Dear Friend,
The following article illustrates the size of our dilemma: HAMAS is the religious equivalent of Israeli "fundamentalism", invoking "God's help" in destroying those who are not "of God". This is further compounded by "Christian" Zionists, who also invoke "God" to help rid the world of those arrayed "against God".
Where are the voices of those who believe it is the will of "God" to allow Jews, Muslims and Christians to learn to live together, side by side, in that God-tormented land, learning from each other, making room for each other, listening to each other?
It looks to me like there are two kinds of people in the US and the world right now: 1) Those who work towards finding ways of "living together" as part of the world's great religions and 2) Those who deep down believe that the differences are irreconciliable and will always lead to bloodshed and annihilation of "the other". Why are both of these tendencies "true"? JRK
In a follow up to yesterday's report by Donald MacIntyre from Jerusalem, the Independent Newspaper has an article, entitled, "Israeli's told to fight 'holy war' in Gaza". If true this is a lamentable example of how religious Zionism is justifying racism and ethnic cleansing.
MacIntyre writes, "Many Israeli troops had the sense of fighting a "religious war" against Gentiles during the 22-day offensive in Gaza, according to a soldier who has highlighted the martial role of military rabbis during the operation.
The soldier testified that the "clear" message of literature distributed to troops by the rabbinate was: "We are the Jewish people, we came to this land by a miracle, God brought us back to this land and now we need to fight to expel the Gentiles who are interfering with our conquest of this holy land."
One has to ask which rabbinate? Perhaps the one the Apostle John refers to in the Book of Revelation 2:9-10, 3:9? [This paragraph smacks of the kind of "Christian fundamentalism" that we must stop invoking, IMO - JRK]
Back in May 2007, the Jerusalem Post reported that Chief Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu wrote to the Israeli Prime Minister Olmert about Gaza. Under the heading "Eliyahu advocates carpet bombing Gaza" Matthew Wagner writes,
"Eliyahu ruled that there was absolutely no moral prohibition against the indiscriminate killing of civilians during a potential massive military offensive on Gaza aimed at stopping the rocket launchings... Eliyahu's son, Shmuel Eliyahu, who is chief rabbi of Safed, said his father opposed a ground troop incursion into Gaza that would endanger IDF soldiers. Rather, he advocated carpet bombing the general area from which the Kassams were launched, regardless of the price in Palestinian life."If they don't stop after we kill 100, then we must kill a thousand," said Shmuel Eliyahu. "And if they do not stop after 1,000 then we must kill 10,000. If they still don't stop we must kill 100,000, even a million. Whatever it takes to make them stop."
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
The Parable of the Land Magnate
The Parable of the Land Magnate
Once upon a time, in a land far away, there lived a rich Land Magnate who ruled his fiefdom with a veneer of kindly benevolence and trustworthy competence. But underneath he wore brass knuckles to silence critics and extend his reach. He was highly regarded by rich insiders and the majority. Poor outsiders and minorities were suspicious and hateful. (Some of the land he managed had previously belonged to them.) He was approved by all governmental authorities. He especially had the confidence and support of other wealthy land holders from other favored countries, apparently knowledgeable and skilled in handling his own and other people’s properties. His company, BMAC, was an Acquisition Corporation par excellence, duly registered with and given oversight by all the proper regulative bodies.
Then it came to pass, after a short and smashing military victory over surrounding “enemies”, BMAC gained control of more land than ever before. But, lo and behold, it quickly became a problem. Our Magnate wanted to insure the conquered land would benefit himself and his friends. He didn’t care that the land previously belonged to the “enemies” of his people. He built well-appointed subdivisions with a copious water supply and gated communities high above the vanquished who were kept in their place. These new places were off limits to them. The self-respecting but marginalized people of the valley looked up with growing disgust at the high-end neighborhoods nestled on the fortified hills, joined by modern thoroughfares on land that once was theirs. Many years passed. It appeared the Magnate was an extraordinarily good manager. His reach was extended. Goods and services flowed especially to the favored ones who had learned of his uncanny and unequaled ability to make their assets grow. The vanquished had no “rights”. To the victors belonged the spoils. Might made right. Those who rule make the rules.
However, there was a major problem. (It was hidden from public view). He was a thief! He stole and mismanaged people’s property. He consistently committed fraudulent practices. He was deceitful. He betrayed people’s trust. He used the land to please his family, friends and supporters at all costs, giving them greater returns than was humanly possible or permissible. He lied about assets he managed. He printed false documents on asset usage, making it look to all the world that the people’s possessions were being used wisely and well.
Even though he knew that what he was doing was criminal, he kept the scheme going through many decades, adding more and more land to his empire, his reputation climbing to new heights of admiration and awe. He built defensive walls to protect his assets, hoping against all truth that his empire would be secure and last forever against all “enemies”. The illusion grew that he was beating all the odds. He is one of us. You can trust him. He takes care of his own. There were his detractors, a few people “in the know” who doubted that BMAC was “on the up and up”. No one listened to them. Things were going “well”. People were “happy”. Trust BMAC.
But, buried deep in his sub-conscious mind, the Magnate was fearful there would be a Day of Reckoning, a Day when his actions would be exposed and his company would disappear like vapor. He knew from the very beginning that his behavior was completely criminal, that he was misusing people and mismanaging their possessions. He dulled the pain he was feeling for abusing the confidence others place in him.
And come it did. Fear of a great depression crept over all the land. People of the country were feeling insecure, fearing they might lose everything. Many wanted their assets back. Suddenly the fiefdom he had built with their assets crumbled like a house of cards. The company office was shuttered and the social fabric was left torn and tattered. He could no longer hide his thievery. His deceit became apparent to those closest to him and to those farthest away. It now became clear to the whole world that the great Land Magnate, the head of BMAC was a crook.
I’m ashamed of my actions, he confessed. I am so sorry for the hurt I’ve caused many, many people. I wanted to end the scheme in short order, but the whole enterprise quickly spun out of control. I became captive to it. I wanted to keep administering the land as long as I could. It became impossible. I just couldn’t keep things from unspooling.
Meanwhile, there was great anger, grief and confusion among all the defrauded people. They quickly lined up, demanding restitution for their lost assets and the return of what had previously been theirs. There was no easy way to return the stolen assets to rich and poor, insiders and outsiders, the majority and minorities alike. There was no simple way to live side by side, separate yet united. There wasn’t enough insurance money to compensate those wronged. Some suggested a Truth and Reconciliation Commission with forgiveness as the way, vowing to handle people more respectfully and possessions more fairly. Others even said there could be no compensation for “stolen” lands. After the “crash” it took several generations to attain equanimity approaching normality. For many, many years it seemed impossible to untangle the knots that had formed. New fabric had to be woven, the knots cut away and discarded.
The day came when other Acquisition corporations were formed, knowing right from wrong, slowly restoring the trust that had been betrayed, promising transparency in reporting, issuing responsible returns from properties entrusted to them, thus fulfilling their promises.
It took many decades for people’s trust to be restored. The sense of betrayal was pervasive. Hatred of the Magnate was deep. The consequences of wrong-doing were long lasting. None of it healed easily. Those who wanted “justice” (revenge) hung around the margins of the new society for years and years, but were kept on the margins by strong and able leadership. Friends and “enemies” tore down the walls that separated them. People learned to appreciate their differences and value each person’s and group’s unique contribution to the well being of the larger community.
The whole society continued to wrestle with its bias toward selfish greed, self-serving lies, bitter vengefulness and persistent cover-up. New leaders were more humble, more vulnerable, more willing to admit their mistakes, more willing to say they were sorry and more willing and able to do better. Slowly, all the citizens learned that not all is fair in love and war, all are flawed, all persons are to be treated with respect and all possessions are to be valued and compensated fairly.
It was a costly lesson. But learn it they did. It was not easy and the road was rough. Issues of proper governance were contentious, but friends and “enemies” were brought into the process. Rich insiders and poor outsiders shared space equitably. And the people and the land lived happily and in peace for many generations.
Once upon a time, in a land far away, there lived a rich Land Magnate who ruled his fiefdom with a veneer of kindly benevolence and trustworthy competence. But underneath he wore brass knuckles to silence critics and extend his reach. He was highly regarded by rich insiders and the majority. Poor outsiders and minorities were suspicious and hateful. (Some of the land he managed had previously belonged to them.) He was approved by all governmental authorities. He especially had the confidence and support of other wealthy land holders from other favored countries, apparently knowledgeable and skilled in handling his own and other people’s properties. His company, BMAC, was an Acquisition Corporation par excellence, duly registered with and given oversight by all the proper regulative bodies.
Then it came to pass, after a short and smashing military victory over surrounding “enemies”, BMAC gained control of more land than ever before. But, lo and behold, it quickly became a problem. Our Magnate wanted to insure the conquered land would benefit himself and his friends. He didn’t care that the land previously belonged to the “enemies” of his people. He built well-appointed subdivisions with a copious water supply and gated communities high above the vanquished who were kept in their place. These new places were off limits to them. The self-respecting but marginalized people of the valley looked up with growing disgust at the high-end neighborhoods nestled on the fortified hills, joined by modern thoroughfares on land that once was theirs. Many years passed. It appeared the Magnate was an extraordinarily good manager. His reach was extended. Goods and services flowed especially to the favored ones who had learned of his uncanny and unequaled ability to make their assets grow. The vanquished had no “rights”. To the victors belonged the spoils. Might made right. Those who rule make the rules.
However, there was a major problem. (It was hidden from public view). He was a thief! He stole and mismanaged people’s property. He consistently committed fraudulent practices. He was deceitful. He betrayed people’s trust. He used the land to please his family, friends and supporters at all costs, giving them greater returns than was humanly possible or permissible. He lied about assets he managed. He printed false documents on asset usage, making it look to all the world that the people’s possessions were being used wisely and well.
Even though he knew that what he was doing was criminal, he kept the scheme going through many decades, adding more and more land to his empire, his reputation climbing to new heights of admiration and awe. He built defensive walls to protect his assets, hoping against all truth that his empire would be secure and last forever against all “enemies”. The illusion grew that he was beating all the odds. He is one of us. You can trust him. He takes care of his own. There were his detractors, a few people “in the know” who doubted that BMAC was “on the up and up”. No one listened to them. Things were going “well”. People were “happy”. Trust BMAC.
But, buried deep in his sub-conscious mind, the Magnate was fearful there would be a Day of Reckoning, a Day when his actions would be exposed and his company would disappear like vapor. He knew from the very beginning that his behavior was completely criminal, that he was misusing people and mismanaging their possessions. He dulled the pain he was feeling for abusing the confidence others place in him.
And come it did. Fear of a great depression crept over all the land. People of the country were feeling insecure, fearing they might lose everything. Many wanted their assets back. Suddenly the fiefdom he had built with their assets crumbled like a house of cards. The company office was shuttered and the social fabric was left torn and tattered. He could no longer hide his thievery. His deceit became apparent to those closest to him and to those farthest away. It now became clear to the whole world that the great Land Magnate, the head of BMAC was a crook.
I’m ashamed of my actions, he confessed. I am so sorry for the hurt I’ve caused many, many people. I wanted to end the scheme in short order, but the whole enterprise quickly spun out of control. I became captive to it. I wanted to keep administering the land as long as I could. It became impossible. I just couldn’t keep things from unspooling.
Meanwhile, there was great anger, grief and confusion among all the defrauded people. They quickly lined up, demanding restitution for their lost assets and the return of what had previously been theirs. There was no easy way to return the stolen assets to rich and poor, insiders and outsiders, the majority and minorities alike. There was no simple way to live side by side, separate yet united. There wasn’t enough insurance money to compensate those wronged. Some suggested a Truth and Reconciliation Commission with forgiveness as the way, vowing to handle people more respectfully and possessions more fairly. Others even said there could be no compensation for “stolen” lands. After the “crash” it took several generations to attain equanimity approaching normality. For many, many years it seemed impossible to untangle the knots that had formed. New fabric had to be woven, the knots cut away and discarded.
The day came when other Acquisition corporations were formed, knowing right from wrong, slowly restoring the trust that had been betrayed, promising transparency in reporting, issuing responsible returns from properties entrusted to them, thus fulfilling their promises.
It took many decades for people’s trust to be restored. The sense of betrayal was pervasive. Hatred of the Magnate was deep. The consequences of wrong-doing were long lasting. None of it healed easily. Those who wanted “justice” (revenge) hung around the margins of the new society for years and years, but were kept on the margins by strong and able leadership. Friends and “enemies” tore down the walls that separated them. People learned to appreciate their differences and value each person’s and group’s unique contribution to the well being of the larger community.
The whole society continued to wrestle with its bias toward selfish greed, self-serving lies, bitter vengefulness and persistent cover-up. New leaders were more humble, more vulnerable, more willing to admit their mistakes, more willing to say they were sorry and more willing and able to do better. Slowly, all the citizens learned that not all is fair in love and war, all are flawed, all persons are to be treated with respect and all possessions are to be valued and compensated fairly.
It was a costly lesson. But learn it they did. It was not easy and the road was rough. Issues of proper governance were contentious, but friends and “enemies” were brought into the process. Rich insiders and poor outsiders shared space equitably. And the people and the land lived happily and in peace for many generations.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
END THE OCCUPATION!
The key is an end to occupation
Daoud Kuttab
The Jordan Times
March 12, 2009
http://www.jordantimes.com/?news=14952 [1]
Following the words and efforts of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Sharm El Sheikh, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Ramallah, one gets the feeling that she was on a hard-sell campaign trying to convince the majority of Israelis to accept the concept of the two-state solution.
For now, Palestinians are more interested in the end of the decades-old occupation of their lands.
Clinton’s pleading with Netanyahu to adopt the international consensus on the two-state solution is wrong. She should focus instead on the choices that Israel has, namely, to share the land of Palestine/Israel with the Palestinian side or agree to power sharing, among the people living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.
The two-state solution has been on the books for some time. An independent Palestinian state alongside Israel has been a demand of some Palestinians since the 1970s, but became official PLO policy in one year, after the relatively nonviolent Intifada began.
The November 15, 1988, declaration of a Palestinian state alongside Israel replaced the PLO policy which called for a secular state on all of historic Palestine.
The two-state solution was adopted by the Arab League at its Beirut summit in 2004, and following that, it was unanimously supported by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, which includes states such as Iran, Indonesia and Pakistan.
Former US president George W. Bush gave the two-state solution public support most prominently in the last year of his second term, when he promised that an independent, viable and contiguous state of Palestine will see the light before the end of his term.
Consecutive Israeli governments have given mixed responses to it. The current Olmert/Livni government gave lip service to the two-state solution, but exclusive Jewish settlement building continued in areas earmarked for the Palestinian part. The effort to depopulate East Jerusalem of its Palestinian inhabitants has not stopped since Israel occupied and then unilaterally annexed the Arab-populated section of the city to Israel.
The poll results that followed the assault on Gaza seemed to show a shift in the Israeli opinion towards a more hawkish position, contrasting sharply with the more dovish shift in the US. Some expect that a Netanyahu government will be on a collision course with the Obama administration. Hence, Clinton has been pleading with the right-wing Israeli leader to adopt the policy that even the pro-Israeli Bush-Cheney team had adopted.
With the shift to the hawkish right in the most recent Israeli elections, many Palestinians believe that the true nature of the Israeli ruling elite became clear. Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been tapped to form a coalition government, refused to publicly accept the two-state concept.
As Israelis seem to be backtracking from the two-state solution, some Palestinians are arguing for the need to create one state for all the people living in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. But the choices that should be made clear to Israel are not whether it should accept the two-state or the one-state solution. Israeli leaders and people must be made to understand that the key issue is the need to end the occupation.
The international community has made this very clear since 1967. In the preamble of UN Security Council Resolution 242, the binding resolution states: “It is inadmissible to occupy land by force.”
Being wedded to the two-state solution, the US has been forced to try and deal with the day-to-day actions of the Israeli army and Israeli government in the occupied territories.
US Middle East envoy George Mitchell decided to set up office in Jerusalem and to staff it with security and political personnel whose job will be to monitor the situation in the occupied territories. This is a positive development, but what is needed is much more strategic. Instead of pleading with the Israelis to accept the two-state solution, the US should simply ask the Israelis to end their military occupation of Arab lands.
Such a strategy might require the international community to help Palestinians and Israelis in the transitional period. This might mean the introduction of international troops in the occupied territories, instead of the Israeli army.
To carry out such strategy, the US must not beg the Israelis to accept this or that solution. Instead, the US as the leader of the international community, must place a clear challenge to Netanyahu, Avigdor Lieberman, Livni, Barak and all Israelis. It should set a date for the withdrawal of occupation forces and begin negotiating a responsible pullout.
The question, therefore, is as simple as the one uttered by a US presidential nominee in the 1990s. Using former president Bill Clinton’s phrase, it is not a two-state or a one-state solution, “it is the occupation, stupid”.
Daoud Kuttab
The Jordan Times
March 12, 2009
http://www.jordantimes.com/?news=14952 [1]
Following the words and efforts of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Sharm El Sheikh, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Ramallah, one gets the feeling that she was on a hard-sell campaign trying to convince the majority of Israelis to accept the concept of the two-state solution.
For now, Palestinians are more interested in the end of the decades-old occupation of their lands.
Clinton’s pleading with Netanyahu to adopt the international consensus on the two-state solution is wrong. She should focus instead on the choices that Israel has, namely, to share the land of Palestine/Israel with the Palestinian side or agree to power sharing, among the people living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.
The two-state solution has been on the books for some time. An independent Palestinian state alongside Israel has been a demand of some Palestinians since the 1970s, but became official PLO policy in one year, after the relatively nonviolent Intifada began.
The November 15, 1988, declaration of a Palestinian state alongside Israel replaced the PLO policy which called for a secular state on all of historic Palestine.
The two-state solution was adopted by the Arab League at its Beirut summit in 2004, and following that, it was unanimously supported by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, which includes states such as Iran, Indonesia and Pakistan.
Former US president George W. Bush gave the two-state solution public support most prominently in the last year of his second term, when he promised that an independent, viable and contiguous state of Palestine will see the light before the end of his term.
Consecutive Israeli governments have given mixed responses to it. The current Olmert/Livni government gave lip service to the two-state solution, but exclusive Jewish settlement building continued in areas earmarked for the Palestinian part. The effort to depopulate East Jerusalem of its Palestinian inhabitants has not stopped since Israel occupied and then unilaterally annexed the Arab-populated section of the city to Israel.
The poll results that followed the assault on Gaza seemed to show a shift in the Israeli opinion towards a more hawkish position, contrasting sharply with the more dovish shift in the US. Some expect that a Netanyahu government will be on a collision course with the Obama administration. Hence, Clinton has been pleading with the right-wing Israeli leader to adopt the policy that even the pro-Israeli Bush-Cheney team had adopted.
With the shift to the hawkish right in the most recent Israeli elections, many Palestinians believe that the true nature of the Israeli ruling elite became clear. Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been tapped to form a coalition government, refused to publicly accept the two-state concept.
As Israelis seem to be backtracking from the two-state solution, some Palestinians are arguing for the need to create one state for all the people living in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. But the choices that should be made clear to Israel are not whether it should accept the two-state or the one-state solution. Israeli leaders and people must be made to understand that the key issue is the need to end the occupation.
The international community has made this very clear since 1967. In the preamble of UN Security Council Resolution 242, the binding resolution states: “It is inadmissible to occupy land by force.”
Being wedded to the two-state solution, the US has been forced to try and deal with the day-to-day actions of the Israeli army and Israeli government in the occupied territories.
US Middle East envoy George Mitchell decided to set up office in Jerusalem and to staff it with security and political personnel whose job will be to monitor the situation in the occupied territories. This is a positive development, but what is needed is much more strategic. Instead of pleading with the Israelis to accept the two-state solution, the US should simply ask the Israelis to end their military occupation of Arab lands.
Such a strategy might require the international community to help Palestinians and Israelis in the transitional period. This might mean the introduction of international troops in the occupied territories, instead of the Israeli army.
To carry out such strategy, the US must not beg the Israelis to accept this or that solution. Instead, the US as the leader of the international community, must place a clear challenge to Netanyahu, Avigdor Lieberman, Livni, Barak and all Israelis. It should set a date for the withdrawal of occupation forces and begin negotiating a responsible pullout.
The question, therefore, is as simple as the one uttered by a US presidential nominee in the 1990s. Using former president Bill Clinton’s phrase, it is not a two-state or a one-state solution, “it is the occupation, stupid”.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
The DEATH of the "Two-State" Solution!
Dear Friend,
I keep coming back to this 2/20/09 post by Ben White at The Guardian. His insight is compelling, disturbing, and (unfortunately) accurate as an assessment of what is really going on over there. Israeli intentions are very plain for those who see actions that belie the voiced support for the "two-state" myth.
Israel will someday have to accept the "one-state" solution, with voting rights for Palestinians who have "rights" to the land which has been confiscated. It will not be easy, nor pretty, but it will happen. The question is: will there be any Palestinians left there when it happens? JRK
The real Israel-Palestine story is in the West BankIsrael's targeting of civilian resistance to the separation wall proves the two-state solution is now just a meaningless slogan
Ben White
Friday 20 February 2009
The Guardian (UK)
It is quite likely that you have not heard of the most important developments this week in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the West Bank, while it has been "occupation as normal", there have been some events that together should be overshadowing Gaza, Gilad Shalit and Avigdor Lieberman.
First, there have been a large number of Israeli raids on Palestinian villages, with dozens of Palestinians abducted. These kinds of raids are, of course, commonplace for the occupied West Bank, but in recent days it appears the Israeli military has targeted sites of particularly strong Palestinian civil resistance to the separation wall.
For three consecutive days this week, Israeli forces invaded Jayyous, a village battling for survival as their agricultural land is lost to the wall and neighbouring Jewish colony. The soldiers occupied homes, detained residents, blocked off access roads, vandalised property, beat protestors, and raised the Israeli flag at the top of several buildings.
Jayyous is one of the Palestinian villages in the West Bank that has been non-violently resisting the separation wall for several years now. It was clear to the villagers that this latest assault was an attempt to intimidate the protest movement.
Also earlier this week, Israel tightened still further the restrictions on Palestinian movement and residency rights in East Jerusalem, closing the remaining passage in the wall in the Ar-Ram neighbourhood of the city. This means that tens of thousands of Palestinians are now cut off from the city and those with the right permit will now have to enter the city by first heading north and using the Qalandiya checkpoint.
Finally – and this time, there was some modest media coverage – it was revealed that the Efrat settlement near Bethlehem would be expanded by the appropriation of around 420 acres land as "state land". According to Efrat's mayor, the plan is to triple the number of residents in the colony.
Looked at together, these events in the West Bank are of far more significance than issues being afforded a lot of attention currently, such as the truce talks with Hamas, or the discussions about a possible prisoner-exchange deal. Hamas itself has become such a focus, whether by those who urge talks and cooption or those who advocate the group's total destruction, that the wider context is forgotten.
Hamas is not the beginning or the end of this conflict, a movement that has been around for just the last third of Israel's 60 years. The Hamas Charter is not a Palestinian national manifesto, and nor is it even particularly central to today's organisation. Before Hamas existed, Israel was colonising the occupied territories, and maintaining an ethnic exclusivist regime; if Hamas disappeared tomorrow, Israeli colonisation certainly would not.
Recognising what is happening in the West Bank also contextualises the discussion about Israel's domestic politics, and the ongoing question about the makeup of a ruling coalition. For the Palestinians, it does not make much difference who is eventually sitting around the Israeli cabinet table, since there is a consensus among the parties on one thing: a firm rejectionist stance with regards to Palestinian self-determination and sovereignty.
During the coverage of the Israeli elections, while it was clear that Palestinians mostly did not care which of the candidates for PM won, the reason for this apathy was not explained. Labor, Likud and Kadima alike, Israeli governments without fail have continued or intensified the colonisation of the occupied territories, entrenching Israel's separate-and-unequal rule, a reality belied by the false "dove"/"hawk" dichotomy.
Which brings us to the third reason why news from the West Bank is more significant than the Gaza truce talks or the Netanyahu-Livni rivalry – it is a further reminder that the two-state solution has completed its progression from worthy (and often disingenuous) aim to meaningless slogan, concealing Israel's absorption of all Palestine/Israel and confinement of the Palestinians into enclaves.
The fact that the West Bank reality means the end of the two-state paradigm has started to be picked up by mainstream, liberal commentators in the US, in the wake of the Israeli elections. Juan Cole, the history professor and blogger, recently pointed out that there are now only three options left for Palestine/Israel: "apartheid", "expulsion", or "one state".
The path of the wall, and the number of Palestinians it directly and indirectly affects, continues to make a mockery of any plan for Palestinian statehood. Jayyous is just one example of the way in which the Israeli-planned, fenced-in Palestinian "state-lets" are at odds with the stated intention of the quartet and so many others, of two viable states, "side by side". As the World Bank pointed out (pdf), land colonisation is not conducive to economic prosperity or basic independence.
In occupied East Jerusalem meanwhile, Israel has continued its process of Judaisation, enforced through bureaucracy and bulldozers. The latest tightening of the noose in Ar-Ram is one example of where Palestinian Jerusalemites are at risk of losing their residency status, victims of what is politely known as the "demographic battle".
It is impossible to imagine Palestinians accepting a "state" shaped by the contours of Israel's wall, disconnected not only from East Jerusalem but even from parts of itself. Yet this is the essence of the "solution" being advanced by Israeli leaders across party lines. For a real sense of where the conflict is heading, look to the West Bank, not just Gaza. [IT IS THIS REALITY THAT OBAMA/CLINTON NEED TO FACE. EVERYTHING ELSE IS JUST TALK --JRK]
http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/commentisfree/2009/feb/20/israelandthepalestinians-israeli-elections-2009
I keep coming back to this 2/20/09 post by Ben White at The Guardian. His insight is compelling, disturbing, and (unfortunately) accurate as an assessment of what is really going on over there. Israeli intentions are very plain for those who see actions that belie the voiced support for the "two-state" myth.
Israel will someday have to accept the "one-state" solution, with voting rights for Palestinians who have "rights" to the land which has been confiscated. It will not be easy, nor pretty, but it will happen. The question is: will there be any Palestinians left there when it happens? JRK
The real Israel-Palestine story is in the West BankIsrael's targeting of civilian resistance to the separation wall proves the two-state solution is now just a meaningless slogan
Ben White
Friday 20 February 2009
The Guardian (UK)
It is quite likely that you have not heard of the most important developments this week in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the West Bank, while it has been "occupation as normal", there have been some events that together should be overshadowing Gaza, Gilad Shalit and Avigdor Lieberman.
First, there have been a large number of Israeli raids on Palestinian villages, with dozens of Palestinians abducted. These kinds of raids are, of course, commonplace for the occupied West Bank, but in recent days it appears the Israeli military has targeted sites of particularly strong Palestinian civil resistance to the separation wall.
For three consecutive days this week, Israeli forces invaded Jayyous, a village battling for survival as their agricultural land is lost to the wall and neighbouring Jewish colony. The soldiers occupied homes, detained residents, blocked off access roads, vandalised property, beat protestors, and raised the Israeli flag at the top of several buildings.
Jayyous is one of the Palestinian villages in the West Bank that has been non-violently resisting the separation wall for several years now. It was clear to the villagers that this latest assault was an attempt to intimidate the protest movement.
Also earlier this week, Israel tightened still further the restrictions on Palestinian movement and residency rights in East Jerusalem, closing the remaining passage in the wall in the Ar-Ram neighbourhood of the city. This means that tens of thousands of Palestinians are now cut off from the city and those with the right permit will now have to enter the city by first heading north and using the Qalandiya checkpoint.
Finally – and this time, there was some modest media coverage – it was revealed that the Efrat settlement near Bethlehem would be expanded by the appropriation of around 420 acres land as "state land". According to Efrat's mayor, the plan is to triple the number of residents in the colony.
Looked at together, these events in the West Bank are of far more significance than issues being afforded a lot of attention currently, such as the truce talks with Hamas, or the discussions about a possible prisoner-exchange deal. Hamas itself has become such a focus, whether by those who urge talks and cooption or those who advocate the group's total destruction, that the wider context is forgotten.
Hamas is not the beginning or the end of this conflict, a movement that has been around for just the last third of Israel's 60 years. The Hamas Charter is not a Palestinian national manifesto, and nor is it even particularly central to today's organisation. Before Hamas existed, Israel was colonising the occupied territories, and maintaining an ethnic exclusivist regime; if Hamas disappeared tomorrow, Israeli colonisation certainly would not.
Recognising what is happening in the West Bank also contextualises the discussion about Israel's domestic politics, and the ongoing question about the makeup of a ruling coalition. For the Palestinians, it does not make much difference who is eventually sitting around the Israeli cabinet table, since there is a consensus among the parties on one thing: a firm rejectionist stance with regards to Palestinian self-determination and sovereignty.
During the coverage of the Israeli elections, while it was clear that Palestinians mostly did not care which of the candidates for PM won, the reason for this apathy was not explained. Labor, Likud and Kadima alike, Israeli governments without fail have continued or intensified the colonisation of the occupied territories, entrenching Israel's separate-and-unequal rule, a reality belied by the false "dove"/"hawk" dichotomy.
Which brings us to the third reason why news from the West Bank is more significant than the Gaza truce talks or the Netanyahu-Livni rivalry – it is a further reminder that the two-state solution has completed its progression from worthy (and often disingenuous) aim to meaningless slogan, concealing Israel's absorption of all Palestine/Israel and confinement of the Palestinians into enclaves.
The fact that the West Bank reality means the end of the two-state paradigm has started to be picked up by mainstream, liberal commentators in the US, in the wake of the Israeli elections. Juan Cole, the history professor and blogger, recently pointed out that there are now only three options left for Palestine/Israel: "apartheid", "expulsion", or "one state".
The path of the wall, and the number of Palestinians it directly and indirectly affects, continues to make a mockery of any plan for Palestinian statehood. Jayyous is just one example of the way in which the Israeli-planned, fenced-in Palestinian "state-lets" are at odds with the stated intention of the quartet and so many others, of two viable states, "side by side". As the World Bank pointed out (pdf), land colonisation is not conducive to economic prosperity or basic independence.
In occupied East Jerusalem meanwhile, Israel has continued its process of Judaisation, enforced through bureaucracy and bulldozers. The latest tightening of the noose in Ar-Ram is one example of where Palestinian Jerusalemites are at risk of losing their residency status, victims of what is politely known as the "demographic battle".
It is impossible to imagine Palestinians accepting a "state" shaped by the contours of Israel's wall, disconnected not only from East Jerusalem but even from parts of itself. Yet this is the essence of the "solution" being advanced by Israeli leaders across party lines. For a real sense of where the conflict is heading, look to the West Bank, not just Gaza. [IT IS THIS REALITY THAT OBAMA/CLINTON NEED TO FACE. EVERYTHING ELSE IS JUST TALK --JRK]
http://www.guardian.co.uk:80/commentisfree/2009/feb/20/israelandthepalestinians-israeli-elections-2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
A Two Minute Expose'
Dear Friend,
Please take 2 minutes and view this clip from the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC).
Send it to your friends. It exposes the fallacy of US policy saying we support both the two-state "solution" AND Israeli settlements. (Oh, we expect Israel to desist from expanding and adding to their settlements, but we don't demand it. We don't make further aid conditional on ceasing and desisting).
These are not compatible. Until we change our policy, the two-state proposal won't "work". JRK
Please take 2 minutes and view this clip from the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC).
Send it to your friends. It exposes the fallacy of US policy saying we support both the two-state "solution" AND Israeli settlements. (Oh, we expect Israel to desist from expanding and adding to their settlements, but we don't demand it. We don't make further aid conditional on ceasing and desisting).
These are not compatible. Until we change our policy, the two-state proposal won't "work". JRK
Saturday, February 28, 2009
A Short, Simple, History Lesson
Dear Friend of Isr/Pal,
Wells Thoms was an RCA missionary doctor and his family in the ME before oil. He served Omanis, Saudis, Bahrainies, and others at the invitation of ME rulers. Two of his daughters (Lois Dickason and Nancy Block) have memories and experiences with folks there and visit sometimes. (Lew Scudder is a cousin).
Here is an excerpt from a recent post from Nancy and Russ (who live in NJ) and were in the ME last year. (JRK)
Last February, Russ and I, brothers Peter and Norman and Norm's wife Anna spent 2 weeks visiting some of the places where we (Thoms family) grew up--mainly Oman, with some time in Bahrain, where grandparents began medical mission work around the turn of the last century, and then parents followed suit for their careers, and brothers each spent a year. We were given the royal treatment, welcomed as family by people we knew, and as highly esteemed guests by the press, national TV who interviewed us, and others--all of this in honor of the work of the mission, and our parents who were beloved by all.
I would just like to copy here for you the last part of our letter, under "Some Final Observations".
"In the 1930s the King of Sa'udi Arabia granted the US the oil rights in his country because he trusted the American mission doctors whom he invited to minister to his people. In 2001, the mighty Trade Towers in New York City were destroyed by disaffected and disillusioned young men from the same country. What happened in between?
"The American people do not understand what is clear to many others. Our US government joined in 1947 with Britain and France in giving away to Zionists (however pressing their needs and claims) what did not belong to us: the Palestinian homeland--to avoid accommodating many more displaced European Jews. And it has, ever since, unquestioningly supported Israel, a sovereign foreign power, both militarily and morally in its deliberate, methodical continuing policy of oppressive occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, abdicating our responsibility for their downward trajectory into near oblivion.
"Hamas, by which we identify them, is only a blustery but basically feeble voice of rage and protest by generations of the dispossessed and powerless. There is so little left of their land and economy, between Israeli state take-over and illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank at this point that a touted "two-state solution" to the conflict is practically-speaking all but impossible. The repercussions are global.
"To people of conscience, including many American and Israeli Jews, the slaughter in Gaza of people living in a virtual prison for years is an outrage, as is the history leading up to this point. What is demanded of us now is honest acknowledgement of present and historical truth, claiming responsibility, humbly repenting and beginning to make amends, admittedly a Herculean task.
We recommend to you both Christian and Jewish-based groups, including Tikkun in the US, working for justice and reconciliation, and books such as An Israeli in Palestine by Jeff Halper of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, and The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Illan Pappe, for authoritative background and current information. We 'pray for the peace of Jerusalem' (Psalm 122:6), remembering the words of the prophet '---what does the Lord require of thee but to do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God?' (Micah 6:8).
"We wish you hope, love and PEACE for this year. SALAAM ALEIKUM and SHALOM!"
Nancy and Russ
Wells Thoms was an RCA missionary doctor and his family in the ME before oil. He served Omanis, Saudis, Bahrainies, and others at the invitation of ME rulers. Two of his daughters (Lois Dickason and Nancy Block) have memories and experiences with folks there and visit sometimes. (Lew Scudder is a cousin).
Here is an excerpt from a recent post from Nancy and Russ (who live in NJ) and were in the ME last year. (JRK)
Last February, Russ and I, brothers Peter and Norman and Norm's wife Anna spent 2 weeks visiting some of the places where we (Thoms family) grew up--mainly Oman, with some time in Bahrain, where grandparents began medical mission work around the turn of the last century, and then parents followed suit for their careers, and brothers each spent a year. We were given the royal treatment, welcomed as family by people we knew, and as highly esteemed guests by the press, national TV who interviewed us, and others--all of this in honor of the work of the mission, and our parents who were beloved by all.
I would just like to copy here for you the last part of our letter, under "Some Final Observations".
"In the 1930s the King of Sa'udi Arabia granted the US the oil rights in his country because he trusted the American mission doctors whom he invited to minister to his people. In 2001, the mighty Trade Towers in New York City were destroyed by disaffected and disillusioned young men from the same country. What happened in between?
"The American people do not understand what is clear to many others. Our US government joined in 1947 with Britain and France in giving away to Zionists (however pressing their needs and claims) what did not belong to us: the Palestinian homeland--to avoid accommodating many more displaced European Jews. And it has, ever since, unquestioningly supported Israel, a sovereign foreign power, both militarily and morally in its deliberate, methodical continuing policy of oppressive occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people, abdicating our responsibility for their downward trajectory into near oblivion.
"Hamas, by which we identify them, is only a blustery but basically feeble voice of rage and protest by generations of the dispossessed and powerless. There is so little left of their land and economy, between Israeli state take-over and illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank at this point that a touted "two-state solution" to the conflict is practically-speaking all but impossible. The repercussions are global.
"To people of conscience, including many American and Israeli Jews, the slaughter in Gaza of people living in a virtual prison for years is an outrage, as is the history leading up to this point. What is demanded of us now is honest acknowledgement of present and historical truth, claiming responsibility, humbly repenting and beginning to make amends, admittedly a Herculean task.
We recommend to you both Christian and Jewish-based groups, including Tikkun in the US, working for justice and reconciliation, and books such as An Israeli in Palestine by Jeff Halper of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, and The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine by Illan Pappe, for authoritative background and current information. We 'pray for the peace of Jerusalem' (Psalm 122:6), remembering the words of the prophet '---what does the Lord require of thee but to do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God?' (Micah 6:8).
"We wish you hope, love and PEACE for this year. SALAAM ALEIKUM and SHALOM!"
Nancy and Russ
Monday, February 23, 2009
An Amazing Politically Incorrect Vision!!
Dear Friend,
This is the best thing I've seen in the last two weeks. Deb Reich won't be in the new government, but she should be an advisor to whoever emerges "at the top".
She speaks truth. Is anybody listening? Is the US listening? With thanks to Kathy Matsushima for passing this article along, JRK
Choose life!
by Deb Reich
Abu Ghosh, Israel/Palestine
Most people will say I'm delusional; that's okay. I will say what I have to say anyway. When your opinion is way out on the periphery, it may mean you are delusional - or it may just mean that the so-called center has gradually drifted closer and closer to a very high cliff, and finally fallen off the edge, while the majority of the population follows along like a horde of doomed lemmings. In that scenario, someone needs to stake out a position at the other extreme and drag the locus of the center back from oblivion. So here goes.
After this futile, criminal, pornographic war in Gaza (Shmuel Amir rightly termed it a "hunt" rather than a war) and yet another national election in Israel ending basically in impasse, but this time with a distinctly fascist motif, we are no closer to sustainable peace in the Middle East. We need a drastic revisioning of what we are doing here.
So we start with this: Speaking as an Israeli Jew, I say that we (Israeli Jews and our friends abroad) ought to embrace EVERYONE who wants to live here among us, so long as they truly love the land and have some reasonable claim to it. This would not include, say, tourists from Zanzibar or Antarctica - but would naturally include the Palestinians, whose claim to the land is (or ought to be) beyond dispute and whose deep and enduring love for the land is richly evident to any observer not in a vegetative state.
I say we bring all the long-suffering, besieged, shell-shocked Gazans home to Israel now! They miss their homes. They want to come home. Let us welcome them! We can all move over a little bit and make room. Believe me, there is still plenty of room.
Dayenu! (Enough!). Enough suffering inflicted on the surviving families in Gaza who are hungry, thirsty, cold, frightened, wounded, traumatized for life, and bereaved. Enough. And enough suffering on the other side of the fence in Sderot and environs, too. (Their fates are inextricably intertwined; all our fates are inextricably intertwined.)
The generals and the militants have had their day, for the nth time - and at the end of it, as usual, all that we (any of us) have now, as a result, is war crimes and grief. War crimes and grief and fear. War crimes, grief, fear, hatred, and despair, with thousands of injured and disabled people bearing the burden most directly, forever.
Enough! Israelis are more afraid now than before, and more at risk, too. Time to ABANDON this insane strategy that we (any of us) can force people to love us, or anyhow accept us, by killing them!
Let us in Israel who have so much, open our homes and our communities to the victims of this insane war who have so little - exactly as we once opened our homes to refugees from northern Israel when the Katyushas were falling. Our traditional ethos is full of charity and generosity; we know all about providing refuge and succour; we have taken in wave after wave of refugees over the decades, most recently more than a million Russian émigrés deemed essential to our future, for whom we moved over and made room.
So let's get going. Let every family in Israel who wants to live in peace in this region, open their home to a Gaza family until new housing can be built. Let the participating families declare a hudna between themselves. Now. Today.
You start by not picturing these neighbors as "the enemy"; picture them instead as families who have suffered a tsunami like the one that flattened coastal Indonesia a few years ago - and in fact, the order of magnitude of what they have been through is about the same. Presto! Reaching out to help suddenly makes perfect sense. Moreover, professional planners have already minutely addressed the question of exactly where Palestinians coming home to Israel could reside, eager to make their best contribution to a shared future. What is missing in Israel is not sufficient space, but sufficient imagination to envision how much there is to be gained by all concerned. Now is a good time to change that.
The Gaza disaster can become the turning point. Let the Gazan expatriates whose families came from Ashdod (Issdod) be matched with Ashdod-area families. Let the expatriates from Lod (Lydd) be matched with Lod/Lydd-area families - Jewish or Palestinian. And so forth. And let no time be lost! They have lost everything and their situation is dire. We in Israel have lost our moral compass and we want to reclaim it. Bingo!
Let the governments of the world, led by the USA, immediately stop sending Israel aid for military ordnance, and earmark it instead for a massive rehabilitation and reconciliation program. [Amnesty calls for an arms embargo on both Israelis and Palestinians--JRK].
Let all the tens of thousands of Palestinian professionals who are citizens of Israel, born and raised here - doctors, social workers, nurses, dentists, psychiatrists, lawyers, engineers, teachers, designers, journalists - join gladly and wholeheartedly in this effort, finally and at long last, to bring their fellow Palestinians home from exile in Gaza. Let us bind up the wounds and become whole, together. All of us. Let us build a really wonderful society together, for the sake of ALL OUR CHILDREN. Rewrite the national anthem! Why not? It's a SONG, folks. No song is holier than the life of even one child (anyone's child).
The Gaza families who actually lived in Gaza before 1948 will want to stay and rebuild their homes and communities. Volunteers would doubtless throng to Gaza from all over the world to help them. Imagine them turning what was the world's largest open-air prison into the world's largest open-air Reconciliation Park - with facilities for tourism, education, environmental studies, cultural attractions, and museums (including a Palestinian Nakba Museum). Imagine Gaza as the reconciliation capital of the world - people in Israel could commute to work in Gaza for a change, instead of the other way around. Very refreshing.
This is a blueprint for a SHARED LIFE. If it sounds crazy, just ask yourself: Which is crazier -- rampant slaughter, or rampant cooperation? Rivers of blood, or the free flow of joint prosperity? Rampant mass cooperation could break out here tomorrow - and in a week or two, or maybe a month or two, we would feel like we have always believed in it.
A political accommodation would follow the humanitarian one - probably some creative form of federation, with complete, reciprocal, national-cultural autonomy based on each group's granting the other group the same perks it wants for itself. The technical restructuring follows the vision, not the other way around. There are several good plans, already fully elaborated, for political power-sharing here. Anyone can read them; they're on the web. Once we dare to envision a shared future, we can make it happen. And if not now, when?
We Jews consider it rational and wonderful to rejoice in our emergence as a modern nation in the ancient homeland, after, not twenty years, not two hundred years, but two thousand years of exile!! Yet the idea of repatriating all those homesick Palestinian families, exiled from their homes a mere 60 years ago, is considered delusional. Something there does not compute.
So think it over and let's put the guns away for good. Let the tribunals meet to apportion blame and responsibility, by all means, but as for the rest of us: we have other tasks. Treat the wounded, yes, of course, and heal the traumatizedÅ And beat the swords into ploughshares and recycle the tank parts into computer equipment. Retool the death factories to make swimsuits instead of parachutes, irrigation pipes for farmers instead of M16 rifles. No time for missiles; we'll all be too busy getting a life. The only phosphorous I ever want to see around here again is in a spelling contest for the kids (ALL our kids). Haul out the welcome mat for the long-lost cousins and let's get busy - there's a lot of work to do here. It's not too late, even now, but you have to take the first step: Choose life!!!
Deb Reich is a writer and translator in Israel/Palestine, at debmail@alum.barnard.edu
This is the best thing I've seen in the last two weeks. Deb Reich won't be in the new government, but she should be an advisor to whoever emerges "at the top".
She speaks truth. Is anybody listening? Is the US listening? With thanks to Kathy Matsushima for passing this article along, JRK
Choose life!
by Deb Reich
Abu Ghosh, Israel/Palestine
Most people will say I'm delusional; that's okay. I will say what I have to say anyway. When your opinion is way out on the periphery, it may mean you are delusional - or it may just mean that the so-called center has gradually drifted closer and closer to a very high cliff, and finally fallen off the edge, while the majority of the population follows along like a horde of doomed lemmings. In that scenario, someone needs to stake out a position at the other extreme and drag the locus of the center back from oblivion. So here goes.
After this futile, criminal, pornographic war in Gaza (Shmuel Amir rightly termed it a "hunt" rather than a war) and yet another national election in Israel ending basically in impasse, but this time with a distinctly fascist motif, we are no closer to sustainable peace in the Middle East. We need a drastic revisioning of what we are doing here.
So we start with this: Speaking as an Israeli Jew, I say that we (Israeli Jews and our friends abroad) ought to embrace EVERYONE who wants to live here among us, so long as they truly love the land and have some reasonable claim to it. This would not include, say, tourists from Zanzibar or Antarctica - but would naturally include the Palestinians, whose claim to the land is (or ought to be) beyond dispute and whose deep and enduring love for the land is richly evident to any observer not in a vegetative state.
I say we bring all the long-suffering, besieged, shell-shocked Gazans home to Israel now! They miss their homes. They want to come home. Let us welcome them! We can all move over a little bit and make room. Believe me, there is still plenty of room.
Dayenu! (Enough!). Enough suffering inflicted on the surviving families in Gaza who are hungry, thirsty, cold, frightened, wounded, traumatized for life, and bereaved. Enough. And enough suffering on the other side of the fence in Sderot and environs, too. (Their fates are inextricably intertwined; all our fates are inextricably intertwined.)
The generals and the militants have had their day, for the nth time - and at the end of it, as usual, all that we (any of us) have now, as a result, is war crimes and grief. War crimes and grief and fear. War crimes, grief, fear, hatred, and despair, with thousands of injured and disabled people bearing the burden most directly, forever.
Enough! Israelis are more afraid now than before, and more at risk, too. Time to ABANDON this insane strategy that we (any of us) can force people to love us, or anyhow accept us, by killing them!
Let us in Israel who have so much, open our homes and our communities to the victims of this insane war who have so little - exactly as we once opened our homes to refugees from northern Israel when the Katyushas were falling. Our traditional ethos is full of charity and generosity; we know all about providing refuge and succour; we have taken in wave after wave of refugees over the decades, most recently more than a million Russian émigrés deemed essential to our future, for whom we moved over and made room.
So let's get going. Let every family in Israel who wants to live in peace in this region, open their home to a Gaza family until new housing can be built. Let the participating families declare a hudna between themselves. Now. Today.
You start by not picturing these neighbors as "the enemy"; picture them instead as families who have suffered a tsunami like the one that flattened coastal Indonesia a few years ago - and in fact, the order of magnitude of what they have been through is about the same. Presto! Reaching out to help suddenly makes perfect sense. Moreover, professional planners have already minutely addressed the question of exactly where Palestinians coming home to Israel could reside, eager to make their best contribution to a shared future. What is missing in Israel is not sufficient space, but sufficient imagination to envision how much there is to be gained by all concerned. Now is a good time to change that.
The Gaza disaster can become the turning point. Let the Gazan expatriates whose families came from Ashdod (Issdod) be matched with Ashdod-area families. Let the expatriates from Lod (Lydd) be matched with Lod/Lydd-area families - Jewish or Palestinian. And so forth. And let no time be lost! They have lost everything and their situation is dire. We in Israel have lost our moral compass and we want to reclaim it. Bingo!
Let the governments of the world, led by the USA, immediately stop sending Israel aid for military ordnance, and earmark it instead for a massive rehabilitation and reconciliation program. [Amnesty calls for an arms embargo on both Israelis and Palestinians--JRK].
Let all the tens of thousands of Palestinian professionals who are citizens of Israel, born and raised here - doctors, social workers, nurses, dentists, psychiatrists, lawyers, engineers, teachers, designers, journalists - join gladly and wholeheartedly in this effort, finally and at long last, to bring their fellow Palestinians home from exile in Gaza. Let us bind up the wounds and become whole, together. All of us. Let us build a really wonderful society together, for the sake of ALL OUR CHILDREN. Rewrite the national anthem! Why not? It's a SONG, folks. No song is holier than the life of even one child (anyone's child).
The Gaza families who actually lived in Gaza before 1948 will want to stay and rebuild their homes and communities. Volunteers would doubtless throng to Gaza from all over the world to help them. Imagine them turning what was the world's largest open-air prison into the world's largest open-air Reconciliation Park - with facilities for tourism, education, environmental studies, cultural attractions, and museums (including a Palestinian Nakba Museum). Imagine Gaza as the reconciliation capital of the world - people in Israel could commute to work in Gaza for a change, instead of the other way around. Very refreshing.
This is a blueprint for a SHARED LIFE. If it sounds crazy, just ask yourself: Which is crazier -- rampant slaughter, or rampant cooperation? Rivers of blood, or the free flow of joint prosperity? Rampant mass cooperation could break out here tomorrow - and in a week or two, or maybe a month or two, we would feel like we have always believed in it.
A political accommodation would follow the humanitarian one - probably some creative form of federation, with complete, reciprocal, national-cultural autonomy based on each group's granting the other group the same perks it wants for itself. The technical restructuring follows the vision, not the other way around. There are several good plans, already fully elaborated, for political power-sharing here. Anyone can read them; they're on the web. Once we dare to envision a shared future, we can make it happen. And if not now, when?
We Jews consider it rational and wonderful to rejoice in our emergence as a modern nation in the ancient homeland, after, not twenty years, not two hundred years, but two thousand years of exile!! Yet the idea of repatriating all those homesick Palestinian families, exiled from their homes a mere 60 years ago, is considered delusional. Something there does not compute.
So think it over and let's put the guns away for good. Let the tribunals meet to apportion blame and responsibility, by all means, but as for the rest of us: we have other tasks. Treat the wounded, yes, of course, and heal the traumatizedÅ And beat the swords into ploughshares and recycle the tank parts into computer equipment. Retool the death factories to make swimsuits instead of parachutes, irrigation pipes for farmers instead of M16 rifles. No time for missiles; we'll all be too busy getting a life. The only phosphorous I ever want to see around here again is in a spelling contest for the kids (ALL our kids). Haul out the welcome mat for the long-lost cousins and let's get busy - there's a lot of work to do here. It's not too late, even now, but you have to take the first step: Choose life!!!
Deb Reich is a writer and translator in Israel/Palestine, at debmail@alum.barnard.edu
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)