Dear Friend,
Tonight, the "Forum" at Hope Church, 7:00 p.m. following up on the Arendshorst presentation.
Here is what many academics think of the "Resolution" passed by the Netanyahu cabinet yesterday:
"We will not be citizens of a fascist state purporting to be Israel"
Press Release October 10, 2010
"We will not be citizens of a fascist state purporting to be Israel" say hundreds of Israeli academics and public figures.
A protest rally against the government's "Loyalty Oath Bill" was held outside the Tel Aviv house. There Ben-Gurion read the 1948 the Declaration of Independence. There, today, the "Declaration of Independence from Fascism" was signed.
"We are citizens of the Israel which was depicted in the Declaration of Independence, a peace-seeking country based on the principles of equality and civil liberties. We do not intend to be the citizens of a state purporting to be Israel which stops being democratic and enbarks on becoming a fascist state," proclaimed intellectuals, public figures, and Israel Prize laureates who gathered this afternoon for a protest rally against the "Loyalty Oath Bill" approved by the government. A protest rally was held on Tel Aviv's Rothschild Boulevard, in front of the museum building where David Ben Gurion had read the Declaration of Independence in 1948.
Beneath the statue of Meir Dizengoff, first mayor of Tel Aviv, actress Hanna Meron read out from that Declaration of Independence: "The State of Israel will be based on based on Liberty, Justice and Peace, as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants, irrespective of religion, race or gender; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations". She noted that, sixty-two years later, the reality of Israel is very different than what the country's Declaration of Independence envisaged. At the end of the rally, a "Declaration of Independence from Fascism" was signed (see full text below).
Among participants in the initiative were Shulamit Aloni, Uri Avnery, Alex Ansky, Shery Ansky, Menachem Brinker, Ran Cohen, Ruth Cohen, Yaron Ezrachi, Galia Golan, Haim Guri, Sna'it Gisis, Yoram Kaniuk, Dani Karavan, Yehoshua Knaz, Elia Leibowitz, Alex Libak, Hanna Meron, Sammy Michael, Merav Michaeli, Sefi Rachlevsky, Gabi Solomon, David Tartakower, Micha Ullman, and many others.
Following is the full text of the Declaration of Independence from Fascism:
A state which forcibly invades the hallowed realm of the individual citizen's conscience, and which imposes punishment on those whose opinions and beliefs do not fit the authorities' opinions and the prescribed "character" of the state, stops being a democracy and embarks on becoming a fascist state.
Behind these stairs where we stand, the state of Israel was proclaimed. The state which increasingly takes Israel's place – a state which fills the country with a variety of racist legislation, promoted by the Knesset and the cabinet – is excluding itself from the family of democratic nations. Therefore we, citizens of the Israel envisaged in the Declaration of Independence, hereby declare that will not be citizens of a country purporting to be Israel and which violates its basic commitment to the principles of equality, civil liberty and sincere aspiration for peace – principles upon which the State of Israel was founded.
Contact: Sefi Rachlevsky 052-7078075
Monday, October 11, 2010
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Fight Fire with Water, not More Fire!
Dear Friend,
It would be news if Muslims torched a Synogogue. Outrage in the Western press would overflow.
But when Settlers torch a Mosque, where is the outrage?
Here is the news story from the Christian Science Monitor; and attached, is a particularly pointed and accurate anecdote to how it should be dealt with. Peace, Justice, Love, JRK
Tel Aviv, Israel – Israel is worried that Jewish militants torched a West Bank mosque overnight Monday in a bid to undermine peace negotiations with the Palestinians.
A mosque in the Palestinian village of Beit Fajar, just south of Bethlehem, became the fourth in the last two years to be the target of an arson attempt, according to human rights workers. The attack is believed to be part of a campaign by vigilante settlers to ignite violence by attacking Muslim holy sites.
"Whoever did this is a terrorist in every sense of the word, and intended to hurt the chances for peace and dialogue with the Palestinians,'' said Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak in a statement. "This was a shameful act that besmirched the State of Israel and its value."
Perpetrators of previous attacks against mosques have left behind in Hebrew graffiti the words "price tag," referring to a policy of using violence against Palestinians and Israeli security forces in retaliation for outpost evacuations and militant attacks on settlers.
The price tag campaign is seen by experts as an attempt by militant settlers to deter Israel from making concessions to Palestinians, either by evacuating illegal settler outposts or by temporarily halting settlement expansion in the West Bank. Militant settlers have rioted in Palestinian villages and uprooted crops belonging to Palestinian farmers.
Now Friends, here is a comment to the CSM story by "Bobi", may she be blessed eternally [JRK]
Who did it? We know who did it. This damage to a house of worship was done by fundamentalist radicals. Does it make any difference which flavor? No it doesn't make any difference at all. What makes a difference is if the fundamentalist radicals damage the peace efforts. The buildings can be repaired and the books replaced. What can't be repaired or replaced are the lives of the innocent people in all the countries in the region who's lives are being destroyed. That would be the vast majority in all the countries in the Middle East.
The best ancedote for this kind of fundamentalist radical behavior is for the moslems to repair and replace damage done to synagoges and the jewish people to repair and replace damage done to mosques. This is what actually happens most of the time and is the really important news.
Reporters need to focus more on the good news and take away the forum from the fundamentalist radical extremist terrorists on both sides. When you trump terrorist activities with good works, then terrorism loses its power over all of us.
Israel, replace the burned books with better than they lost, send in faithful Muslims from Israel to repair the building, send in the materials for the repair of the building, and take control back over your own country. Muslims do the same. You both have to fight fire with water. Water is the source of life, cool and refreshing, fire is not (Bobi, on comments to the main story).
It would be news if Muslims torched a Synogogue. Outrage in the Western press would overflow.
But when Settlers torch a Mosque, where is the outrage?
Here is the news story from the Christian Science Monitor; and attached, is a particularly pointed and accurate anecdote to how it should be dealt with. Peace, Justice, Love, JRK
Tel Aviv, Israel – Israel is worried that Jewish militants torched a West Bank mosque overnight Monday in a bid to undermine peace negotiations with the Palestinians.
A mosque in the Palestinian village of Beit Fajar, just south of Bethlehem, became the fourth in the last two years to be the target of an arson attempt, according to human rights workers. The attack is believed to be part of a campaign by vigilante settlers to ignite violence by attacking Muslim holy sites.
"Whoever did this is a terrorist in every sense of the word, and intended to hurt the chances for peace and dialogue with the Palestinians,'' said Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak in a statement. "This was a shameful act that besmirched the State of Israel and its value."
Perpetrators of previous attacks against mosques have left behind in Hebrew graffiti the words "price tag," referring to a policy of using violence against Palestinians and Israeli security forces in retaliation for outpost evacuations and militant attacks on settlers.
The price tag campaign is seen by experts as an attempt by militant settlers to deter Israel from making concessions to Palestinians, either by evacuating illegal settler outposts or by temporarily halting settlement expansion in the West Bank. Militant settlers have rioted in Palestinian villages and uprooted crops belonging to Palestinian farmers.
Now Friends, here is a comment to the CSM story by "Bobi", may she be blessed eternally [JRK]
Who did it? We know who did it. This damage to a house of worship was done by fundamentalist radicals. Does it make any difference which flavor? No it doesn't make any difference at all. What makes a difference is if the fundamentalist radicals damage the peace efforts. The buildings can be repaired and the books replaced. What can't be repaired or replaced are the lives of the innocent people in all the countries in the region who's lives are being destroyed. That would be the vast majority in all the countries in the Middle East.
The best ancedote for this kind of fundamentalist radical behavior is for the moslems to repair and replace damage done to synagoges and the jewish people to repair and replace damage done to mosques. This is what actually happens most of the time and is the really important news.
Reporters need to focus more on the good news and take away the forum from the fundamentalist radical extremist terrorists on both sides. When you trump terrorist activities with good works, then terrorism loses its power over all of us.
Israel, replace the burned books with better than they lost, send in faithful Muslims from Israel to repair the building, send in the materials for the repair of the building, and take control back over your own country. Muslims do the same. You both have to fight fire with water. Water is the source of life, cool and refreshing, fire is not (Bobi, on comments to the main story).
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Push for the Right to Vote
Dear Friend,
Robert Wright has an idea: Palestinians demonstating to vote in "democratic" Israel. They are living on the land more and more totally occupied by Israel. Why not work to be considered true citizens of the country?
It is, unfortunately, idealistic to think the Palestinians can forget about giving up the "right to their land". Israel is no more likely to give them "a vote" as it is to end their "occupation" of Palestinian land. It will take US initiative in withholding support for Israeli occupation for anything significant to "happen", IMHO. JRK
A One-to-Two-State SolutionRobert Wright
The New York Times (Blog)
September 28, 2010 - 12:00am
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/a-one-to-two-state-solution/?ref...
This week’s bad news from the West Bank — the resumption of settlement construction after a 10-month moratorium, just as a new round of peace talks had gotten underway — didn’t much dampen optimism among seasoned Middle East watchers.
That’s because there wasn’t much optimism to dampen. For the past few years, more and more people who follow these things have been saying that the perennial goal of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks — a two-state solution — will never be reached in any event.
These experts fall into two camps.
The more upbeat, while pessimistic about a two-state solution, hold out hope for a “one-state solution”: Israel gains uncontested possession of the West Bank and Gaza but gives Palestinians who live there the vote, and Israel evolves from a Jewish state into a stable and peaceful secular state.
People in the other camp — the pure, 100-percent pessimists — say that even if such a thing could work, even if a democracy with about as many Arabs as Jews could function, it isn’t going to happen; most Israelis would never admit a large and growing Arab population to the electorate.
But there’s a third possibility that nobody ever talks about. Pursuing a one-state solution could actually lead to a two-state solution. Instead of following the current road map to a Palestinian state, maybe we can get there by detour.
One key to working up enthusiasm for this detour is to get clear on the nature of the roadblock.
It’s common to say that Israel’s intransigence on the settlements issue reflects the growing strength of the right, especially the religious fundamentalists who do much of the settling. But at least as big a problem as the zeal of the radicals is the apathy of the moderates.
A recent Time magazine cover story — “Why Israel Doesn’t Care About Peace” — explained why many Israelis just don’t think a peace deal is all that important: they’ve already got peace. Ever since Israel built its security wall, they’ve been safe from suicide bombers, and homemade rockets from Gaza can’t reach them. They’re prosperous to boot. What’s not to like?
So long as this attitude prevails, the far right will have veto power over policy in the occupied territory. For a peace deal to happen, Israel’s centrists need to get jarred out of their indifference. Someone needs to scare these people.
There’s a way for Palestinians to do that — and not the usual way, with bombs and rockets. Quite the opposite.
If Palestinians want to strike fear into the hearts of Israelis they should (a) give up on violence as a tool of persuasion; (b) give up on the current round of negotiations; and (c) start holding demonstrations in which they ask for only one thing: the right to vote. Their argument would be simple: They live under Israeli rule, and Israel is a democracy, so why aren’t they part of it?
A truly peaceful movement with such elemental aspirations — think of Martin Luther King or Gandhi — would gain immediate international support. In Europe and the United States, leftists would agitate in growing numbers for economic and political pressure on Israel.
In 2002, some Harvard students urged the university to purge investments in Israel from its portfolio, and the president of Harvard, Lawrence Summers, suggested that the disinvestment movement was anti-Semitic. This time there would be a lot more students, and no university president would call them anti-Semitic. All they’d be saying is that if Israel isn’t going to give up the occupied territories — and, let’s face it, the current government isn’t exactly in headlong pursuit of that goal — it should give Arabs living there the same rights it gives Jews living there.
As momentum grew — more Palestinians marching, more international support for them, thus more Palestinians marching, and so on — the complacent Israeli center would get way less complacent. Suddenly facing a choice between a one-state solution and international ostracism, reasonable Israelis would develop a burning attraction to a two-state solution — and a sudden intolerance for religious zealots who stood in the way of it. Before long Israel would be pondering two-state deals more generous than anything that’s been seriously discussed to date.
Obviously, neutralizing Israeli extremists wouldn’t get rid of all obstacles to peace. For one thing, there are the Palestinian extremists. They could sabotage peaceful progress with attention-grabbing violence, and Hamas, in particular, has shown as much. But that problem, which looms large on the current road to peace, would loom smaller on the detour.
For starters, if a peaceful suffrage movement gave Palestinians the vigorous international support they’ve long sought, it would be hard for Hamas to conspicuously oppose it.
Besides, given the Arab birth rate, for Arabs to get the vote would theoretically put them on the path toward effective control of Israel, which is exactly what Hamas says it wants. It would be kind of awkward for Hamas to stand in the way of that.
Of course, once Israel started talking seriously about a two-state deal, Hamas could revert to fierce opposition. But if indeed the deal being discussed was more generous than those discussed in the past, the success of the Palestinian peace movement would be undeniable. Hamas might persist in its obstructionism, but it would have less support than it has now. That’s progress.
Given the ongoing damage done to America’s national security by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it’s in America’s interest for Israelis to feel intensely eager for a two-state deal. And some do.
As for the others: if they really grasped their predicament, they’d be intensely eager as well. The menu of futures for Israel features only three items: (1) two-state solution; (2) one-state solution; (3) something really, really horrible. There’s just no way that the situation will simmer indefinitely without boiling over, whether via nuclear bomb (purchased by terrorists from cash-hungry North Korea, say), or via a tit-for-tat exchange with Hamas or Hezbollah that spins out of control, bringing a devastating regional war, or via some other path to catastrophe.
Sooner or later, something will alert Israel’s unfortunately silent majority to the high price of leaving the Palestinian issue unresolved. The only question is whether by then the price will have already been paid.
Robert Wright has an idea: Palestinians demonstating to vote in "democratic" Israel. They are living on the land more and more totally occupied by Israel. Why not work to be considered true citizens of the country?
It is, unfortunately, idealistic to think the Palestinians can forget about giving up the "right to their land". Israel is no more likely to give them "a vote" as it is to end their "occupation" of Palestinian land. It will take US initiative in withholding support for Israeli occupation for anything significant to "happen", IMHO. JRK
A One-to-Two-State SolutionRobert Wright
The New York Times (Blog)
September 28, 2010 - 12:00am
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/a-one-to-two-state-solution/?ref...
This week’s bad news from the West Bank — the resumption of settlement construction after a 10-month moratorium, just as a new round of peace talks had gotten underway — didn’t much dampen optimism among seasoned Middle East watchers.
That’s because there wasn’t much optimism to dampen. For the past few years, more and more people who follow these things have been saying that the perennial goal of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks — a two-state solution — will never be reached in any event.
These experts fall into two camps.
The more upbeat, while pessimistic about a two-state solution, hold out hope for a “one-state solution”: Israel gains uncontested possession of the West Bank and Gaza but gives Palestinians who live there the vote, and Israel evolves from a Jewish state into a stable and peaceful secular state.
People in the other camp — the pure, 100-percent pessimists — say that even if such a thing could work, even if a democracy with about as many Arabs as Jews could function, it isn’t going to happen; most Israelis would never admit a large and growing Arab population to the electorate.
But there’s a third possibility that nobody ever talks about. Pursuing a one-state solution could actually lead to a two-state solution. Instead of following the current road map to a Palestinian state, maybe we can get there by detour.
One key to working up enthusiasm for this detour is to get clear on the nature of the roadblock.
It’s common to say that Israel’s intransigence on the settlements issue reflects the growing strength of the right, especially the religious fundamentalists who do much of the settling. But at least as big a problem as the zeal of the radicals is the apathy of the moderates.
A recent Time magazine cover story — “Why Israel Doesn’t Care About Peace” — explained why many Israelis just don’t think a peace deal is all that important: they’ve already got peace. Ever since Israel built its security wall, they’ve been safe from suicide bombers, and homemade rockets from Gaza can’t reach them. They’re prosperous to boot. What’s not to like?
So long as this attitude prevails, the far right will have veto power over policy in the occupied territory. For a peace deal to happen, Israel’s centrists need to get jarred out of their indifference. Someone needs to scare these people.
There’s a way for Palestinians to do that — and not the usual way, with bombs and rockets. Quite the opposite.
If Palestinians want to strike fear into the hearts of Israelis they should (a) give up on violence as a tool of persuasion; (b) give up on the current round of negotiations; and (c) start holding demonstrations in which they ask for only one thing: the right to vote. Their argument would be simple: They live under Israeli rule, and Israel is a democracy, so why aren’t they part of it?
A truly peaceful movement with such elemental aspirations — think of Martin Luther King or Gandhi — would gain immediate international support. In Europe and the United States, leftists would agitate in growing numbers for economic and political pressure on Israel.
In 2002, some Harvard students urged the university to purge investments in Israel from its portfolio, and the president of Harvard, Lawrence Summers, suggested that the disinvestment movement was anti-Semitic. This time there would be a lot more students, and no university president would call them anti-Semitic. All they’d be saying is that if Israel isn’t going to give up the occupied territories — and, let’s face it, the current government isn’t exactly in headlong pursuit of that goal — it should give Arabs living there the same rights it gives Jews living there.
As momentum grew — more Palestinians marching, more international support for them, thus more Palestinians marching, and so on — the complacent Israeli center would get way less complacent. Suddenly facing a choice between a one-state solution and international ostracism, reasonable Israelis would develop a burning attraction to a two-state solution — and a sudden intolerance for religious zealots who stood in the way of it. Before long Israel would be pondering two-state deals more generous than anything that’s been seriously discussed to date.
Obviously, neutralizing Israeli extremists wouldn’t get rid of all obstacles to peace. For one thing, there are the Palestinian extremists. They could sabotage peaceful progress with attention-grabbing violence, and Hamas, in particular, has shown as much. But that problem, which looms large on the current road to peace, would loom smaller on the detour.
For starters, if a peaceful suffrage movement gave Palestinians the vigorous international support they’ve long sought, it would be hard for Hamas to conspicuously oppose it.
Besides, given the Arab birth rate, for Arabs to get the vote would theoretically put them on the path toward effective control of Israel, which is exactly what Hamas says it wants. It would be kind of awkward for Hamas to stand in the way of that.
Of course, once Israel started talking seriously about a two-state deal, Hamas could revert to fierce opposition. But if indeed the deal being discussed was more generous than those discussed in the past, the success of the Palestinian peace movement would be undeniable. Hamas might persist in its obstructionism, but it would have less support than it has now. That’s progress.
Given the ongoing damage done to America’s national security by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it’s in America’s interest for Israelis to feel intensely eager for a two-state deal. And some do.
As for the others: if they really grasped their predicament, they’d be intensely eager as well. The menu of futures for Israel features only three items: (1) two-state solution; (2) one-state solution; (3) something really, really horrible. There’s just no way that the situation will simmer indefinitely without boiling over, whether via nuclear bomb (purchased by terrorists from cash-hungry North Korea, say), or via a tit-for-tat exchange with Hamas or Hezbollah that spins out of control, bringing a devastating regional war, or via some other path to catastrophe.
Sooner or later, something will alert Israel’s unfortunately silent majority to the high price of leaving the Palestinian issue unresolved. The only question is whether by then the price will have already been paid.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Affirm this Letter!
Dear Friend,
Read the enclosed text of the letter sent to our President by the CMEP (Churches for ME Peace). It deserves to be disseminated and supported by you and others.
Written on August 30, it still expresses the hope that the parties will act in the best interests of each other.
It isn't just what they "say" (about settlements, e.g.). It is that the Israelis are actually refraining from adding to the settlements, perhaps even after the September 26 deadline passes (despite what is being reported in the press today).
Israel has been reluctant to add to the settlements ever since the Obama "team" made such a Big Deal out of it this spring; AND because Clinton, Mitchell and Obama are continuing to MAKE a BIG DEAL out of continuing the "freeze" RIGHT NOW.
This letter is gaining support, even among "evangelicals", (Jim Wallis, Lynne Hybels (Willow Creek Church), Gradye Parsons (PC-USA), Wes Granberg-Michaelson (RCA) and Tony Campolo.
There are so many ways for this current series of "negotiations" to "FAIL". We need not enumerate them.
But here is what is needed now: Right thinking. Courage. Moderation. Persistence in the face of serious distractions. Considering what is best for "the other"; not being deterred by the violence and counter violence even now taking place, in Gaza, e.g.
If Abbas can get this "done", it will be a blow to the rejectionists (HAMAS); and Netanyahu will be able to restrain the extremists in his Likud base (the settlers).
There are still many "ifs" that need definition and action. There is risk for our President as well, and a challenge he must face: The Israeli lobby.
We have been quick to criticize Palestinians "violence" and withhold support; we must also be ready to keep criticizing Israeli settlement resumption, and be ready to withhold support for it--something it will be hard for Obama to do politically as well. Yet with our support, he will be able to stand up for what is "right".
President Obama has correctly "framed" the issues: 1) Security for Israel (peace); and 2) Sovereignty for Palestinians (justice). Each demands the other.
There is no peace without justice; there is no justice without "concern for what is best for the other". Persistence in making the right choices, again and again, until we get it right. These times test the character of the American, Israeli and Palestinians soul. We need to grow up. All of us.
Pray and work as if your life depends on it; Pray and hope as if all depends on "God". And you'll get it right. JRK
August 30, 2010
Dear Mr. President,
As leaders of American Christian faith communities deeply concerned with the need to end the long-standing conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, we are pleased with the success of your diplomacy in bringing the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of the Palestinian Authority together in Washington September 1-2 to restart direct negotiations aimed at reaching an agreement on final status issues within the coming year. We fully support your goal of ending the occupation that began in 1967 and achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace with a viable Palestinian state living side by side with Israel in peace and security.
At the same time we have no illusions about the difficulty of the task ahead. Both sides hold deep convictions contrary to those held by the other. Although many issues have been clarified in past negotiations, major compromises by both sides will be needed at considerable political risk and cost. Without your help it seems unlikely that an agreement can be reached. Time is short. If an agreement is not reached within the coming year, it may not be reachable at all.
For that reason we call on you and your negotiating team to continue your vigilant efforts to help the parties find acceptable solutions. We are heartened by the statement of Senator George Mitchell that he will remain closely involved in the negotiations. The U.S. will need to empower both sides to take risks for peace and when necessary to make proposals to bridge remaining differences. The United States must be clear that actions or words by either side in the coming year that undermine confidence in the negotiations, incite disrespect or prejudge the outcome of final status issues will not be tolerated.
In support of this effort, we pledge to maintain and expand our dialogue on this issue with American Jewish and Palestinian communities and to assure them of our steadfast support for achieving the aspirations of both Israel and the Palestinian people for peace and security.
Mr. President, we are praying for you as you seek to bring God's justice and peace to a place torn by walls and weapons. We are convinced that with your vigilant support this dream can be fulfilled, and the lives of Palestinians and Israelis, as well as U.S. national security interests, can be transformed for the better.
Sincerely,
Read the enclosed text of the letter sent to our President by the CMEP (Churches for ME Peace). It deserves to be disseminated and supported by you and others.
Written on August 30, it still expresses the hope that the parties will act in the best interests of each other.
It isn't just what they "say" (about settlements, e.g.). It is that the Israelis are actually refraining from adding to the settlements, perhaps even after the September 26 deadline passes (despite what is being reported in the press today).
Israel has been reluctant to add to the settlements ever since the Obama "team" made such a Big Deal out of it this spring; AND because Clinton, Mitchell and Obama are continuing to MAKE a BIG DEAL out of continuing the "freeze" RIGHT NOW.
This letter is gaining support, even among "evangelicals", (Jim Wallis, Lynne Hybels (Willow Creek Church), Gradye Parsons (PC-USA), Wes Granberg-Michaelson (RCA) and Tony Campolo.
There are so many ways for this current series of "negotiations" to "FAIL". We need not enumerate them.
But here is what is needed now: Right thinking. Courage. Moderation. Persistence in the face of serious distractions. Considering what is best for "the other"; not being deterred by the violence and counter violence even now taking place, in Gaza, e.g.
If Abbas can get this "done", it will be a blow to the rejectionists (HAMAS); and Netanyahu will be able to restrain the extremists in his Likud base (the settlers).
There are still many "ifs" that need definition and action. There is risk for our President as well, and a challenge he must face: The Israeli lobby.
We have been quick to criticize Palestinians "violence" and withhold support; we must also be ready to keep criticizing Israeli settlement resumption, and be ready to withhold support for it--something it will be hard for Obama to do politically as well. Yet with our support, he will be able to stand up for what is "right".
President Obama has correctly "framed" the issues: 1) Security for Israel (peace); and 2) Sovereignty for Palestinians (justice). Each demands the other.
There is no peace without justice; there is no justice without "concern for what is best for the other". Persistence in making the right choices, again and again, until we get it right. These times test the character of the American, Israeli and Palestinians soul. We need to grow up. All of us.
Pray and work as if your life depends on it; Pray and hope as if all depends on "God". And you'll get it right. JRK
August 30, 2010
Dear Mr. President,
As leaders of American Christian faith communities deeply concerned with the need to end the long-standing conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, we are pleased with the success of your diplomacy in bringing the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of the Palestinian Authority together in Washington September 1-2 to restart direct negotiations aimed at reaching an agreement on final status issues within the coming year. We fully support your goal of ending the occupation that began in 1967 and achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive peace with a viable Palestinian state living side by side with Israel in peace and security.
At the same time we have no illusions about the difficulty of the task ahead. Both sides hold deep convictions contrary to those held by the other. Although many issues have been clarified in past negotiations, major compromises by both sides will be needed at considerable political risk and cost. Without your help it seems unlikely that an agreement can be reached. Time is short. If an agreement is not reached within the coming year, it may not be reachable at all.
For that reason we call on you and your negotiating team to continue your vigilant efforts to help the parties find acceptable solutions. We are heartened by the statement of Senator George Mitchell that he will remain closely involved in the negotiations. The U.S. will need to empower both sides to take risks for peace and when necessary to make proposals to bridge remaining differences. The United States must be clear that actions or words by either side in the coming year that undermine confidence in the negotiations, incite disrespect or prejudge the outcome of final status issues will not be tolerated.
In support of this effort, we pledge to maintain and expand our dialogue on this issue with American Jewish and Palestinian communities and to assure them of our steadfast support for achieving the aspirations of both Israel and the Palestinian people for peace and security.
Mr. President, we are praying for you as you seek to bring God's justice and peace to a place torn by walls and weapons. We are convinced that with your vigilant support this dream can be fulfilled, and the lives of Palestinians and Israelis, as well as U.S. national security interests, can be transformed for the better.
Sincerely,
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
A Hopeful View of the Negotiations
Dear Friend,
Well-known leaders like Gershon Baskin cast the right vision. Will "leaders", the current P.M. and President and their entourage "make it happen" and carry their constituents along with them?
The situation is NOT insoluble. Israeli "security" and Palestinian "sovereignty" are not mutually exclusive. But it will take "work", making room for "the Other". Pray that we may all make room for "the Others" in our midst.
Palestinians are making headway with "infrastructure" and economic viability, inspite of the oppressive atmosphere. What if the creative energies of both peoples could be even more greatly unleashed? Side by side, in cooperation instead of conflict? For this we must fervently hope (and work)! Faithfully yours, JRK
Gershon Baskin
The Jerusalem Post (Opinion)
September 14, 2010 - 12:00am
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=188020
TWO RIGHTS DON'T MAKE IT WRONG
Yes, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is right – why should Israel continue the settlement freeze; after all, everyone knows Gilo will never be Palestinian. Ramot Eshkol will not be part of the Palestinian capital of al-Kuds, nor will Pisgat Ze’ev? Palestinians should understand that there are certain facts that will not be undone. The Jewish Quarter of the Old City and the Western Wall will remain under Israeli sovereignty in any peace agreement; without this, there can be no peace and certainly the Palestinians should realize this by now.
Yes, but Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is also right – why should the Palestinians enter new negotiations while Israel continues to build settlements on land which will become part of the Palestinian state? Haven’t too many Israeli facts already been created on the ground? The last time Netanyahu was prime minister, Har Homa didn’t exist, but now look at it – another Israeli city built on Palestinian land. The whole need to find land to swap comes from the facts that Israel has created, illegally by international law.
YES, BOTH sides are right. Palestinians and Palestinian-supporters will argue that there is no moral equivalent in the above claims. Israel has acted illegally and settlements were explicitly built by some former (and current) politicians to prevent the eventual creation of a Palestinian state.
There are two defining elements of Palestinian identity – the nakba (catastrophe) and dispersal of 1948 and settlements. For 43 years, Palestinians have watched their land get swallowed up as their dream of liberation, freedom and independence has withered with each new home built in the West Bank.
The settlement presence has meant land expropriation, bypass roads, usurping of water reserves, confiscation of natural resources such as stone quarries, and the entire system of controls – fences, roadblocks, barriers, walls and lots of IDF soldiers.
There is no way for any Palestinian to have any sympathy for settlers or settlements.
Their very presence is a daily reminder of their lack of freedom in their own land.
It is equally impossible for settlers, I imagine, to feel any sympathy for the Palestinians. Almost no settler will understand that Palestinians believe they made their most painful compromise already when they accepted the two-state solution within the 1967 borders. Settlers cannot see that when the Palestinian national movement officially accepted the idea of two states in November 1988 it was giving up 78 percent of what it believed to be its birthright – all of the land that was the State of Israel prior to June 5, 1967.
Palestinians sincerely believe that all of Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean legitimately belongs to them (as many Israelis believe that the entire land from the river to the sea belongs to them), and that the creation of the State of Israel was an historic injustice to them as they had nothing to do with the Holocaust. The Palestinians cannot see and accept what I do – that the birth of Israel was a moral imperative and that the Jewish people had the same right as all other peoples to a state of their own in their historic land.
And yes, so do the Palestinians. The creation of a Palestinian state today is a moral imperative for both Jews and Palestinians, and the Jewish people should be the most vocal advocates of the rights of the Palestinian people.
THE CLASH of the rights of these two peoples is the greatest wrong to both of them. The lingering bloody and tragic conflict must come to an end. Those leaders who cling to excuses to foil the chance of finding a way out of this mess are criminally negligent and dangerous.
Those Israeli and Palestinian citizens who encourage their leaders to provoke an early death to the new negotiations are nothing less than traitors to their own people.
There is a way out of this conflict. We are not destined to live by the sword forever. There are solutions to the issues. Israel can be secure and recognized; Jerusalem can be our eternal capital, recognized by all the nations of the world. Israel can be the magnet, the just and model society that will attract more Jews to come here to live. Israel can continue to shine in the field of hi-tech communications, biotech, agrotech and more.
Palestine too can prosper and shine. Palestine can be the first truly democratic Arab state, with the most advanced education system in the Arab region, the highest use of renewable energy, modern technology in industry and agriculture, a new and prospering hi-tech sector rapidly developing in cooperation with Israeli companies. The entrepreneurial spirit which has enabled the Palestinians to survive from one disaster to another can be the fertile ground on which a new economy of Internet-age Palestinians can be built.
We need to let loose the energies in both societies that are locked up by the continued conflict. This is much truer about Palestine than Israel, but in Israel as well, too much energy is improperly invested in the survival mode necessary to sustain us in conflict rather than in the creative mode which is sparked by security and liberation. We must let that energy loose. We can all be so much more than we are today.
This is not romantic kumbaya. Make no mistake, our spirit and our belief in our own abilities is the essence of our life, hope is the fire of our souls and the realization of our most noble dreams is the goal that we must achieve. There are those of us, maybe the majority, who cry woe about the horrible fate that has been bestowed on us. There are those of us who see that real peace is a real possibility and that the enormous amount of energy and money that has gone into fostering conflict can now be diverted to education, health care, science, discovery, the environment, the arts, and not just the fact of our existence.
The rights of both peoples do not have to be mutually negating; they can be mutually sustaining and fulfilling. The only way for that to happen is for us to end the blood feud, recognize each others’ rights to this land and make real peace.
Well-known leaders like Gershon Baskin cast the right vision. Will "leaders", the current P.M. and President and their entourage "make it happen" and carry their constituents along with them?
The situation is NOT insoluble. Israeli "security" and Palestinian "sovereignty" are not mutually exclusive. But it will take "work", making room for "the Other". Pray that we may all make room for "the Others" in our midst.
Palestinians are making headway with "infrastructure" and economic viability, inspite of the oppressive atmosphere. What if the creative energies of both peoples could be even more greatly unleashed? Side by side, in cooperation instead of conflict? For this we must fervently hope (and work)! Faithfully yours, JRK
Gershon Baskin
The Jerusalem Post (Opinion)
September 14, 2010 - 12:00am
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=188020
TWO RIGHTS DON'T MAKE IT WRONG
Yes, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is right – why should Israel continue the settlement freeze; after all, everyone knows Gilo will never be Palestinian. Ramot Eshkol will not be part of the Palestinian capital of al-Kuds, nor will Pisgat Ze’ev? Palestinians should understand that there are certain facts that will not be undone. The Jewish Quarter of the Old City and the Western Wall will remain under Israeli sovereignty in any peace agreement; without this, there can be no peace and certainly the Palestinians should realize this by now.
Yes, but Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is also right – why should the Palestinians enter new negotiations while Israel continues to build settlements on land which will become part of the Palestinian state? Haven’t too many Israeli facts already been created on the ground? The last time Netanyahu was prime minister, Har Homa didn’t exist, but now look at it – another Israeli city built on Palestinian land. The whole need to find land to swap comes from the facts that Israel has created, illegally by international law.
YES, BOTH sides are right. Palestinians and Palestinian-supporters will argue that there is no moral equivalent in the above claims. Israel has acted illegally and settlements were explicitly built by some former (and current) politicians to prevent the eventual creation of a Palestinian state.
There are two defining elements of Palestinian identity – the nakba (catastrophe) and dispersal of 1948 and settlements. For 43 years, Palestinians have watched their land get swallowed up as their dream of liberation, freedom and independence has withered with each new home built in the West Bank.
The settlement presence has meant land expropriation, bypass roads, usurping of water reserves, confiscation of natural resources such as stone quarries, and the entire system of controls – fences, roadblocks, barriers, walls and lots of IDF soldiers.
There is no way for any Palestinian to have any sympathy for settlers or settlements.
Their very presence is a daily reminder of their lack of freedom in their own land.
It is equally impossible for settlers, I imagine, to feel any sympathy for the Palestinians. Almost no settler will understand that Palestinians believe they made their most painful compromise already when they accepted the two-state solution within the 1967 borders. Settlers cannot see that when the Palestinian national movement officially accepted the idea of two states in November 1988 it was giving up 78 percent of what it believed to be its birthright – all of the land that was the State of Israel prior to June 5, 1967.
Palestinians sincerely believe that all of Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean legitimately belongs to them (as many Israelis believe that the entire land from the river to the sea belongs to them), and that the creation of the State of Israel was an historic injustice to them as they had nothing to do with the Holocaust. The Palestinians cannot see and accept what I do – that the birth of Israel was a moral imperative and that the Jewish people had the same right as all other peoples to a state of their own in their historic land.
And yes, so do the Palestinians. The creation of a Palestinian state today is a moral imperative for both Jews and Palestinians, and the Jewish people should be the most vocal advocates of the rights of the Palestinian people.
THE CLASH of the rights of these two peoples is the greatest wrong to both of them. The lingering bloody and tragic conflict must come to an end. Those leaders who cling to excuses to foil the chance of finding a way out of this mess are criminally negligent and dangerous.
Those Israeli and Palestinian citizens who encourage their leaders to provoke an early death to the new negotiations are nothing less than traitors to their own people.
There is a way out of this conflict. We are not destined to live by the sword forever. There are solutions to the issues. Israel can be secure and recognized; Jerusalem can be our eternal capital, recognized by all the nations of the world. Israel can be the magnet, the just and model society that will attract more Jews to come here to live. Israel can continue to shine in the field of hi-tech communications, biotech, agrotech and more.
Palestine too can prosper and shine. Palestine can be the first truly democratic Arab state, with the most advanced education system in the Arab region, the highest use of renewable energy, modern technology in industry and agriculture, a new and prospering hi-tech sector rapidly developing in cooperation with Israeli companies. The entrepreneurial spirit which has enabled the Palestinians to survive from one disaster to another can be the fertile ground on which a new economy of Internet-age Palestinians can be built.
We need to let loose the energies in both societies that are locked up by the continued conflict. This is much truer about Palestine than Israel, but in Israel as well, too much energy is improperly invested in the survival mode necessary to sustain us in conflict rather than in the creative mode which is sparked by security and liberation. We must let that energy loose. We can all be so much more than we are today.
This is not romantic kumbaya. Make no mistake, our spirit and our belief in our own abilities is the essence of our life, hope is the fire of our souls and the realization of our most noble dreams is the goal that we must achieve. There are those of us, maybe the majority, who cry woe about the horrible fate that has been bestowed on us. There are those of us who see that real peace is a real possibility and that the enormous amount of energy and money that has gone into fostering conflict can now be diverted to education, health care, science, discovery, the environment, the arts, and not just the fact of our existence.
The rights of both peoples do not have to be mutually negating; they can be mutually sustaining and fulfilling. The only way for that to happen is for us to end the blood feud, recognize each others’ rights to this land and make real peace.
Monday, September 13, 2010
This Film Casts the Right Vision
Dear Friend,
LITTLE TOWN OF BETHLEHEM is a 77 minute tour through violence to nonviolence, showing the determination of a Palestinian Christian, a Palestinian Muslim and a Jew, to live out Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's vision of nonviolence. Here is the website for the "trailer": www.littletownofbethlehem.org
To find, or organize, a local screening visit www.littletownofbethlehem.org, where trailers and other videos are also available to view, or email imatthews@egmfilms.org.
Sami, Ahmad, Yonatan come from radically different backgrounds in a land of unending war. Yet, against all odds, including some within their Israeli and Palestinian communities, they are able to find common ground. They walk a path of nonviolence struggle in lockstep with Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. For them courage is found not in taking up arms, but setting them down once and for all and extending a hand in peace.
From the award-winning team that brought you End of the Spear (2006) and Miss HIV (2007) comes director Jim Hanon’s latest documentary, Little Town of Bethlehem. Unscripted and unrehearsed, discover the humanity lurking behind an ancient cycle of violence.
Featuring: Sami Awad, Ahmad Al’Azzeh, Yonatan Shapira. Music Produced by: Kirk Whalum. Film Design by: Mike Galloway and Mark Arnold. Produced by: Mart Green. Written, Directed and Filmed by: Jim Hanon. Feature running time: Approximately 77 minutes. This film is rated PG-13, Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13, for some violent and disturbing images.
As an opinion maker, you can schedule this film for your constituency. People with the right mindset will eventually get it done. There is no peace without justice; there is no justice without love. JRK
LITTLE TOWN OF BETHLEHEM is a 77 minute tour through violence to nonviolence, showing the determination of a Palestinian Christian, a Palestinian Muslim and a Jew, to live out Martin Luther King's and Gandhi's vision of nonviolence. Here is the website for the "trailer": www.littletownofbethlehem.org
To find, or organize, a local screening visit www.littletownofbethlehem.org, where trailers and other videos are also available to view, or email imatthews@egmfilms.org.
Sami, Ahmad, Yonatan come from radically different backgrounds in a land of unending war. Yet, against all odds, including some within their Israeli and Palestinian communities, they are able to find common ground. They walk a path of nonviolence struggle in lockstep with Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. For them courage is found not in taking up arms, but setting them down once and for all and extending a hand in peace.
From the award-winning team that brought you End of the Spear (2006) and Miss HIV (2007) comes director Jim Hanon’s latest documentary, Little Town of Bethlehem. Unscripted and unrehearsed, discover the humanity lurking behind an ancient cycle of violence.
Featuring: Sami Awad, Ahmad Al’Azzeh, Yonatan Shapira. Music Produced by: Kirk Whalum. Film Design by: Mike Galloway and Mark Arnold. Produced by: Mart Green. Written, Directed and Filmed by: Jim Hanon. Feature running time: Approximately 77 minutes. This film is rated PG-13, Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13, for some violent and disturbing images.
As an opinion maker, you can schedule this film for your constituency. People with the right mindset will eventually get it done. There is no peace without justice; there is no justice without love. JRK
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Courage to Face Down "Extremists"
Dear Friend,
Occasionally, one comes upon an essay or blog that strikes the right note with penetrating clarity.
Especially these days, when Americans are painting all Muslims as "stealth terrorists" who want to take over America.
Bradley Burston gives us the song. Will any dance to his text and tune?
To "extremists", moderation, "peace", sharing and resolving disputes is weakness and compromise. Yet, true leaders build bridges not walls between groups of people who have been thrown together by history and vision. Read and share, with thanks to the ATFP for digging this out of Haaretz. JRK
A Special Place in Hell / Real men don't talk Mideast peace
Bradley Burston
Haaretz (Blog)
September 6, 2010 - 12:00am
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/a-special-place-in-hell-rea...
There was something wrong with the air here the day President Obama hosted Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. There was a bottom-heavy grip to the heat, the air almost too thick to breathe, as though it had to be forced down, like medicine.
In other places, this freight in the weather is the kind which announces a monsoon, or an earthquake. Not here. Here it was murder that was in the air. It just hadn't happened yet.
The stage had been set for days. Israel's most influential former chief rabbi had ushered in the week with a message about the Palestinians that hinted at expulsion and flirted with genocide.
Soon after, the head of Hamas' political bureau told an interviewer that the upcoming peace talks would come to nothing. "I tell my people that the Palestinian state and Palestinian rights will not be accomplished through this peace process," Khaled Meshal, "but will be accomplished by force, and it will be accomplished by resistance."
The army and the police would later say that there were no special alerts in place for attacks against civilians. As if any were needed.
In fact, none of it was needed. Nor is it ever. Not when there is any threat of peace.
There is something in the air here that militates against peace itself. It is more than mere tribalism, although tribalism is a part. It is more than past experience, although history's lessons have been almost uniform in their bitterness.
What it constitutes is something akin to a religion of its own, rooted in fundamentalism and terrifying focus, not an unusual circumstance in this cradle of monotheism and mania.
Where it comes to peace talks, this new religion has an oddly unifying effect on extremists, whether Jewish, Muslim, or even Born-Again Christian. None may believe in a Holy Land shared by Israeli and Palestinian states, but just to be on the safe side, a number of them are going to make sure that it doesn't happen.
What is all this, really? Much too much of it has nothing to do with ideology, God's promises or promises to God. For Jews and for Palestinians, whom history and tragedy have often and profoundly robbed of the sense and the substance of manhood,
much too much of it has to do with the need to prove oneself a man.
Even at the price of thinking like a 12-year-old boy.
Real men, this religion preaches, don't talk Mideast peace. Real men do not compromise. Real men neither bend nor relinquish, they concede no error, correct no course,
It is a religion whose first tenet is that a peace which does not conform to the vision of the extremist is no peace at all. It is a religion which effectively believes that there can be no peace. My way or the die way.
Thus it is, that Avigdor Lieberman chose a festive pre-Rosh Hashanah gathering of his Yisrael Beiteinu – perhaps the only Israeli political party which looks down on and dislikes native-born Israelis nearly as much as it dislikes and looks down on Arabs – to declare that a U.S.-brokered peace with the Palestinians is "unattainable, not in the course of this year, and not in the course of a generation."
Lieberman and Meshal, Eli Yishai and Mahmoud Zahar, all share more than just this religion of negation. They are bullies. They bully their peoples into believing that compromise is immoral, and that the highest form of courage is the frank pursuit of violence.
On the even of the White House meeting, my Palestinian-American colleague Ray Hanania wrote that peace would depend on real courage from both Netanyahu and Abbas. "Do they have the courage to stand up to the fanatics in their own community and confront the growing anger from the moderates who are pulled apart by violence, failure, and the actions of the other side?" he asked.
Many years ago, a Hasidic figure, now largely forgotten, taught that a human being - a real person, male or female, a mensch - is made with a Gibor (hero) on one shoulder, and a Tzaddik (righteous one) on the other. The first takes initiative, takes responsibility, takes chances, the second taking the long view, the broad view, tempering justice with wisdom.
By tradition, the concept of the Gibor is more complex than its English equivalent. True heroes, the Talmud says, resist, conquer their own passions, for the sake of doing what is truly righteous.
In the end, what in the world are the extremists really after?
They are after your humanity. They are betting that when the smoke clears after the damage caused by settlement expansion and drive-by killings, moderates will have surrendered to apathy, despair, or vengeful rage, and the extremist will then have won.
In the long run, though, the one thing that bullies cannot defeat, is courage.
For this peace to have any chance, two peoples, the Jewish and the Palestinian, here and abroad, must take a stand against their own extremists. To reclaim their own independence. Our independence.
It may well make more sense, in the present reality, to put your money on bloodshed. "I hope that one of my personal rules about the Middle East is proved wrong," Thomas Friedman wrote as the talks neared, "that in this region extremists go all the way and moderates tend to just go away."
In response, my wife wondered aloud why, under this formula, we were still here.
Perhaps its time to call moderates what we, in fact, are. Extremists for peace.
The occupation, the culture of militant Islam, [Burston should have added: "militant Judaism" - JRK] the constant undermining of peace moves, the propaganda that states that killing of civilians is ever justified or that theft of land is somehow legal – all of it is after your humanity.
Resist. They'll only take your soul if you let them.
Occasionally, one comes upon an essay or blog that strikes the right note with penetrating clarity.
Especially these days, when Americans are painting all Muslims as "stealth terrorists" who want to take over America.
Bradley Burston gives us the song. Will any dance to his text and tune?
To "extremists", moderation, "peace", sharing and resolving disputes is weakness and compromise. Yet, true leaders build bridges not walls between groups of people who have been thrown together by history and vision. Read and share, with thanks to the ATFP for digging this out of Haaretz. JRK
A Special Place in Hell / Real men don't talk Mideast peace
Bradley Burston
Haaretz (Blog)
September 6, 2010 - 12:00am
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/a-special-place-in-hell/a-special-place-in-hell-rea...
There was something wrong with the air here the day President Obama hosted Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House. There was a bottom-heavy grip to the heat, the air almost too thick to breathe, as though it had to be forced down, like medicine.
In other places, this freight in the weather is the kind which announces a monsoon, or an earthquake. Not here. Here it was murder that was in the air. It just hadn't happened yet.
The stage had been set for days. Israel's most influential former chief rabbi had ushered in the week with a message about the Palestinians that hinted at expulsion and flirted with genocide.
Soon after, the head of Hamas' political bureau told an interviewer that the upcoming peace talks would come to nothing. "I tell my people that the Palestinian state and Palestinian rights will not be accomplished through this peace process," Khaled Meshal, "but will be accomplished by force, and it will be accomplished by resistance."
The army and the police would later say that there were no special alerts in place for attacks against civilians. As if any were needed.
In fact, none of it was needed. Nor is it ever. Not when there is any threat of peace.
There is something in the air here that militates against peace itself. It is more than mere tribalism, although tribalism is a part. It is more than past experience, although history's lessons have been almost uniform in their bitterness.
What it constitutes is something akin to a religion of its own, rooted in fundamentalism and terrifying focus, not an unusual circumstance in this cradle of monotheism and mania.
Where it comes to peace talks, this new religion has an oddly unifying effect on extremists, whether Jewish, Muslim, or even Born-Again Christian. None may believe in a Holy Land shared by Israeli and Palestinian states, but just to be on the safe side, a number of them are going to make sure that it doesn't happen.
What is all this, really? Much too much of it has nothing to do with ideology, God's promises or promises to God. For Jews and for Palestinians, whom history and tragedy have often and profoundly robbed of the sense and the substance of manhood,
much too much of it has to do with the need to prove oneself a man.
Even at the price of thinking like a 12-year-old boy.
Real men, this religion preaches, don't talk Mideast peace. Real men do not compromise. Real men neither bend nor relinquish, they concede no error, correct no course,
It is a religion whose first tenet is that a peace which does not conform to the vision of the extremist is no peace at all. It is a religion which effectively believes that there can be no peace. My way or the die way.
Thus it is, that Avigdor Lieberman chose a festive pre-Rosh Hashanah gathering of his Yisrael Beiteinu – perhaps the only Israeli political party which looks down on and dislikes native-born Israelis nearly as much as it dislikes and looks down on Arabs – to declare that a U.S.-brokered peace with the Palestinians is "unattainable, not in the course of this year, and not in the course of a generation."
Lieberman and Meshal, Eli Yishai and Mahmoud Zahar, all share more than just this religion of negation. They are bullies. They bully their peoples into believing that compromise is immoral, and that the highest form of courage is the frank pursuit of violence.
On the even of the White House meeting, my Palestinian-American colleague Ray Hanania wrote that peace would depend on real courage from both Netanyahu and Abbas. "Do they have the courage to stand up to the fanatics in their own community and confront the growing anger from the moderates who are pulled apart by violence, failure, and the actions of the other side?" he asked.
Many years ago, a Hasidic figure, now largely forgotten, taught that a human being - a real person, male or female, a mensch - is made with a Gibor (hero) on one shoulder, and a Tzaddik (righteous one) on the other. The first takes initiative, takes responsibility, takes chances, the second taking the long view, the broad view, tempering justice with wisdom.
By tradition, the concept of the Gibor is more complex than its English equivalent. True heroes, the Talmud says, resist, conquer their own passions, for the sake of doing what is truly righteous.
In the end, what in the world are the extremists really after?
They are after your humanity. They are betting that when the smoke clears after the damage caused by settlement expansion and drive-by killings, moderates will have surrendered to apathy, despair, or vengeful rage, and the extremist will then have won.
In the long run, though, the one thing that bullies cannot defeat, is courage.
For this peace to have any chance, two peoples, the Jewish and the Palestinian, here and abroad, must take a stand against their own extremists. To reclaim their own independence. Our independence.
It may well make more sense, in the present reality, to put your money on bloodshed. "I hope that one of my personal rules about the Middle East is proved wrong," Thomas Friedman wrote as the talks neared, "that in this region extremists go all the way and moderates tend to just go away."
In response, my wife wondered aloud why, under this formula, we were still here.
Perhaps its time to call moderates what we, in fact, are. Extremists for peace.
The occupation, the culture of militant Islam, [Burston should have added: "militant Judaism" - JRK] the constant undermining of peace moves, the propaganda that states that killing of civilians is ever justified or that theft of land is somehow legal – all of it is after your humanity.
Resist. They'll only take your soul if you let them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)