| |
|
I’m feeling very tentative about this post. But I have thought about for a few days, and it’s a considered rather than a dashed-off-angry response.
I’m also very conscious that the “givens” on Barbelith seem clear and almost universally agreed upon, despite the supposed smash-the-system sub-cultural starting point. So for example, whilst there are only two news links in this thread (BBC and the Guardian) both are organisations that have a stated policy to not use the word “terrorist” in association with Palestinians.
I’ll lay my cards on the table. My great-grandfather went to live in Israel in 1929. The land he legitimately bought – near Jaffa – from the local Arabs was “taken back” in the War of Independence. My family have done nothing to have it returned. My cousin was killed by a sniper, walking down the street in Jerusalem. Some of my friends in Israel have died during this and the previous Intifada. Unfortunately, a lot of people I don’t know, on both “sides” have died in the last two years.
So it’s personal to me. I’ve had coffee in the Moment Café, which was bombed in March, probably a hundred times. I’ve walked down the streets I see covered in blood on TV. I cry every time I hear of more deaths; it’s as hurtful for the prospect of peace whoever dies.
My friends who live in Israel live under constant stress. Everyone is affected. They don’t go out, at all. They don’t ride buses. They assess what they think of the security guard’s judgement outside the shopping mall before they go in. It’s commonplace to call people after a bomb and say “still alive?”, hear their response and hang-up.
As far as this thread goes, I’m not even going to attempt to answer every issue raised (should Cherie be making political statements? Was the timing good or bad? Feminist concerns in relation to Cherie’s ability to stand up and be counted), but I will say this:
The seeming starting point of this debate is a “demonization” of Israel and Zionism (rather, than as Flyboy suggests, a demonization of Palestinians). Here are some facts that are rarely covered in the Western media:
ONE: The Arabs' 1947 rejection of UN General Assembly Resolution 181 - which would have partitioned the British Mandate area into an Arab state and a Jewish state – resulted in a war started by the Arabs in the hope of destroying Israel. Many Palestinian Arabs abandoned their homes, often at the request of Arab leaders. A refugee problem would not have been created had this war not been forced upon Israel by the Arab countries and the local Arab leadership.
TWO: The surrounding Arab nations are committed to using the Palestinians as a pawn in their war against Israel. In May of 1967, Gamel Abdul Nasser, President of the U.A.R. said, "Our basic aim is the destruction of Israel."
Discussing the partition plan, Arab League Secretary Azzam Pasha on September 16, 1947 told Jewish Agency representatives David Horowitz and Abba Eban :
The Arab world is not in a compromising mood. It's likely, Mr. Horowitz, that your plan is rational and logical, but the fate of nations is not decided by rational logic. Nations never concede; they fight. You won't get anything by peaceful means or compromise. You can, perhaps, get something, but only by the force of your arms. We shall try to defeat you. I am not sure we'll succeed, but we'll try. We were able to drive out the Crusaders, but on the other hand we lost Spain and Persia. It may be that we shall lose Palestine. But it's too late to talk of peaceful solutions."
So, as Barry Auckland said, compromise is not necessarily in the Palestinian lexicon.
THREE: Arafat turned down the Barak peace plan at Camp David in 2000, offering 97% concessions.
FOUR: The current intifada began through a strategic Palestinian policy, not the visit of then Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon to Jerusalem's Temple Mount in late September 2000. It was merely a pretext to launch a premeditated campaign against Israel - the Intifada.
The Palestinian leadership made a strategic decision to pursue violence rather than negotiation months before the Temple Mount visit. Palestinian officials themselves divulged this fact in statements they made in Arabic-language media resources. On December 6, 2000, the semi-official Palestinian daily Al-Ayyam reported as follows:
"Speaking at a symposium in Gaza, Palestinian Minister of Communications, Imad Al-Falouji, confirmed that the Palestinian Authority had begun preparations for the outbreak of the current Intifada from the moment the Camp David talks concluded, this in accordance with instructions given by Chairman Arafat himself. Mr. Falouji went on to state that Arafat launched this Intifada as a culminating stage to the immutable Palestinian stance in the negotiations, and was not meant merely as a protest of Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount."
FIVE: Since 1994, Israel has made substantial efforts after the signing of the Oslo accords to facilitate Palestinian-Israeli economic cooperation in the context of the peace process. As a result, there had been a marked expansion of Palestinian trade and employment in Israel, as well as other forms of economic cooperation from 1994 until the outbreak of the present violence.
Don’t get me wrong. If I were an Israeli, I wouldn’t have voted for Sharon. Israel, like most countries, is imperfect, I admit that. But there’s no other country in the world, that I’m aware of, that has to constantly justify its very existence.
It seems to me that the current demonization of Israel in the western/intellectual circles is a twenty-first century equivalent of the medieval conception of the Jew as the “devil incarnal” [see The Devil and the Jews, Joshua Trachtenberg, Yale University Press 1943].
This is a Reuters picture from July 22 2001, of young Palestinians assembling automatic assault rifles while blindfolded during a Palestinian Fatah military-style summer camp graduation in Nablus.
Or consider this; an article in the Palestinian Authority daily Al-Ayyam by columnist Ashraf Al-'Ajrami addressing the phenomenon of Palestinian children carrying out suicide attacks and the roots of this trend. Al-'Ajrami demanded that the PA take measures to stop this type of attack.
Or check this, from the Islamic Society of Gaza in Palestine (I don’t speak Arabic, but on their project page they state: “You are a great helper for our great Intefada thank you for your providing in many fields , so we’ll go a head to gather and still struggle until putting Islamic flag upon the holy land which was spoild by Israel . Asking Allah to bless you” [translation unchanged]).
This appears to be kindergarten aged children dressed as soldiers, from the same site.
So, to answer the question. Are the Palestinians desperate? Perhaps. But it may be because, sadly, Palestinian cultural identity is increasingly being based around the destruction of Israel. Are Palestinians effectively being trained, from a young age, to revere martyrs and martydom? It would appear so. Whilst a significant majority of Israelis have come a long way in the last few years (I read a statistic that 75% are committed to a two state solution, but can’t find the reference) Palestinians seem to be moving the other way.
What hope is there for any kind of peace if one party is so firmly committed to non-negotiation? |
|
|
