( this is an excerpt from an email correspondence)
Dante,
There are biases from every point of view and it is our challenge to interprete the biases and the facts and put them together to understand the overall story. There is no "Israeli standpoint", within Israel there consists every opinion on these subjects and when I talk with you I present my own. This freedom of thought and dialogue can only happen in an open society where various opinions and information channels are available to the population.
I have many video clips that I would like to watch with you so we can together evaluate if such basic freedoms are provided to the Palestinian people, and if not, what messages they are taught and surrounded by. These messages, in a closed society, are provided by the leadership to the people forming their belief system and ultimately their actions. Therefore, the final question stands, 'In a closed society what is the message from the leadership to the people? And is it conducive to peace?'
The article (with holocuast horrors and "palestinian equivalents") you sent me is a popular way to attack Israel, and I think answers to the core of your "why" questions.
Graphic marketing such as this must be evaluated as follows. 1) If these photos are real. 2) If they are taken and portrayed in the context of the situation. 3) What are the intentions of both sides involved- the reason for the situation 4) Is the situation a trend or policy?
I will not respond to the first three steps becuase clearly this type of ad is not geared for critical analysis and it does not confront the fundamental point being made. I do not have enough information on the specific pictures and circumstances. So I will skip to number four in light of the more general context of Israel's relationship with the Palestinian people.
Israel has no policy of extermination. No policy of targeting civilians. Israel has the best military in the region and leads the world in urban warfare combat. Compared to all modern militaries in the world Israel has the least civilian deaths to combatant ratio. Before engagements Israel calls homes and neighborhoods to clear out civilians. The military sends air leaflets to notify civilians and routinely abandons missions where civilian lives will knowingly be lost.
War, all war, is ugly. Civilians die in war. Mistakes are made. Plans are not executed correctly. Unwanted harm is inevitably done.
What makes the Nazi comparisons so hurtful particularly to Israel is the obvious connection between Jews and the Holocaust. Unlike Israel, the Nazis did have a policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide. As one of the most powerful armies in Europe they did use their resources to segregate and annahilate large populations in Europe. Most of my father's family was victim to such a policy.
To the core, these holocaust fotos answer all your why questions. It is not about land - when given land attacks get worse and terrorist groups are emboldened. And it is not about resources- palestinians are provided all humanitarian necessities as quantified by the UN, including water. Look at Israel's immediate enemies. Iran publicly calls for the annihilation of Jews. Hezbollah, Hamas, the list goes on with the outward haters. Look up their charters. Look up their leaders. It is very clear. They don't even try to hide their intentions, they spell it out clearly and announce what they want in their public speeches.
Land, resources, economic opportunity can be solutions to problems for palestinian people. The wars being faught are not against the palestinian people. They are agianst those who control their opinion, restrict their basic liberties and freedom of thought.
The answer to the why question: Look at Israel, its constant condemnation by the world community, moreso than any other country- ever. More than N. Korea. Myanmar. Iran. China. USA. These disputes are not simply surface issues (like settlements) the world makes it out to be. No country is misrepresented, deligitimized, targeted like Israel.
Does Israel make mistakes? Yes. Does it have policies I disagree with? Yes. Do some citizens discriminate? Yes. Do some soldiers kill innocent people? Probably.
Are these issues unique to Israel? No.
Why? The hatred toward Israel is for what makes makes it unique. The only Jewish majority country in the world.
And that my friend is a much bigger and scarier question. "Why" past here is one of the oldest questions in the world. A legacy that has endured for thousands of years. One that I am a part of and you are not.
We have to get together to speak face to face. We both want the same thing- Justice. Through critical thought, analysis and compassion we can find a way to get there.
Not quite Thanksgiving yet but I' probably won't see you.
Thanks for being in my life,
Enjoy the holiday.
7 comments:
I try to stay away from Israel-palestine discussions... I'm not really well enough educated to make super informed points. But Israel does seem to commit a rather large number of war crimes. Your friend basically seems to be making the point that because other countries make fucked up decisions that end in civilian death too Israel shouldn't be looked upon that harshly. Unfortunately that doesn't dismiss responsibility for the crimes they have committed.
Forthcoming critique will be more thorough BUT -
This issue should not be viewed as a religious struggle. Religions have fought for thousands of years on and off but what is mainly the concern is a secular struggle.
So then what do you have?
An majority oppressing a minority, in terms of power relationships. Colonialism 101 or Empire 101.
Israel has no policy of extermination. Neither does the US in Iraq. But that hasn't stopped over 100000 iraqi casualties as revealed in the Wikileaks Cablegate of the last few days.
A country is stigmatized. Wow maybe they have a point. Global opinion should be headed. The reason that Israel survives without any sort of sanction is the ties to the US, which is heavily entrenched in the military-industry complex and rise of disaster capitalism.
Critiques against Israel are not anti-semitic because indeed there is nothing more anti-semitic then Zionism.
Being Jewish, I can attack the attempt at excluding Dante from this dialogue as basis of him not being of the specific group. Yes the Holocaust totally happened. And it totally sucked. Yes Jews have a long history of persecution.
But for fucks sake what group hasn't been persecuted? Frame the argument this way gives a blank ticket that anyone who has a grievance is justified in the way they react afterwards.
Like saying an abusive father is resolved because he was abused. Or that Nazi's deserve recognition because they were persecuted in the forties. Bullshit.
To be elaborated upon because I am working on a paper but I had to squeeze this out first after reading this excerpt.
YES. there are many view points in relation to the conflict in the region. each individual has consumed their native narrative of said conflict (regardless if they our first or third partying) and compounded those ideas with their unique experiences and understandings. when we have talked in the past the dividing point that we fundamentally split at is the underlying relationship--my understanding is that we essentially have two people's: we have a set of people who for the last two hundred-ish years have existed within the region as easily the majority population; and we have a second set of people who have been denied access to autonomy and singled out abusively throughout history to only upon extreme hardship be granted world recognition--and state sovereignty within the palestinian region. Nonetheless, within the region we still have the Natives(palestinians) and the Settlers(israelis). i would be curious Uri to hear how you perceive this fundamental relationship.
I acknowledge that there have been innumerable nuances of engagements from this initial interaction that have widened the conflict in an inconceivably complex web. i would like to set aside the gamut and focus specifically on what i perceive to be the underlying structure.
starting with the natives and the settlers:
Israel's landing on the "world map" was not a pretty one. Violence was fundamental to its establishment. The initial intentions set out by theUnited Nations Partition Plan for Palestine
PAUSE --i was doing some wiki searching trying to figure out who the "architects were" and stumbled upon the page "history of israel" then found a sentence "By the 19th century, the Land of Israel was populated mostly by Muslim and Christian Arabs, as well as Jews,..." and was intrigued by the structure of the sentence: the Land of Israel. it was already destined?? --then clicked on Land of Israel and was awed to find that the land of israel had already been mapped out in the bible...there fore it must be valid?? anyways i digress UNPAUSE
(too large to post in one comment)
The initial intentions set out by the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine--seemed fair--producing sovereignty for both. Where the region is now is compared to building map is completely different and far from that. Regardless of the intentions of the region's communities we have: one group with power and one group that has been marginalized; we have one group that is consuming the natural resources within the region faster than the other which is being forced to purchase resources that exist under their land from the other group; we have a group in command of the largest military in the region and control of unacknowledged nuclear weapons and one group that has no military and is being subjugated by the other; we have one group that is the settlers of the region through recent history and another group that was native; we have one group that 70 years ago made up the vast majority of the region and now has no state sovereignty and a new group that controls the region; we have one group that controls the gaza strip, only twice the size of Bainbridge island yet 1.5 million strong and immensely impoverished, and another group that is trapped within; i could go on. BUT really the point that i am shooting towards is that israel (largely a jewish community) has gained access to an immense amount of power at the expense and well being of palestinians. REGARDLESS of israel's intentions it is what has happened. in response the common justifier is that it was us or them, that we were acting in defense, that they started it, that they don't want us to exist. Firstly palestinians have been marginalized for some time and those that were fighting to remove and prevent the establishment of israel were other Arab powers. Resistance by the palestinian communities when israel was declaring independence is easily understood, even current israeli settlers are seen resisting their own government for their homes. what we have here is misguided anger and abuse from one once marginalized community to another. it hurts me to see a community that has survived an event like the holocaust and other persecutions gain immense power and not ensure that its own neighbors are treated with the same respect that they have struggled for. The other justification i have heard is that the jewish community fought for what they have, that through their hard work they now have israel--and for the palestinians its too bad and in fact they may empathize but it is a dog eats dog world. that was the same justifier and story sneered into the ears of those trapped in concentration camps. i don't buy it. those who win get good and keep winning and those who lose get pushed further down--our economics breathes this concepts and today corporations dominate the world while half of the planet lives on less than two dollars a day and 90% of all large fish have been removed from the ocean it is too corrosive. Currently palestinians are on their back and fighting. through this lens, dog eat dog, they can feel the corner and they know what is coming (this motto dog eat dog is defining them, how can they say oh okay we'll stop fighting while they are lying on the cliff). Israel though holds the power and is in the position to be the bigger man, country, people. they can be the savior that they once dreamt of. i just don't see how a community that was once the victim of a very similar circumstance can do the same or at least not prevent the marginalization of palestinians when holding the power to make a difference. Granted that it may mean the reduction of control that israel currently has.--i'll stop there to let anyone respond if they want
http://www.ted.com/talks/william_ury.html
William Ury provides a poignant, symbolic, path for us, as outsiders to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, to walk towards conflict resolution. We need more direct positive action that shifts the paradigm of dog-eat-dog aggression. The power of symbols can unite a divided population.
I'm not on board with thinking that tourism will vanquish terrorism, but I value the way he encourages us to feel a responsibility to act as global citizens.
December 1, 2010 2:17 AM
Dante - your right the fuck on. And I like your argument in your later post about water rights - when taken to a purely ethical moral level, israel-palestine can be addressed pluralistically, like 'both sides have used terrorist tactics and have committed aggressive acts' or 'both sides have declared undying hatred for the other' but when you present FACTS justification fades and you are forced to evaluate based the figures you view and draw conclusions.
I want to watch this Uri video but I am in the library without speakers so it might be awkward but I want to say that I think we should look at what our definition of terrorism is.
To me, killing individuals for political entities is terrorism. Like the the war in iraq. like sept. 11. like random, predictable israeli shootings of palestinians with live ammunition at protests. allowing people to die for political reasons aka embargos and stopping aid packages in cuba, the west bank, gaza is a form of terrorism.
I would not consider property destruction terrorism. I would barely even consider it violent. SO - suicide bombers = terrorists. locking down to bulldozers to prevent your home from being bulldozed so the berlin wall / west bank wall can go in your backyard, segregating an ethnicity in a ghetto = viable form of political dissent.
FYI started working on a boycott divestment sanction campaign at the u of o ... keep you posted, but its going to be very sexy.
Post a Comment