Al-Quds Divided: The Politics of Hatred

re:SameerJB #46

I agree with your points. A few more points I`d like to your comments are:

``The democracy in Israel is undeniable and actually does not need any discussion here. One should condemn violence by democratic/ undemocratic, Israelis or Arabs like Hafez Al-Asad or Saddam Hussain. But I will strongly criticize Israel here because roughly 50 cents of every 1000 dollars I earn go to Israel as aid which is not a loan. I never gave any money to most Arabs directly or indirectly (except Egypt who also gets 30 cents of my every 1000 dollar earning). ``

There hasn`t been a serious downturn in the US economy since the Great Depression (Recessions are minor issues). Whenever such an event does happen rest assured that Israel will have to find ways of fending for itself financially.

Israel knows that it`s American subsidies can`t continue forever, which is why it was especailly interested in establishing ``peace`` with it`s Arab neighbours. It needs to establish trade with those countries bordering it so that it can survive in the future. U.S knows this too which is one of the many reasons on why it`s promoting this peace process.

I agree that in the longterm existence of Israel looks quite bleak. They`ve had a lot of help to exist as long as they have but their enemies aren`t going away anytime soon. It`ll be VERY difficult for such a small state to exist over the long term. They have no natural protection such as mountains or thick forests. Natural resources are non-existent. And their population and geographic size is miniscule compared to it`s neighbours.

``In the case of Israel, the problem is more or less old-style colonialism. While many Arab rulers have been ruthless using brute force, the western colonizers in the past and Israel go about doing it systematically, over time, marketing democracy and constant comparison with other dictators in the area. The question one asks is why have they chosen to live in a bad neighborhood.

They were Europeans, descendants of Europeans, used their own mythology to claim and successfully acquire a piece of land in the bad neighborhood. ``

Throughout history they have experienced a cycle of becoming economically and politically influential to a level of wielding influence far beyond their numbers in whichever country they live. Eventually the majority population doesn`t like this and decides to purge them from their positions of power. Happened in Germany 50 years ago, Russia 80 years ago, Spanish inquisition targeted both Jews and Muslims. After all of these experiences, one could naturally come to the conclusion that the best way to avoid future massacres is to form ones own state and thus be free from possible ethnic cleansing in the future.

Not a bad idea... Only question is why the heck did they decide thousands years after being kicked out of the Holy Land through conquest that Palestine is where they will forceably build thier new modern nation for Jews-right in the middle of literally millions of potentially hostile Arabs?

If the Europeans and Americans truly only had the best interest of the Jews in mind in terms of saving them from future genocide than why did they not cede a part of their own unused land for them to start their own state? The tiny strip of modern Israel is less than 1% of most of these countries in terms of land. After all culturally the European Jews would be able to adjust in any of these places far more easily than in the middle of the Middle East.

Perhaps the Europeans were not being as altruistic as they claim to be and took the growth of Zionism as an easy way to relocate the Jews of their own free will out of their own backyards? After all these are the same nations that had a habit of ethnically cleansing them every so often...

The irony in all of this is for the Jewish people is that they formed a nation state to escape future genocides. However by forcing themselves into Palestine and creating sworn enemies of the Arabs they risk another serious bloodbath in their own nation state whose scale would rival the previous genocides they`ve experienced.

Regards,

Fozia

Insight into pushes and pulls on US foreign policy in a different region:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35827-2000Oct8.html

tahmed321 #43,

``Fighting for freedom is one thing, fighting for land is another.``

Who was talking about freedom? But since you brought it up, what`s wrong with fighting for freedom from oppression, and in Israel`s case, it`s oppression by land.

``To win the fight for freedom, you must know what is freedom and you must know who the enemy is. In the fight for freedom, in Pogo`s eternal words, ``we have met the enemy, and he is us.``

Pogo (whoever that is) can philosophize as much as he wants to, the matter is not as simple as a bunch of feel good words.

``In the fight for land, as in the fight for toys as children, the enemy is your own sweet brother or sister.``

Sweet brothers and sisters don`t kill innocent children with machine guns. Which cloud are you sitting on?

`` Now put this in your pipe as you execute battlefield maneuvers from your armchair, and smoke it.``

You think that speaking against Israeli atrocities

is executing battlefield maneuvers?

Please get off the cloud, leave Pogo Shogo there, and get back to the harsh realities of this world.

re fairdinkum 42

`You maintain that the human rights record of Israel is not good at all…and yet we shouldn’t condemn her on crimes against humanity because Israel is a democracy? `

Please refrain from deliberately misrepresenting me. I have never said that Israel shouldn`t be criticised. I have emphasized that such criticism should not be in a vaccuum. In other words, intellectual honesty will demand that those who put Israeli actions under the microscope should do the same to the activities of the PLO, the Hamas, and each and every Arab country in the neighborhood. If Israel is to be blamed, say, for murdering Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria should not be spared either. If Muslims can feel outraged at the desecration of the Al-Aqsa mosque, they can feel similar outrage at the destruction of dozens of mosques by Hafez al Assad in Hama.

If Israel being a democracy is a `standard US media line`, as one person pointed out, so what? The question is not whose line it is but whether it is true!

The question of Israel`s democracy is an integral part of the any discussion for MidEast peace. In the early nineteenth century Immanuel Kant pointed out that democracies generally don`t go to war with each other. Two hundred years later, that hypothesis still largely holds true. After all, for those who can kill their own people with impunity, killing others is even less problematic. This is perhaps the mindset of the likes of great peacemakers like Saddam Hussein and the late Hafez el Assad.

tahmed321 #43,

``Fighting for freedom is one thing, fighting for land is another.``

Who was talking about freedom? But since you brought it up, what`s wrong with fighting for freedom from oppression, and in Israel`s case, it`s oppression by land.

``To win the fight for freedom, you must know what is freedom and you must know who the enemy is. In the fight for freedom, in Pogo`s eternal words, ``we have met the enemy, and he is us.``

Pogo (whoever that is) can philosophize as much as he wants to, the matter is not as simple as a bunch of feel good words.

``In the fight for land, as in the fight for toys as children, the enemy is your own sweet brother or sister.``

Sweet brothers and sisters don`t kill innocent children with machine guns. Which cloud are you sitting on?

`` Now put this in your pipe as you execute battlefield maneuvers from your armchair, and smoke it.``

You think that speaking against Israeli atrocities

is executing battlefield maneuvers?

Please get off the cloud, leave Pogo Shogo there, and get back to the harsh realities of this world.

re fairdinkum 42

`You maintain that the human rights record of Israel is not good at all…and yet we shouldn’t condemn her on crimes against humanity because Israel is a democracy? `

Please refrain from deliberately misrepresenting me. I have never said that Israel shouldn`t be criticised. I have emphasized that such criticism should not be in a vaccuum. In other words, intellectual honesty will demand that those who put Israeli actions under the microscope should do the same to the activities of the PLO, the Hamas, and each and every Arab country in the neighborhood. If Israel is to be blamed, say, for murdering Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria should not be spared either. If Muslims can feel outraged at the desecration of the Al-Aqsa mosque, they can feel similar outrage at the destruction of dozens of mosques by Hafez al Assad in Hama.

If Israel being a democracy is a `standard US media line`, as one person pointed out, so what? The question is not whose line it is but whether it is true!

The question of Israel`s democracy is an integral part of the any discussion for MidEast peace. In the early nineteenth century Immanuel Kant pointed out that democracies generally don`t go to war with each other. Two hundred years later, that hypothesis still largely holds true. After all, for those who can kill their own people with impunity, killing others is even less problematic. This is perhaps the mindset of the likes of great peacemakers like Saddam Hussein and the late Hafez el Assad.

Ever since the mid-1980s I had proposed to the PLO leadership and to every Palestinian and Arab I met that the PLO quest for the President`s ear was a total illusion since all recent Presidents have been devoted Zionists, and that the only way to change US policy and achieve self-determination was through a mass campaign on behalf of Palestinian human rights, which would have the effect of outflanking Zionists and going straight to the American people.

Edward W Said.

The rest at: http://www.dawn.com/2000/10/08/op.htm#2

SameerJB #46

Sameer,

I did not quote that line...it was sigalph235 who tried ``the only democracy in Middle East`` trick on me :) True it’s an old, and much used line in western media to shift the attention of American people/world from Israel’s crimes against humanity to ``democratic Israel in the midst of savage Arabs.`` In the past it sold like hot cake...but I think times have changed. People are sick and tired of Israel’s ‘spoilt child of the west’ status. US instead of using veto merely abstained from voting when UN Security Council adopted a resolution to condemn Israel for using excessive force against Palestinian population.

As for the long-term viability of the state of Israel, well, you make some good points.... I haven`t thought along these lines... Progress and prosperity of Israel is not only subsidized by US taxpayers, in large part, it is also subsidized by the sweat and blood of Palestinians.

A few InterActors! have been consistently using the InterAct! space to post messages that have no connection with either the article or the ongoing discussion. In the interest of other readers and writers please refrain from doing this as it diminishes the value of this valuable space. To announce and or voice opinions that are not related to the posted articles you should use the Speakers Corner and the Chowk Forum`s. From our end we will soon provide a service that can allow your to post your impromptu emotions and opinions.

Thank you.

scout #39 Fighting for freedom is one thing, fighting for land is another. To win the fight for freedom, you must know what is freedom and you must know who the enemy is. In the fight for freedom, in Pogo`s eternal words, ``we have met the enemy, and he is us``. In the fight for land, as in the fight for toys as children, the enemy is your own sweet brother or sister.

Now put this in your pipe as you execute battlefield maneuvers from your armchair, and smoke it.

P.S. and excuse me for posting an incomplete copy of this post earlier, if that happened.

fairdinkum: You quoted the standard line on most media outlets in the USA.

[“Imperfect as it is, Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East. Her human rights record is not good at all. But she needs no lecture from Palestinians or most other Arabs on that issue…”]

The democracy in Israel is undeniable and actually does not need any discussion here. One should condemn violence by democratic/ undemocratic, Israelis or Arabs like Hafez Al-Asad or Saddam Hussain. But I will strongly criticize Israel here because roughly 50 cents of every 1000 dollars I earn go to Israel as aid which is not a loan. I never gave any money to most Arabs directly or indirectly (except Egypt who also gets 30 cents of my every 1000 dollar earning).

In the case of Israel, the problem is more or less old-style colonialism. While many Arab rulers have been ruthless using brute force, the western colonizers in the past and Israel go about doing it systematically, over time, marketing democracy and constant comparison with other dictators in the area. The question one asks is why have they chosen to live in a bad neighborhood. They were Europeans, descendants of Europeans, used their own mythology to claim and successfully acquire a piece of land in the bad neighborhood.

Having said all this, they have done relatively decent job in turning that piece of land into a modern country which not only threatens its weak neighbors but also spreads jealousy among non-Jews. Although the current prosperity and modern state is in large part subsidized by US and German money but still it is remarkable achievement. Moreover, Jewish people have done excellent job for USA in business, government, education, arts and culture and US support for Israel is, in part, a reflection of it. But still the violence perpetrated by Israel against Palestinians must be condemned and US government must use her leverage vis-s-vis Israel, to stop violence against Palestinians.

I believe, this will continue for 5-10 generation more. Israel is a kind of artificial country, and can not sustain another 100-150 years. Their population is at a stand still and water resources scarce. I think it was a mistake by zionists to put all their eggs in one basket. Any natural disaster or prolong wars against its neighbors will ruin any chances for long-term survival. Ultimately, the remaining (mostly sephardics) will mix up and learn to live with their neighbors while rest will move on to greener pastures of the west, Australia and New Zealand.

Well one more time despite the fact that who started this bloodshed, all US politicians and media pundits are trying to save Israel`s face and blaming it entirely on Arafat. Barak is going to every cable and network station to give head job and propagate lies. Things are hopeless for palestinians, the ultimatum will not be accepted by them - which means more bloodshed for them.

If only US like many other countries of UN tried

to be fair, we would have chance.

Ordinary people will believe whatever media says unless it effects them personaly. I think greatest weapon arabs have is their oil,

with it they can crash markets and send their message to ordinary people.

My heart goes out to the Palestenians, who have to fight against a superior Israeli army with stones. The fact that these young Palestinians continue to persist by hurling stones against guys armed with Uzi submachine guns only highlights their frustration & determination to fight a just cause with violence, with no hopes of ever winning.

If we step back for a moment & consider some realism, there is no way these poor Palestinians can ever hope to win by this strategy--no matter how noble their cause. In fact, it only hardens the determination of the opponent. Barakh, who is perhaps a lot more commited to genuine peace than , say, Nathanyahu or Sharon , responded by giving a two day ultimatum.

If there is a dispute between 2 parties, BOTH contribute to the problem. There is no point in arguing who`s fault is greater because then the problem will never be solved. Each side then becomes more hurt, self righteous & intansigent. In that respect Kashmir & Palestine are very analogous.

The only hope that the weaker party has to win against a superior adversary, is to recognise some stark realities of the ``laws of fighting against oppressors``. Mind you, ``laws`` can be unfair or unjust (eg, I dont like the way my taxes are being spent). But whether we like it or not, we cause greater hardship on ourselves if we disobey them.

So, to apply the above para to the Palestinian problem, the Palestinians should first recognise the following realities or ``laws``:

1)There is NO way they can hope to vanquish the Israelis by violence, whether that is by throwing stones or performing acts of terrorism. I will argue that the combined military might of the Arab world wont vanquish the Israelis. They`ve tried it before & havent won.

2) The US will NOT stop supporting Israel. There is no point crying about US hypocracy because that wont make a damn bit of difference in the US foreign policy, not matter whether Gore or Bush wins. As long as the Israelis make a claim that they have a right to defend themselves (even against stones), the US will support them.

3)Jerusalem HAS to be shared by all 3 religions because all 3 have some of their most sacred sites there.

So do the Palestinians have ANY hope of winning? I will propose a solution, eventhough many will jump at it & denounce it as ``corny`` or ridiculous. IMHO, that is the only hope Palestinians have to prevail.

Firstly, Arafat should denounce ALL forms of violence, including stone throwing. Secondly , all Palestinians should cease that form of protest. Then continue to provoke the Israelis relentlessly with civil nonviolent disobedience. There is not a damn thing Israel could do in such an event. They dont have that many jail cells to incarcerate all the Palestinians. The world press will only be too happy to show the Israeli army beating or shooting at Palestinians who wont resort to violence. Nothing will ``terrorise`` the Israelis more! Even American Jews will pressure the Israeli govt to back down.

This Gandhian method has proven itself not just in British India, but was used very effectively by Martin Luther King himself. By doing so, world opinion turns against the superior force & shows them to be the evil bully that they are. I will argue that if Kashmiris also adopt that method, it will give their cause much more success than a million mujahadeen.

OK, now throw all the stones at me ,if you want:)

sigalph235 #38
Dear Sigalph,
On the issue of terrorism, I think the facts are there for you to see. Bilal has quite eloquently summarized the whole matter in his following statement:

“Terrorism is a socially constructed concept. A discourse on terrorism needs to be grounded in a universally accepted set of values. Are you sure that you apply the concept of terrorism consistently across the board – people, places, and periods?” ahmadb #41

I, however, would briefly comment on some of your statements. Also, if you wish, I am happy to discuss the Syrian involvement in the Middle East crisis with special emphasis on Syria’s role in Lebanon.

You say:

“Imperfect as it is, Israel remains the only democracy in the Middle East. Her human rights record is not good at all. But she needs no lecture from Palestinians or most other Arabs on that issue…”

That Arab/Muslims nations of Middle East are not democratic, and whether or not Israel is a true liberal democracy is an entirely different issue. You maintain that the human rights record of Israel is not good at all…and yet we shouldn’t condemn her on crimes against humanity because Israel is a democracy? I am afraid you are confusing the two issues here.

You say:

“Condemning Israel and the Jews is a favourite pastime of pseudo-intellectuals of the Muslim world. All that righteous energy over the fifty years could have been put to much effective use in improving the conditions of the people in Pakistan,Bangladesh, and the Sudan. The money so lavishly given to terror groups in Syria and Iraq could have helped feed the starving masses in Ethiopia and Somalia. But these were not the `sexy` issues for the sheikhs. The PLO and Israel was.”

If you are interested in debating the matter you brought up in your post #17, I urge you to remain focused on the issue at hand. Avoid making gross generalizations, and blanket statements. Substantiate your statements with facts and references. Speculative statements must, at least, be backed with sound and reasoned arguments.

In response to sigalph35 (Reply # 17)

Dear sigalph235:

Although I am satisfied with Fairdinkum’s rebuttal (Reply # 22), I want to react to a small part of your post.

Your statement: “Give them [Palestinians] Jerusalem and they`ll probably blow it up like they use to regularly blow up airplanes.”

Comment: Sigalph235, I feel sorry for your interpretation of human history. Your definition and application of the notion of terrorist is, my view, neither unambiguous nor just. Please consider the following from Chomsky:

“. . . after the massacre of Palestinians praying at the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron by Baruch Goldstein, a still more punitive curfew was imposed – on Palestinians. The purpose was “to protect the Jewish settlers from revenge.” Ori Nir reported, describing how “the Israeli occupation redoubled the oppression” of Palestinians, destroyed the market that was the center of Hebron’s economy, and closed roads to Palestinians though not Jewish settlers, who were left free to rampage, destroy, and humiliate the Arab population at will, an “insane reality” enforced by the military that “subordinates their lives to the settlers interests.” A year later, the Arab population was again locked up under 24-hour curfew for four days so that settlers and 35,000 Jewish visitors could travel through the city undisturbed by an Arab presence during the Passover holidays, having picnics and dancing in the streets under the protection of extra military forces. The settlers and visitors used the opportunity “to insult the Palestinian imprisoned in their houses and to throw stones at them if they dared to peek out of the windows at the Jews celebrating in their city.” The celebration was brought to a close “by settlers rampaging through the Old City, destroying property, and smashing car windows . . . in a city magically cleansed . . . of Palestinians, . . . effectively jailed for days in their homes” but able to watch the “merry dances of settlers” and the “festive processions” on TV while “commerce, careers, studies, the family, love – all are immediately disrupted,” and the medical system was paralyzed” so that “many sick persons in Hebron were unable to reach hospitals during the curfew and women giving birth could not arrive in time at the clinics” (Chomsky, 1996, “World Orders Old and New,” pp. 278-79).

Terrorism is a socially constructed concept. A discourse on terrorism needs to be grounded in a universally accepted set of values. Are you sure that you apply the concept of terrorism consistently across the board – people, places, and periods?

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

Scout #39

Good thinkin`. Israel is actually a humane version of `the Final Solution` that Europe had in its mind for a while.