Al-Quds Divided: The Politics of Hatred

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

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.

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.

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

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

If I were OverLord of the World, I would give all claimants to Jerusalem exactly one year to figure out mutually acceptable arrangements that guaranteed the rights of all residents of the city, the safety of the holy sites, and the freedom and safety of all pilgrims to visit these sites.

If they couldn`t figure it out in one year, I would evacuate all the people from the city, pulverize the top 10 meters of the surface to fine dust until there is no trace of humans ever having inhabited the place.

If you count the number of wars and people killed for one city, I think you will find that Jerusalem may be more dangerous than any nuclear bomb. A humanity that cannot handle this with care must be deprived of it.

-arun gupta

shankar #44 You write that ``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`` This is certainly a better solution than simply continuing to bang heads against a wall.

I thought I had presented an even better solution in my earlier post: Forget past injustices, and focus on getting education and improving your economic conditions. Even nonviolent disobedience has a cost in terms of taking the focus away from the real problem: economic and social underdevelopment. As we have found in Pakistan and India and Bangladesh, simply getting rid of British control did not lead to nirvana: Only the handful of ``elite`` benefitted in terms of political control, while poverty and misery remains the lot of the vast majority in these countries.

Scout: You dont know who Pogo Shogo is and advise me to see reality. Pogo incidentally is just a cartoon character, and the quote I made is from one of his comic strips and has become quite popular in the US. If you dont like Pogo Shogo, let me quote from Sheikh Peer: ``The fault, dear Brutus, is not in they stars but in thyself``. Or Anonymous: ``If you cant fight them, join them``. Or another one from Anonymous Venonymous: ``The definition of insanity is to continue to do the same thing, each time expecting to get a different result``. I would suggest you - and the Palestinians - need to get real.

tahmed321 #55,

Like Sheikh Peer! Agree with you completely. There are times when one has to act as a bania- for the lack of a better terminology on this site- i.e.,recognize losses, protect whatever little you still possess, and move on for bigger and better things. Keep bleeding may be courageous though foolhardy, and an injustice to own`s future generations. There will always be cheerleaders on the side-lines, but very few bleeders to keep company or the fellow heaven-travellers. Dying for real estate is the worst excuse!

Kant.....

macgupta and others:

Condensed from ``It`s Mine!`` - a children`s fable by Leo Lionni (author of many children`s books).



In the middle of a pond there was a small island. On the island lived three quarrelsome frogs. They quarreled and quibbled from dawn to dusk.

``Stay out of the pond!`` would yell one. ``The water is mine.``

``Get off the island!`` would shout another. ``The earth is mine.``

``The air is mine!`` would shout the third.

And so it went.

One day a large toad appeared before them.

``I live on the other side of the island,`` he said, ``but I can hear you shouting `It`s mine! It`s mine! It`s mine!` all day long. There is no peace because of your endless bickering. You can`t go on like this!``

With that the toad turned around and hopped away. No sooner had he left than the frogs started quarrelling again - over worms.

Suddenly the sky darkened and thundered. Rain filled the air, and the water turned to mud. The island grew smaller and smaller as it was swallowed up by the rising flood. The frogs were scared. Desperately they clung to the few slippery stones that still rose above the wild, dark water. But soon these too began to disappear. There was only one rock left and there the frog huddled, trembling from cold and fright. But they felt better now that they were together, sharing the same fears and hopes. Little by little the flood subsided. The rain fell gently and then stopped altogether.

They then realized that the large rock that had saved them was no rock but the toad.

``You saved us!`` shouted the frogs when they recognized him.

The next morning the water had cleared. The sun was out and the frogs joyfully jumped into the pond swam all around the island. Together they leaped after the butterflies that filled the air. And later, when they rested in the weeds, they felt happy in a way they had never been before.

``Isn`t it peaceful,`` said one frog.

``And isn`t it beautiful,`` said another.

``And do you know what else?`` asked the third.

``No, what?`` the others asked.

``It`s ours!`` she answered.

Fozia: That was one fine response. You have concisely put the finger on some of the most important issues with respect to Palestinian-Israel conflict. One just can not discuss the current crisis in all fairness without knowing and taking into consideration of many facts about Jewish history, religion, diaspora, origins and the creation of Israel. Just couple of additional points:

The concept of nation is usually associated with a combination of similarity of race, culture, history or geography. In case of Jewish nation, neither race nor geography is there to support the concept. Even history in support of their nation is only true if you accept their interpretation of history. Just like a Hindu does not have to believe in the history described in Quran, a non-Jew does not have to accept the history describe in the Old Testament. There were always a number of tribes living in what we now call Palestine. Jews were a minor tribe in the sea of Cannanites and Maobites, Aranites to the north and Babylonian and Assyrian to the east. Descendants of many other tribes can have equal, if not more, claim to that land based on more than 2000-year-old biblical accounts of history.

Religion associated with geography can be used for a nation-state concept, as in the case of Pakistan but remember; Pakistan does not belong to Islam, Pakistan belongs to Pakistanis. Similarly, Sikhs can think themselves a nation by virtue of living almost exclusively in a particular area with a particular culture. Same can not be said of Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists or Jains.

Jews, living among different cultures were loyal and contributed well in the cultures they lived in. But their concept of Jewish nation hurt them time and again because dominant culture of the land considered it nation within a nation and the element of jealousy was also there since Jews would prosper more on the average than the rest. Now this Jewish nation concept is extrapolated into Jews as one race, descendants of the original migrants from Palestine 2000 years ago. This point is generally not acceptable outside the media outlets. The intermarriages, back and forth conversions and at least once, a whole tribe converting to Judaism and later on spreading all over Russia, Ukraine and Poland are well known historical facts. In fact, it is holocaust: the reason for Israel’s existence.

The other issue deals with Israel’s vulnerability. Only thing I might add to the geographical factors you described is the future of International relations with China and India playing a significant role in the next century. Israel is already trying hard to improve relations with both of these countries but neither of them are expected to tilt towards Israel as much as USA. If Arabs can get their act together through democratization, education and sound economical initiatives; they might have more to offer to China and India than Israel. In the meantime, Israel is a democracy, powerful and prosperous. Muslim countries should recognize it as an independent state—until it ceases to exist.

Regards,

Sameer

Re: Harimau #369

Gen. Jacobs, I believe, made Lt. Gen.; I believe he and Gen. Niazi were coursemates (or at least colleagues) from WWII. You might have also mentioned that a Muslim was Chief of the Air Staff of the IAF and there have been several non-Hindu Indian Army COASs (Rodriguez, Manekshaw) and some of the ostensibly Hindu COAS were actually aboriginial nominal Hindus (Coorgis such as Cariappa and Thimmaya, although both were true Pukka Saabs, a compliment not an insult). I believe a Hyderabadi Muslim, S. M. Zaki, made Lt. Gen., in the Indian Army.

In our less obscurant days (the pre-Bhutto/Zia years), we Pakistanis were also mildly liberal as far as not persecuting our religious/ethnic minorities were concerned. I would like to mention, for example, such names as Justices Cornelius and Dorab Patel, Sir Zafarullah, Air Vice-Marshall Eric Hall, etc. I would also like to give honorable mention to Gen. Azam for sentencing Maulanas Maududi and Sami-ul-Haq, these learned men, to death for incitement to murder in the Lahore Qadiani riots in the 1950s. A cowardly civilian government commuted their sentences and then released them.

Since the 1970s, Pakistan`s track record on minority treatment is considerably worse than Indias, no matter what rabid Indophobes might say. However, all hope is not lost as Gen. Pervez Musharraf is in some ways a throwback to the more liberal days--although he has not had the nerve to live up to his initial impulses--did resist obscurantist demands and elevated Mr. Justice Bhagwan Das, a Sindhi Hindu, to the Supreme Court.
Perhaps his latest statements means that he has finally had enough?

Regards.

tahmed321 #55

``Forget past injustices, and focus on getting education and

improving your economic conditions.``

If only! It is not easy to work on improving yourself when you are feeling cornered. West Bank and Gaza are very poor especially compared to Israel and those who are in a position to help - such as the oil-rich Arab states - seem to want the conflict to continue. Many Israelis, while wanting peace, still seem to hate the Palestinians. Palestinians are the Gypsies of the Arab world - distrusted, reviled and used by everybody. The secular Israelis seem to recognize the need to live with a Palestinian state alongside but even they think Palestinians are a violent, irrational lot. The Friday prayers aren`t exactly helping either - teaching the kids over and over again that Jews ought to be driven into the sea! How are the Palestinians to improve themselves?

I consider Arafat a great man (he has his shortcomings) but he should make way for a new leader who wants to improve the lives of the Palestinians and help the new state take root.

I am extremely saddened by what`s going on. I support the Palestinian cause and also have many Israeli friends. Hope sanity will prevail.

SameerJB: Arthur Koestler, in his book ``The Thirteenth Tribe`` makes a case for modern day European Jews to have descended from a people who lived around the Black Sea area who were pushed into Hungary and then to other parts of Europe by the invading Mongols. And so he concludes, as I recall, that European Jews could not have been the descendants of the Jews who had to move out of Palestine 3000 years ago due to the Diaspora. Not that it matters one way or another, I think, since the argument is a bit academic in any case. The important thing is that the continuing bloodshed represents a failure of political leaders of the Arabs and of the Israelis to do their job - which for a politician should be, IMHO, to resolve conflicts once and for all in a reasonable and statesmanlike manner. (But then, the same could be said for Indian and Pakistani leaders too, IMHO again).

Awakening Hopeful #60:

The book is `It`s Mine!` - Leo Lionni has written some very good fables that can be used as allegories for different situations in life.

Apart from the fact that it seemed suitable for the situation, the reason I posted the fable was that I wanted to point out the hypocrisy in the values we`re trying to instill in our children. On the one hand we read them stories such as this one - about the importance of peace and sharing and harmony, how constant bickering will lead us nowhere, how everything will turn out for the better. And then we show them photographs of some kid killed by us during one of our clashes. It’s disgusting. If we can’t practice what we preach, why preach? Hey, if it`s okay for us to quibble and quarrel, why stop them from doing the same? Let them have their share of the ``fun``. Why paint unrealistic rosy pictures for them - why not prepare them for the horrible, harsh reality? Why should they have to face the trauma of another disappointment? As if there aren’t enough already. Why make them the promise of peace when we can’t keep it?

*sigh *

As Antoine de Saint Exupéry says in `Le Petit Prince`: ``Les grandes personnes sont comme ça...`` - ``Grown-ups are like that...`` (btw – another book you might want to read to your kids – English translations are available)

That`s why I personally love some of Shel Silverstein`s stories - you might want to introduce your children to them as well. As a child I read his books a lot, but I feel his stories made more sense when I read them again as an adult (hey, there`s nothing wrong with reading children`s books :)). Although they used to leave me feeling sad at the time, I now realize how realistic his stories are. At least he doesn`t go around spinning false hopes and dreams. At least he is honest in his stories.

- Lubna