If you've been watching/listening to the news (at least the 'right' news, not CNN, FOX, or some other American bullshit) you'll have noticed that Benyamin Netanyahu, Israel's Prime Minister, has been traveling around Europe meeting with various foreign diplomats including George Mitchell, whom President Barack Obama appointed as US Envoy to the Middle East earlier this year. They have been discussing different diplomatic options on the table in the Middle East. E.g. the issues of Settlements (in the West Bank) and Israel's perceived threat: Iran. Basically a lot of political banter about the stability of the region. What will come from it is yet to be seen.

My friend pointed me to this Op/Ed piece in the LA Times, and asked for some thoughts. I will oblige him in this post. Besides, its been a while since I wrote something on this blog. (Don't get me wrong, I love photography, but even sometimes pictures can't do something justice. As if words ever could? Anyways, I digress.)

The article calls for a boycott of the state of Israel: after all, it was a similar (and largely effective) push that "put an end to the practice of apartheid in South Africa." Why a boycott? Because some voices in the international community largely disapprove of the ways in which Israel treats their neighbors: Palestine. At least this much is obvious.

The author (Neve Gordon) claims that this call for a boycott doesn't gain a lot of attention in Israel because it is seen as blatantly anti-Semitic. While I definitely see where such an accusation would have grounding, I don't think this defensive mechanism of 'playing the victim' (there might be a technical psychological term for this, I don't know) is very helpful to what goes on in these lands. I must say that terrible things have happened to Jewish people and the nation of Israel in the past, and we should not encourage a state of anti-Semitism anywhere. Maybe it takes an extra step of caution on our part: to make clear that when we critique Israel's violent and unnecessary use of force (cf. Gaza engagement in '08-'09) and even their general attitude toward its neighbors that we are not throwing out careless and arbitrary criticism bent on the humiliation of Israel. This boycott is careful and deliberate in its make light of Israel's faults, and does not seek to merely accuse but to also redeem. What is accusation without redemption anyways but empty words?

Gordon goes on to describe the current political state of Israel: more or less an unofficial apartheid regime.

For more than 42 years, Israel has controlled the land between the Jordan Valley and the Mediterranean Sea. With this region about 6 million Jews and close to 5 million Palestinians reside. Out of this population, 3.5 million Palestinians and almost half a million Jews live in the areas Israel occupied in 1967, and yet while these two groups live in the same area, they are subjected to totally different legal systems. The Palestinians are stateless and lack many of the most basic human rights. By sharp contrast, all Jews -- whether they live in the occupied territories or in Israel -- are citizens of the state of Israel.

Specifically in the West Bank, Israel has put in place a ethnic road system. There are roads that run through the West Bank connecting various settlements that only Jewish people can use. (The United Nations OCHA has a great resource of maps detailing this intricate system.) To some, this makes sense. But the reality is that these roads fragment the West Bank into smaller cantons (thus decimating any chance at economic viability, a viability which will determine the foundation of any future Palestinian state). Avraham Burg writes in his book 'The Holocaust is Over We Must Rise From its Ashes,' that these roads are used as 'reality bypass roads.' They serve to remove (both physically and mentally) the entire existence of the Palestinian people, thus the term bypassing reality. It's bizarre, you can drive miles and miles (or kilometers and kilometers) through Palestinian territory without encountering a single Palestinian.

There is a deeply engrained hatred between these peoples. After spending 5 weeks in Israel/Palestine this summer I have experienced what seems like an incomprehensibly small sliver of what this conflict is. One bit I came away with was the experience of hatred; there is a hatred that runs deep in the blood of Israelis against the Palestinians and vice versa to an equal degree. But this hatred does not stay contained in the psyche of these peoples, it lashes out in offenses and suicide bombings. It is known in the songs sung by young Palestinian children in the Jenin Refugee Camp: 

Answer the call from the Aqsa mosque, call out against those who oppress us. For you sake, my steadfast people, together we will fight and struggle. Raise your voice and say: God is Great, God is great. Every mother's tear and every drop of blood takes its toll. For every martyr that falls a new one will rise. For your sake, my steadfast people... 

It is a hatred that is known in the Israeli education laws that require young students in public education to read from the book of Joshua, to learn of the conquest commanded by God to annihilate the peoples of the Promised Land (this is their interpretation of the text). As of now, both vocal majorities of both the Israel and the Palestinian narrative promote violence against the other.

Gordon sees massive international pressure as the only way to make Israel avoid their fate, a fate they cannot see themselves; there needs to be a large international push against Israel to avoid a new Apartheid. It must be noted that Gordon is an Israeli citizen; he can't bear the sight of seeing his two boys grow up with the deeply entrenched hatred for their neighbors.

As an American, looking at this issue from thousands of miles away, I think Gordon makes a strong point in that the U.S. and the international community (especially including the United Nations) need to take a more forward approach to the situation in Israel/Palestine. Without their initiative, there will never be any progress. Whether the result is a binational state, or a two-state solution, that is neither here nor there. The fact is that Israel and Palestine cannot redeem their hatred alone.

Israel will not take this lightly, there will be much resentment towards the West. But if we are to be ethically responsible humans we must understand that Israel, by her actions, continues dig further and further down a deep hole that only ends in a similar fate experienced in Israel's past. But it is our duty as humans to answer to the call of the oppressed and seek out redemption of those who oppress.

I will close with a reference to this article.

The lesson that Israel must learn from the Holocaust is that it can never get security through fences, walls and guns." Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu of South Africa.

Seriously, this article will floor you. It floored me, especially the last line.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. I'd love feedback or just general comments about this conflict.

Here's an article from the New York Times (which is considerably Pro-Israeli, even for American liberal media) about the evictions in East Jerusalem I posted about early this morning. Though, this one does a good job of weaving in the current Israeli and international political scene concerning settlements and occupation. It isn't hard for me to imagine this happening; I walked these streets just weeks ago. But it's hard for me to sit comfortably in my house in Santa Barbara, CA and know that this is happening.

One of the greatest lies ever told is that one person can't do anything to change the world. I'm not saying I'm the next revolutionary to lead the charge against all oppression in the world, but I can certainly write about it here. I can give a voice to those who don't have the means or the courage to speak for themselves.

The two families who were evicted earlier on Sunday in East Jerusalem had been living in the house since 1956, long before Israel occupied the area. Who's land is it anyway? (If you figure that one out let me know.)

“I do not need a tent or rice,” Mr. Hanoun said. “What I need is to return to my house where I and my children were born.”

A total of 38 members of the Ghawi family were removed from six apartments that made up one of the houses. The Hanoun family numbers 17.

And why does Israel feel it needs this land? 1) It's adjacent to a shrine to Shimon Hatzadik, or Simeon the Just, a Second Temple High Priest. The street was cordoned off by Police after the evictions not allowing anyone through to the houses except Orthodox Jews so they could get to the shrine. Time and time again, Israel has refused to announce that occupation and settlements have nothing to do with Zionism, or the Jewish push to control 100% of the land of Israel, and the complete removal of all Palestinians from the area; the evidence is to the contrary. How can you separate Zionism and occupation? They feed off of each other. Israel occupies the West Bank and subsequent East Jerusalem because they feel it to be their God-given right to control all of the land. But at the expense of an entire people group? 2) They want to build a hotel. Oh. Well that makes sense. 3) The Palestinians live there illegally anyways, the don't have the documentation for their house. Maybe because you won't issue the paperwork in the first place? Or you make it so ridiculously expensive that any Palestinian couldn't afford such documents if they quadrupled their entire life earnings.

There's a lot to say about this. And this isn't the whole story. My point is that Israel continues to violate international law, at a time no less when the international community is willing to make progressive steps towards a viable peace, and bring the 'boot of the empire' harder and harder upon the neck of the oppressed.

Israel, have you become the evil you deplored?

Wes

Maybe I should try out a varied news source. Nevertheless, here is more evidence Israel is unwilling to achieve a viable peace in the region. As long as she continues to break international law there will never be peace. As long as she continues to carelessly uproot an innocent people and destroy families in the process there will never be peace.

Wes

Interesting article here just published on al-Jazeera. Saudi Arabia has rejected peace talks (after encouragement from the United States) with Israel based on Israel's failure to meet initiatives outlined in the Arab Peace Initiative (wikipedia): a full withdrawal of the occupied territories (the West Bank, and the Golan Heights) being the primary initiative.

Al-Faisal said that Israel must adhere to what is stipulated in the Arab Peace Initiative in order for it to have a constructive relationship with Saudi Arabia.

"What is required is a comprehensive approach that defines the final outcome at the outset and launches into negotiations over final status issues," he said.

Those final status issues include marking the borders of a future Palestinian state, control of the city of Jerusalem, the right of return of Palestinian refugees, security and water rights.

It is becoming more and more obvious that Arab states will not tolerate the continued building and expanding of Israeli settlements; yet Israel doesn't seem keen to back down either.

The big question about peace in the Middle East is in Israel's court; this perspective depends on one's perception of the Iranian threat. If Iran is indeed an enormous threat to the stability (as if!) of the region then it might be the case that no matter what Israel does. If she guarantees full right-of-return to 4.6 million Palestinian refugees in the world, completely withdraws from the occupied territories, declares a sovereign and viable Palestinian state on the 1967 borders--what will Iran do?

Iran is not part of the Arab League (one of the main driving forces behind the Arab Peace Initiative), so why does Israel have to make nice with the Arab League if the perceived Iranian threat persists? Israel has no incentive to declare peace with the Arab states because they get nothing out of it. Even if there was a brokered peace between Israel and the Arab League, would the Arab League fight alongside Israel against Muslim brothers in Iran if a war were to break out? Unlikely.

This is a convoluted region; the smallest hint of peace like a mirage in the desert--the closer you get, the further away you realize it is.

Wes

There's a great article written by David Fitch over at the 'Out of Ur' Blog on the Miss California 'event' that happened a couple of months ago.

You can read it by clicking here.