Attempts at reform which have come in from the outside world and been imposed from the West over the past 200 years have remained as state and government projects, due to the unwillingness of the powerful elite to engage in democratic processes, which is, in turn, why these attempts at reform are not usually internalized by society as a whole. Those who set out with the goal of changing this situation first need to think carefully before taking steps. Unfortunately, what happens in Turkey is that we first take steps forward, and then start thinking. This could be seen as a bit of an Ottoman tradition, actually.

Of course, in making reforms, we will reap benefits from the West. But we also need to make some semantic interventions into our conceptual framework. The key concepts arising from Western or other cultural wealth of experiences naturally include world views, philosophies and background plans which are directly related to other nations' institutions and political structures. If we simply import these concepts without altering them, they cannot help us; these are concepts which need to be arranged according to our own physical, social and historical development. After all, the Quran itself changed some of the meanings in the language of the society to which it came. While Arabic words maintained the same form, their meaning underwent deep-rooted changes. Likewise, the philosopher Farabi borrowed some basic concepts from Greek metaphysics and philosophy, altering them, and even re-defining some entirely. Had Muslim scholars not done this, Greek philosophy would have remained an archaic resource, and would have been useless in the creation of modern knowledge.

It was in the 19th century that this opportunity presented itself to us. But the figures of the Tanzimat, the Meşrutiyet and the Republic eras of Turkey all formed their relations with the West on a symbolic level, not thinking to form relations on a conceptual level. It was Sultan Mahmut II who first formed these incorrect relations: borrowing jazz music, offering alcoholic drinks at official meetings, changing outfits, replacing the sarık with the fez, then later the fez with the hat, banning the headscarf, intervening in the wearing of beards by men, and so on. These were all models accepted in the 20th century which derived from Mahmut II.

I talked a bit above about the relations between the Abbasis and Greek philosophy, and how it was not on the level of “awe and symbols,” but rather on a smart and conceptual level. This was true also for their relations with Indian, Babylonian, Iranian, Egyptian and Mesopotamian cultures. Note that Muslims did not translate Greek literature, mythology, tragedies and poetry into Arabic. They translated instead the philosophy and knowledge. Their goal in doing this was to benefit from the wealth of experience and knowledge of other cultures and civilizations, and to use their own religion and abilities to engage in their own semantic changes to all this. Looked at from this perspective, the modernization of Ottoman-Turk was unsuccessful; it cannot be an example to the Islamic world. What we need to take instead as an example is the above-mentioned Abbasi model.

We could use these Abbasi methods today to help us in finding solutions and providing new frameworks through which to interpret and understand our problems with democracy, civil society, and so on. Of course, this does not mean we will simply affect whichever changes grab us at the moment with these concepts. But at the same time, we ought not to simply import concepts from the West as they are, and should instead alter and shape them according to our own culture, history and society. When we grapple with the process of societal change, and deal with it according to this sort of framework, then we can use our own inner dynamics to change.

Todays Zaman (via TimeTurk)

source: http://en.timeturk.com/ali-bulac-what-we-get-from-the-west,-and-how-to-use-it–894-yazisi.html

This fall, I began my first lecture on Eurocentrism by asking my students, How Eurocentric is your day? I explained what I wanted to hear from them. Can they get through a typical day without running into ideas, institutions, values, technologies and products that originated outside the West – in China, India, the Islamicate or Africa?

The question befuddled my students. I proceeded to pepper them with questions about the things they do during a typical day, from the time they wake up.

Unbeknownst, my students discover that they wake up in ‘pajamas,’ trousers of Indian origin with an Urdu-Persian name. Out of bed, they shower with soap and shampoo, whose origins go back to the Middle East and India. Their tooth brush with bristles was invented in China in the fifteenth century. At some point after waking up, my students use toilet paper and tissue, also Chinese inventions of great antiquity.

Do the lives of my students rise to Eurocentric purity once they step out of the toilet and enter into the more serious business of going about their lives? Not quite.

I walk my student through her breakfast. Most likely, this consists of cereals, coffee and orange juice, with sugar added to the bargain. None originated in Europe. Cereals were first cultivated in the Fertile Crescent some ten thousand years BCE. Coffee, orange and sugar still carry – in their etymology – telltale signs of their origins, going back to the Arabs, Ethiopians and Indians. Try to imagine your life without these stimulants and sources of calories.

How far could my students go without the alphabet, numbers and paper? Yet, the alphabet came to Europe courtesy of the ancient Phoenicians. As their name suggests, the Arabic numerals were brought to Europe by the Arabs, who, in turn, had obtained it from the Indians. Paper came from China, also brought to Europe by the Muslims.

Obstinately, my students’ day refuses to get off to a dignified Eurocentric start.

In her prayer, my Christian student turns to a God who – in his human form – walked the earth in Palestine and spoke Aramaic, a close cousin of Arabic. When her thoughts turn to afterlife, my student thinks of the Day of Judgment, paradise and hell, concepts borrowed from the ancient Egyptians and Persians. ‘Paradise’ entered into English, via Greek, from the ancient Avestan pairidaeza.

 Of medieval origin, the college was inspired and, most likely, modeled after the madrasa or Islamic college, first set up by a Seljuk vizier in eleventh century Baghdad. In a nod to this connection, professors at universities still hold a ‘chair,’ a practice that goes back to the madrasa, where the teacher alone sat in a chair while his students sat around him on rugs.

When she finishes college and prepares to receive her baccalaureate at the graduation ceremony, our student might do well to acknowledge another forgotten connection to the madrasa. This diploma harks back to the ijaza – Arabic for license – given to students who graduated from madrasas in the Islamicate.

Our student runs into fields of study – algebra, trigonometry, astronomy, chemistry, medicine and philosophy – that were introduced, via Latin, to Western Europe from the Islamicate. She also encounters a variety of scientific terms – algorithm, alkali, borax, amalgam, alembic, amber, calibrate, azimuth and nadir – which have Arabic roots.

If my students play chess over the weekend and threaten the King with ‘check mate,’ that phrase is adapted from Farsi – Shah maat – for ‘the King is helpless, defeated.’

When she uses coins, paper currency or writes a check, she is using forms of money first used outside Europe. Gold bars were first used as coins in Egypt in the fourth millennium BCE. With astonishment, Marco Polo records the use of paper currency in China, and describes how the paper used as currency was made from the bark of mulberry trees.

At college, my student will learn about modernity, ostensibly the source and foundation of the power and the riches of Western nations. Her professors in sociology will claim that laws based on reasoning, the abolition of priesthood, the scientific method, and secularism – hallmarks of modernity – are entirely of Western origin.  Are they?

During the eighteenth century, many of the leading Enlightenment thinkers were keenly aware that Chinese had preceded them in their emphasis on reasoning by some two millennia. By the end of this century, however, a more muscular, more confident Europe chose to erase their debt to China from its collective memory.

Similarly, Islam, in the seventh century, made a more radical break from priesthood than the Reformation in Europe. In the eleventh century, an Arab scientist, Alhazen – his Latinized name – devised numerous experiments to test his theories in optics, but, more importantly, theorized cogently about the scientific method in his writings. Roger Bacon, the putative ‘founder’ of the scientific method, had read Alhazen in a Latin translation.

When our student reads the sonnets of Shakespeare and Spenser, she is little aware that the tradition of courtly love they celebrate comes via Provencal and the troubadours (derived from taraba, Arabic for ‘to sing’) from Arab traditions of love, music and poetry. When our male student gets down on one knee while proposing to his fair lady, he might do well to remember this.

On a clear night, with a telescope on her dormitory rooftop, our student can watch stars, many of which still carry Arabic names. This might be a fitting closure to a day in the life of our student, who, more likely than not, remains Eurocentric in her understanding of world history, little aware of the multifarious bonds that connect her life to different parts of the ‘Orient.’

M. Shahid Alam is Professor of Economics, Northeastern University, Boston. He is the author of Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism (Palgrave Macmillan: 2009). You may contact him at alqalam02760@yahoo.com .

http://us.macmillan.com/israeliexceptionalism (check out this book!)

When the first Arab Human Development Report (AHDR) was published in 2002, a star glistened in a vast, gloomy sky. The fact that a UN-sponsored report, authored by independent Arab scholars would receive so much attention in Arab media, was in itself a promising start. The fact that such terminology as human security, personal security, economic security, etc – as highlighted in the report – would even compete with the largely ceremonial news bulletins’ headlines in many Arab countries was in itself an achievement. But then, the star quickly faded, the terms became clichés, and the report, published seven times since then, became a haunting reminder of how bad things really are in the Arab World. 

Those who wish to discredit Arab countries, individually or as a collective, now find in these reports plenty of reasons to fuel their constant diatribes; those who genuinely care and wish for things to improve are either silent or muted. 

The last report, sponsored, like the rest, by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) was published in July 2009. It was the grimmest. Its statistics are intriguing, although depressing. 2.9 million square kilometers of land in the Arab World are threatened by desertification. Natural resources are depleting at an alarming level. Birth rates are the highest in the world. Unemployment is skyrocketing. 50 million new jobs must be created by 2020. Arab oil-based economies leave some Arab countries entirely vulnerable to market price fluctuations or the depletion of oil altogether. While many economies, especially in Asia are shifting or have already achieved great strides into becoming knowledge-based economies, Arab economies are still hostage to the same cycle of oil and cheap labor. In fact, 70 percent of the Arab region’s total exports, according to the report, is oil. 

The problem is not just economic, or environmental, it’s societal as well. Inequality is entrenched in many Arab societies. Women’s rights are not the only individual rights violated. Men’s right are violated too, that is if they are not members of the dominant group, which are either divided by blind political allegiance, tribal or sectarian membership, or economic leverage.   

Admittedly, Arab societies are, of course, not the only societies that suffer from these ills, but sadly, the problems of Arab countries are most convoluted, accentuated by the fact that there is little action to rectify the problem, neither at individual country’s level or using joint platforms, for instance, the Arab League. Why didn’t the Arab League hold an emergency summit following the release of the first or even the last AHDR report? One would think that problems of such magnitude, ones that affect the lives of 330 million people, are pressing enough for such gatherings. 

Arab media has been highlighting the issue and the shortcomings, some media outlets more than others. But the discussion is largely political, at times a mere attempt at discrediting this government or that leader, and are still conducted in general terms. The latest report for example was supplemented by opinion polls conducted in four Arab countries – Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco and occupied Palestine. One need not emphasize the different human development challenges in these countries, situated in diverse geopolitical settings. One cannot possibly devise the same solution to a country occupied by a foreign army, to an independent country with untold oil wealth, to a third with immense human potential but dire poverty.  

Generalized problems can only obtain generalized, thus superficial solutions. Therefore, it has been summarily decided that the problem lies in lack of education, not the inequitable and unrepresentative political systems. Education became the buzz word, as if education is a detached value; therefore, education cities are erected in Arab countries that can easily afford importing the best teachers and curricula money can buy. More, research institutions are also making appearances in various Arab capitals. Those existing in rich Arab countries are operated largely by foreigners, whose sense of priority lies, naturally, elsewhere. One fails to grasp the wisdom. 

But of course, education is a mindset, a culture even. What is the point of pursuing a PhD in a society where nepotism determines who does what? It’s most rational, from a self-seeker’s point of view, to spend time knowing and passing one’s business cards to the ‘right people’ than spending years of one’s life pursuing a university degree. 

UNDP had recently launched “The Arab Knowledge Report 2009”, jointly with the United Arab Emirates-based Mohammad bin Rashid al-Maktoum Foundation. Another depressing read, nonetheless. Governments were criticized for paying lip service to ‘reform’, yet “widening the gap between word and deed.” It concluded that Arab countries are far from being knowledge based societies. Numbers and more numbers told the story: Finland spends $1000 per person on scientific research, while less than $10 are spent annually in the Arab world. More, the number of published books averages one for every 491 British citizens, while in the Arab world it’s one for every 19,150. But that should not be much of a surprise considering that one-third of older Arab citizens are illiterate, two-thirds of whom are women. Meanwhile, more than seven million children, who should be in school, are not. Illiteracy stands at 30 percent in the Arab world. 

Dr. Ghassan Khateeb, of Birzeit University in the occupied West Bank believes that there “is a direct relation between the lack of investment and the problematic situation we find ourselves in relation to knowledge.” “This is all related to politics; the lack of democracy and the lack of knowledge enforce each other,” he was quoted as saying. 

Paul Salem, writing in the British Guardian, while recognizing the failure of Arab governments, found that others are also, if not equally, responsible. “The cost of a single month of Western military spending in Iraq or Afghanistan would be enough to triple total aid for education in the Middle East. The cost of two cruise missiles would build a school, the cost of a Eurofighter a small university.” 

Alas, some Arab governments, spend twice, if not three times more on their military budget than invest in education. And keeping in mind that nearly one out of every five Arab citizens lives below the poverty threshold of two-dollars a day, the tragedy is suddenly augmented. 

Arab governments must rethink and reconsider their current priorities and course of action. They must think and act individually, but collectively as well, before the crisis turns into a catastrophe, as will surely be the case if nothing is done. 

- Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an author and editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many newspapers, journals and anthologies around the world. His latest book is, "The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle" (Pluto Press, London), and his forthcoming book is, “My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story” (Pluto Press, London), now available for pre-orders on Amazon.com.

Zayta is my home village and remains the closest place to my heart. Despite the radical shifts in today's world, the early memories of life in Zayta continue to shape my identity and worldview. Villagers' metaphors provide clarity to digest complexities and guidance to navigate the ambiguities of today's complex world. Although I have been living in Canada for the last four years, thousands of miles from Zayta, I still maintain regular presence and engagement with my family, friends and village, thanks to the evolving revolution of information technology. In return, along with this romantic attachment to Zayta, I have been blessed with knowledge and innovative creativity. In this article, I am going to share a transnational vision to build better futures for Zayta and other underprivileged communities in Palestine.

During the last century, the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 and later the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank in 1967, uprooted Zayta villagers from their lands and homes. In 1948, the majority of the village's agricultural land was seized by Israel. The Israeli towns of Maggal, Sde Yizhaq, and parts of Hadera are situated on Zayta's land (Raml Zayta). Israel completed its military occupation of the populated part of the village in 1967, after destroying around 70 houses. Due to land confiscation and home destruction many families from the village were forced to move eastwards and settled in Jordan, Syria, and the Gulf countries. For example, there is a whole neighbourhood in Irbid, Jordan, called Zaytawi due to the large number of families from Zayta who live there. 

Historically, villagers were fully dependent on agriculture for their livelihood. They were harvesting olives, almonds, citrus and rain-fed crops such as wheat, barley, and beans. After the Israeli military occupation, villagers' hardship continued. Villagers were used as unskilled labour in Israeli factories and on construction sites. As a result, farmers neglected their remaining farmlands and agricultural produce declined sharply. As in any other Palestinian locality, shops in the village were turned into marketing outlets for Israeli produce. Moreover, the Israeli military administration controlled all aspects of economic life in the village, including the release of building permits, driving licenses, travel permits and recruitment approval of public servants. All in all, livelihood in the village was designed to serve Israeli colonial interests.

Unfortunately, the living conditions in Zayta and many other villages in the northern part of the West Bank deteriorated further after the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1994. According to the Oslo Accords, Israel was to remain in control of security in the rural areas of the West Bank, while the Palestinian Authority handled civilian matters.

A few years later, the construction of the apartheid Wall by the Israeli government represented another drastic blow to the Zayta economy. According to the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees, the construction of the racist Wall has affected 820 dunums of land in Zayta. Four hundred dunums have been confiscated, levelled, and used in the construction of the Wall. The other 420 dunums are isolated behind the Wall. The construction of the Wall has also been responsible for uprooting 6,000 olive and almond trees and preventing workers from reaching their jobs inside Israel. Access to the Israeli job market has become extremely difficult for Palestinians. As a result, villages in the northern part of the West Bank, including Zayta, have experienced unprecedented poverty rates. Moreover, the unfortunate internal political crisis between Fatah and Hamas has deepened the social and political fragmentation within Palestinian communities. For example, incidents of social disengagement have grown considerably over the last few years and have led to a significant increase in migration flows. 

The combination of accelerated hardships of the Palestinian rural communities, including Zayta, and the failure of conventional development models to resolve Palestinian challenges call for an alternative Palestinian development worldview. In fact, resolving the challenges of deprived communities such as Zayta needs innovative development strategies to transform unhealthy patterns of social formation in these communities. According to social scientists, conventional development models that are focused on handling local and territorial patterns fail to address the evolutionary patterns of today's space-based world.  

The explosion of transnational information that flows through information technologies and social media outlets enhances the role of space in everyday lives worldwide. These space-based technologies are already reshaping organisations and economies. More precisely, they are changing the source of wealth creation, the organisation of firms, the nature of work and the boundaries of economic geography. Spatial literacy now serves as an important key for socio-economic development.  Economists, who have traditionally viewed the economy in territorial terms only, are now recognising the importance of space in economic transformation, technological innovation and global competitiveness.

In the age of open spaces, geographies are changing. Social technologies offer Palestinian communities and businesses a remarkable opportunity to reinvent themselves. For example, businesses have a great opportunity to rebrand their products and services within today's multicultural markets. Blogging offers business owners an easy way to brand and build connections with customers around the world. To take another example, this morning I bought a 3-litre bottle of olive oil produced in Nablus and a 2-kilogram can of pickled cucumbers produced in Jenin from an ethnic grocery store in Mississauga (a Canadian city near Toronto). Labels on these products only included Palestinian phone numbers as contact information. They didn't have electronic mail or website i.e., information. Building a virtual presence is critical for success in today's business world. Maybe  Palestinian businesses should develop their virtual content as a strategy to connect with global clients and partners. They should make information about their products and services accessible to everyone.

The shift from territorial to spatial economics offers Palestinian individuals, businesses, and communities remarkable opportunities to initiate innovative economic networks and create new social formation patterns in our communities inside Palestine. According to official statistics, more than five million Palestinians are living in transnational communities around the world. Building connections between the Palestinian diaspora and communities inside Palestine in today's interconnected world will foster innovation, knowledge transfer, market exploration, and business partnerships. In social terms, building Palestinian transnationalism will enhance community engagement, social change, and political empowerment. 

In the final analysis, it is about time to expand our horizons and facilitate new social interactions within our space-based society in order to build a new potential for Zayta and other Palestinian communities. 

Khaled Islaih is a community developer with a passion for societal transformation. He works with Muslim Community Services to provide language-training services for newcomers to Canada in Mississauga and Brampton. He can be reached at kislaih@yahoo. com.

Reclaiming words:  identity and thought, We are not Israeli Arabs, we are Palestinians 

WRITTEN BY KHALIL NEKHLEH

The indigenous remnants of the Palestinian people in Israel after the ethnic cleansing of 1947/1948 should be referred to as The Palestinians in Israel, or the Palestinian Minority in Israel.  They should not be labeled as “Israeli Arabs”, or “48 Arabs”.

Personally, I am the remnant of my indigenous Palestinian people who lived in Palestine (nearly 900,000), and who were “ethnically cleansed” in preparation for the establishment of the apartheid Jewish state of Israel in 1947/1948.  Only 160,000 of us remained in what became known as “Israel”. I was, and am, a Palestinian, who fortunately was able to stay on the land of historical Palestine, i.e., Palestine under the British Mandate, and who became a member of a growing and vibrant minority of nearly 1.3 million Palestinians, who is living now in the Israeli apartheid state.  The label “Israeli Arabs” was coined and imposed on us by our enemies, namely, the Israeli racist apartheid state. Many Arab states chose to disregard our existence, or were totally ignorant of our status, as well as the Western World who supported Zionism, and facilitated and sanctioned the creation of the Israeli racist apartheid state, and who persists in justifying its existence.  We were Palestinians before the ethnic cleansing of 1947/1948 and we continue to be Palestinians since, and are proud of it.  Our identity and collective destiny is connected to the rest of the Palestinian people in the Palestinian areas occupied by Israel in 1967 and the rest of the dispersed Palestinians in a state of refuge. We are part of nearly 11 million Palestinians all over the world who aspire for freedom and justice. 

As our “solidarity debt”, we expect you to address us as “The Palestinians in Israel”.  We must purge our and your lexicon of the label of “Israeli Arabs”, the concept of our occupiers and oppressors, that seeks to mould our reality in their own image. 

Khalil Nakhleh, Ph.D.
Independent Researcher and Writer
Ramallah, Palestine/Israel
(Struggling to Transform Our Homeland) 

The First Word War is an initiative of Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala. We welcome our readers to submit entries for publication, translation and dissemination. Send them to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

The First Word War

In the name of "Self-defense"
WRITTEN BY REALISTIC BIRD

In the name of "self-defense" they massacred, in the name of "self-defense" they committed ethnic cleansing, and in the name of "self-defense" they stole land. 

The Israelis have hidden behind the concept of self-defense for decades by abusing the word to their advantage. The word self-defense gives off the connotation that the one acting it is the victim under attack from a vicious aggressor.

Have you ever heard the Israelis describing any of their wars or offensives other than in that context? It even led them to call their armed forces, [Israeli] Defense Forces. The duplicity of the situation arises from the nature of the Zionist entity, a colonizing, invading, occupying and racist entity founded on the death and expulsion of the Palestinians. How is it possible for such an entity who was the initiator of aggression to claim its actions are done in self-defense? The one who attacks, who destroys 400 villages, massacres scores of the inhabitants, and occupies the lands of Palestine over more than six decades can't be a victim thus has no right to self-defense.

An occupation is by its very nature a brutal existence and because of this international law admits that any people under it have the right to resist it in all means possible. Yet, looking at the hasbara that the Israelis and their allies spread through the media one thinks that the Israelis are the ones under occupation and not the Palestinians. The Palestinians are always shown as the terrorists, the ones who are attacking but the truth is international and human law gave them the right to fight back aggressors. The Palestinians are the ones under occupation, does anyone deny that? If so how is it possible that the Israelis claim "self-defense" to excuse their crimes when there is an undeniable right to resist them?

In a lopsided world where the meaning of words are taken out of context and contradict the truth and common sense Israelis are allowed to commit their horrendous acts with no one to hold them accountable. 

Visit Realistic Bird’s site at: www.realisticbird.wordpress.com.

The First Word War is an initiative of Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala. We welcome our readers to submit entries for publication, translation and dissemination. Send them to contact@palestinethinktank.com or tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

La Prima Guerra Della Parola – Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala dichiarano la guerra contro la disinformazione

Dare di nuovo un senso alle parole: identità e pensiero, Non siamo “Arabi Israeliani”, ma Palestinesi 

WRITTEN BY KHALIL NAKHLEH
Tradotto da Mary Rizzo

La gente, quel che rimane del popolo indigeno palestinese in Israele dopo la pulizia etnica di 1947/1948 dovrebbe essere chiamata solamente con il nome di I Palestinesi in Israele, oppure La Minoranza Palestinese in Israele.  A queste persone non dovrebbero essere addossate l’etichetta “Arabi Israeliani” oppure “Gli Arabi del ‘48”.

Per quanto mi riguarda, sono un pezzo del mio popolo indigeno palestinese che visse nella Palestina (quasi 900,000 persone), che subì la “pulizia etnica” negli anni 1947/1948, per preparare la fondazione di uno stato ebraico basato sull’apartheid, quello stato chiamato Israele. Solamente 160,000 di noi sono rimasti in quel territorio che è diventato “Israele”. Io ero, e sono, un palestinese, che, fortunatamente è potuto rimanere sulla terra della Palestina storica, vale a dire, la Palestina sotto il mandato britannico, e che è diventato membro di una minoranza florida e in crescita che conta quasi 1,3 milioni di palestinesi. Ma ora vivono nello stato d’apartheid che tutto il mondo conosce con il nome d’Israele. L’etichetta “Arabi Israeliani” è stato inventato e c’è stato imposto dai nostri nemici, lo stato razzista d’Israele. Molti stati arabi hanno scelto di non tenere conto della nostra esistenza, oppure sono stati completamenti ignari della nostra situazione, ed il Mondo Occidentale che ha sostenuto il Sionismo, quello che ha facilitato e promosso la creazione dello stato razzista, che applica l’apartheid, quello d’Israele, persiste nella giustificazione della sua esistenza. Noi siamo stati palestinesi prima della pulizia etnica del 1947/1948, e noi continuiamo ad essere palestinesi, e ne siamo ben orgogliosi di ciò. La nostra identità ed il nostro destino collettivo è connesso a tutto il resto del popolo palestinese nelle zone occupate dall’Israele nel 1967 e con il resto dei palestinesi dispersi con lo status di profughi. Noi siamo una parte dei quasi 11 milioni di palestinesi diffusi in tutto il mondo che aspirano alla libertà e alla giustizia.

Come un gesto di dimostrazione della vostra solidarietà, noi gradiremo che ci chiamaste solo “I Palestinesi in Israele”. Dobbiamo eliminare dal nostro e dal vostro lessico l’etichetta di “Arabi Israeliani”, perché è solo un concetto di quelli che ci tengono sotto l’occupazione, i nostri oppressori, in un tentativo di trasformare la nostra realtà nella loro stessa immagine. 

Khalil Nakhleh, Ph.D.
Ricercatore e Scrittore indipendente
Ramallah, Palestina/Israele
(Lottando per la Trasformazione della Nostra Patria)

La Prima Guerra Della Parola è un'iniziativa di Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala. I nostri lettori possono partecipare, mandando i loro testi a contact@palestinethinktank.com oppure tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

La Prima Guerra Della Parola – Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala dichiarano la guerra contro la disinformazione

Nel nome della “difesa”

SCRITTO DA REALISTIC BIRD

Tradotto da Mary Rizzo 

Nel nome della “auto-difesa” hanno massacrato. Nel nome della “auto-difesa” hanno adoperato la pulizia etnica. Nel nome della “auto-difesa” hanno rubato la terra. 

Gli israeliani si sono nascosti dietro il concetto dell’auto-difesa per decine di anni, abusando di questa parola per il proprio vantaggio. La parola stessa, “auto-difesa”, suggerisce l’idea che quello che agisce lo fa perché è sotto attacco di un aggressore violento e crudele. 

Avete mai sentito gli israeliani descrivere una qualsiasi delle loro guerre (oppure offensive) in una maniera diversa da questo particolare modo? Infatti, questo modo di ragionare gli ha indotti a chiamare le loro forze armate le Forze di Difesa Israeliani (IDF, Israeli Defense Forces in inglese). Il paradosso della situazione nasce dalla natura dell’entità sionista, un entità colonialista, razzista e che adopera l’occupazione di terre altrui, attraverso la morte e l’espulsione forzata dei palestinesi. Com’è possibile per un tale entità che è stato l’artefice delle aggressioni di dichiarare che le sue azioni sono compiute solo per l’auto-difesa? Quello che attacca, che distrugge 400 villaggi, massacrando un gran numero di abitanti, che occupa le terre della Palestina per più di sessant’anni, non può essere una vittima, e quindi, non ha il diritto alla loro presunta “auto-difesa”. 

Vivere sotto un’occupazione, per sua natura, è un’esistenza disumana, e per questo motivo, il diritto internazionale ammette che ogni popolo che vive sotto occupazione ha il diritto a resistere contro l’occupazione stessa con ogni mezzo. Però, sotto l’influenza pesante della hasbara israeliano (ndt: propaganda ufficiale pro-israeliana), che gli israeliani ed i loro alleati diffondono attraverso i mass media, si ha l’impressione che sono invece gli israeliani che vivono sotto l’occupazione e non i palestinesi. I palestinesi sono rappresentati sempre e solamente come “terroristi”, quelli che stanno attaccando gli inermi, ma la verità non ha frontiere, è la legge che gli umani hanno scritto che gli da il diritto di combattere contro gli aggressori. I palestinesi sono quelli che vivono sotto l’occupazione, ci sono delle persone che potrebbero negare questo fatto? Dunque, com’è possibile che l’affermazione israeliana della “auto-difesa” è usata per giustificare i loro crimini quando già esiste il diritto internazionale inderogabile di resistere contro l’occupatore? 

In un mondo sbilanciato dove il significato delle parole manca, e le parole stesse sono usato senza il giusto contesto, contraddicendo la verità stessa, nonché il buonsenso, gli israeliani hanno il permesso di commettere i loro atti orrendi, senza che nessuno gli renda responsabili per le loro azioni. 

Visitate il sito di Realistic Bird (www.realisticbird.wordpress.com). 

La Prima Guerra Della Parola è un'iniziativa di Palestine Think Tank e Tlaxcala. I nostri lettori possono partecipare, mandando i loro testi a contact@palestinethinktank.com oppure tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

In many parts of the West, certain political parties or movements are treated as if they come from the Moon or are alien to any body politic. Their existence among the people is always scrutinised as negative, transitory and something created in a boardroom or a backroom, imposed upon an unsophisticated public that is unable to differentiate a true political programme from empty and simplistic rhetoric. These parties or movements are depicted as if they only address the margins of society who are disenfranchised from any “normal” democratic bodies, and thus, are ramshackle bands that represent a minority constituency. Given their oppositional nature to pre-existing parties, they are outfitted with the label that will serve to keep them isolated from the structures that are already in operation. All of this is to destroy the party or movement by propaganda work rather than analysis of reality.

An entire mythology has been built around the Palestinian resistance movement (which morphed into a party) Hamas. This construct has actually taken on more legitimacy as a factual interpretation of Hamas than the facts themselves. In most of the Western media, no matter if it is on the right or the left, and in some of the “moderate” media in Arab countries, the very name of the party is coupled with terms such as “fundamentalist”, “radical” or “terrorist”. Clearly, this serves to create a fear trigger that will remove the word from being critically and honestly evaluated. The listener will immediately identify Hamas with a negative connotation and is removed from responsibility for understanding that this is a manipulation of reality. The listener is expected to accept the claims that Hamas is “anti-democratic” and “fanatical”. It is child’s play to then convince the listener that Hamas is Bad, that it is the Enemy of all We represent (in our own eyes, tolerance, democracy, Goodness itself). It is possible to then extend that reading to the belief that action must be taken against them, that they are a “cancer that must be gotten rid of”, as quoted by the institutional peacenik, Noa. How does one eradicate a cancer, once it has been diagnosed? By extirpation or bombardment. With cancer treatment, one “bombards” even the healthy parts of the body with toxic agents, waiting to see if after the battle there were enough healthy parts remaining to allow the organism to continue to exist. Once you have set into the minds of millions of people the idea that destruction is good, because the enemy is just so damaging and evil if allowed to exist, the risk of bringing the entire organism to its grave by weakening it dramatically is taken as a viable risk to run. This is a way to make them justify actions that their own eyes don’t see as therapeutic, but are pure horror and evil.

How did it work that the world was so fooled and allowed Israel to destroy Gaza to “get rid of Hamas”? It was quite simple, and it’s always the same answer: Israel and its allies keep people disinformed. Those who actually will go slightly below the screaming headlines of the newspapers might find out a few facts buried that that will contradict the spin, but not that many people will go that far, given that they are exposed to something with an element of truth buried deep within. If that were not problematic enough, even the “progressives” have done meritorious services to rendering Hamas untouchable. They might accept them as a “resistance movement” but they won’t allow their personal ideological bias to see Hamas as a progressive force for their own people’s advancement. This may be out of conviction, convenience or even lack of research or a blindspot that does not allow variations on the theme of the class struggle, where everything is “international” and the same type of rules and ideals should be considered applicable and necessary for all, going so far in some cases to “import democracy” under various more or less aggressive forms.

These people, many of whom are armed with good intentions, have chewed, swallowed, and are spitting back quite a few of the outright lies and distortions that are part of the mythology created by opponents of Hamas, created in Israel and the West, primarily.

What are the components of that mythology?
1) Hamas was created by the Israeli Mossad.
2) Hamas represents a marginal portion of the Palestinians.
3) Hamas turned democratic enough just to be able to obtain some legitimacy to later take over and turn the Palestinian Territories into an Islamic State.
4) Their victory in the polls was nothing more than a protest vote against the corruption of Fatah.
5) Hamas is comprised of a bunch of illiterates and their electors are sucked in by their own ignorance.
6) Hamas is a fundamentalist group and therefore inflexible and incapable of any modification or evolution. The oft cited Charter is used against them to stress that they are simply a radical, destructive group poised for Holy War.
7) Hamas does not seek any kind of compromise with other Palestinian political parties or factions, and are therefore the divisionary element that prohibits of the unity of the people.
8 ) Hamas operates to indoctrinate their people with hate propaganda in order to utilise them as cannon fodder.
9) Hamas is a terrorist group that exists only thanks to financing by “fundamentalist regimes”.

That Hamas is merely a resistance movement has been thoroughly disproved by the elections, but this seems to be the safe place that activists can cluster in order to allow themselves to be able to tolerate Hamas, while wishing for their quick demise. They are not viewed then as having a true heritage as a political party that can be compared to those of “democratic nations” of the “international community”, and thus, analysis of them can remain at an elementary level, lending itself to hasty generalisations.

I ask my readers to kindly forgive all the inverted quotation marks, but these words do become ironic and empty of true meaning when they are applied to the objects indicated by the spin doctors, whose task it is to do the bidding of the hegemonic powers. How can a minority of a handful of nations that always pits itself against the will of the remainder of the world community in the UN be considered as the “international community”? It’s a boy’s club that excludes practically everyone. How can a country that puts in office the candidate who obtains the lesser amount of votes be called a “democracy”? It is when we start to question our own foundations that we can detect that there is a lot of convenience in presenting any opposition as being an enemy and outside of paradigms that we consider to be core to our expectations of how to establish a just and equitable world.

It’s time to debunk a few of these myths with facts.

1) Hamas was not created by Mossad. Although Israel does like to claim credit for many things, this one is not their doing. Political Islam in Palestine has had a presence since the early 40s in Mandate Palestine, and Hamas was born as part of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan), with many of its early leaders formally affiliated. It was the experience of refugeehood that turned Hamas into a more autonomous element with a particular nationalist basis to it, a natural result of the urgent and real human situation of displacement and loss of their cultural and national identity.

There were close relations of this group with the Egyptian base, and the first offices of the Ikhwan in Palestine were created in Gaza in 1945, led by a member of one of the most important families of the zone, Sheykh Zafer al Shawwa. During the first Arab-Israeli war, Islamist volunteers reinforced the ranks, coming primarily from Jordan and Syria, and this support showed the refugees that the Ikhwan had the courage to defend itself, even during the “Israeli War of Independence”. The growing number of refugees gave a stronger identity and sense of purpose to the Islamist movement in Palestine. Therefore, in the civil society and in the population in general, a motivation from any other source was not required to be able to pledge: “I promise to be a good Muslim in defending Islam and the lost land of Palestine. I promise to be a good example for the community and for others.” These were the words spoken by those who swore their loyalty to the Ikhwan in Palestine (source: Beverly Milton Edwards, “Islamic Politics in Palestine”, p. 43). The local Ikhwan had its own agenda, defending its lost land. It didn’t require fanaticism, outside influence or even propaganda. The refugees themselves were living proof of the horrors of deportation and suffering. The identification as part of an international movement was concomitant with the recognition of the particularity of the Palestinian experience. The official foundation, dating 9 December 1987, was only the culmination of an organisation in the works for decades. Organised Islamic resistance was further utilised when the situation precipitated dramatically in 1967 and a new generation was born as refugees. For this generation, a return to Islam was considered as a necessity for the moral and political future of a people that was being literally destroyed. The cause of the Nakba was seen by many as the result of the distancing from a normal society, the Palestinian one, in which the ethical, religious, cultural and traditional values had been devastated by the occupation, and the descent into further degradation, poverty, disenfranchisement and social instability was seen not only as the result of the occupation, but part of its cause.

The “international community” would not come to the rescue of these people, the rest of the Ummah was not caught up in their national struggle, largely because they were not directly involved or were even prohibited from involvement. The extreme pain and disgrace of losing one’s land at that time was a new element to the area, where previous colonisation avoided expelling the indigenous inhabitants, and throwing off the usurpers was not complicated with the total loss of roots and a base. The basis for the formal dimension of Hamas was thus present for decades prior to its official birth. In order to operate, being under the thumb of the occupation, these organised groups that existed had established charities and benefit organisations for their people. These institutions were tolerated by Israel in the Occupied Territories. Israel conceded some operating space through granting of licenses. As General Yitzhak Sager said in an interview to the International Herald Tribune in 1981, the Israeli government “…gave money that the military governor allocated to the mosques […] the sums were used both by the mosques and the religious schools, with the purpose of reinforcing a subject that would contrast that of the Left that was in favour of the PLO.” If there was some motivation for Israel to be involved, it was really as an act of ‘divide and rule’, a bit of tolerance, a bit of economic support to the various religious associations in order to see if an opposition to the nationalists of the PLO could develop. They really were only looking for a way to see the weakening of the PLO, which was gaining some support in the West, and they did not found, provide major financing or in any way influence a movement that they would in some way infiltrate or control. That is pure mythology. Why give Israel credit where none is due?

2) That Hamas represents only a marginal portion of Palestinians is another myth to debunk. It is indeed true that all Palestinians are not refugees, and it is also true that virtually all of the leaders of Hamas were born in exile or at some point were subjected to the experience of expulsion and loss of their homes and possessions. This is a core Palestinian experience, and it is true that even those (few) Palestinians who were not uprooted can identify with the loss of their cultural and national identity, and all of them know that their national aspirations and cohesion as a group have been destroyed by Israel. Thus, even a movement or party that has its own identity in the refugee camps and in exile or in religious roots, is recognised as an intrinsic, legitimate and natural representative of Palestinians as a whole. They even obtained the majority vote in areas of the West Bank that were not considered as Hamas strongholds, as well as obtaining votes from many Christian areas.

3) The myth that Hamas turned “democratic enough” just to get its foot in the door as the first step of forcing an Islamic State upon the entirety of Palestine is a very widespread one, especially in the progressive circles that do not recognise the popularity of the movement or who have an ideological prejudice against any religious movement. There is much to be said in favour of separation of church and state, but this of course is something that cannot be imposed from afar, and furthermore, there are many levels of separation to take into consideration. Those who subscribe to this position of “Hamas buying time before introducing the Sharia” tend to deny that a democracy has certain characteristics, and it is not necessarily a synonym of “secularism”. When the word “democracy” is applied correctly, it has certain characteristics, and Hamas meets these. Hamas has popular consensus. It has an internal structure that is autonomous and recognised as legitimate by its constituency. It follows the rules of elections, meeting the requirements for participation. Once elected, it assumes its role within the existing system, not having overthrown or staged coups against established structures. It is a political movement with several factions (some of them armed, as is true of many parties in areas under occupation, Fatah included) with a history and an organisation. There is widespread discussion among its constituencies, including those who are political prisoners, prior to making decisions, and the majority decides the actions to be undertaken. If one thing must be said about it to set it apart from parties that Westerners are familiar with, highest level leaders generally do not assume the governing roles. This is understandable in a party where a great quantity of the leaders are routinely assassinated by Israel. That the current political director, Khaled Meshaal, must live in exile after having once been victim of an attempted assassination says more about this anomalous situation than a thousand words can.

4) That Hamas’s victory in the Legislative Council election was nothing more than a protest vote (another pet theory of the left) was brilliantly illustrated as false by Paola Caridi in her very good book (despite the sensationalist subtitle) “Hamas, What it is and what the Radical Palestinian Movement Wants”, published by Feltrinelli and only available in Italian at this time. I am translating a few paragraphs that deal with this question.

“There is a precise political reason for which the majority of Palestinians voted for Hamas. It is a reason that concerns the decision made by the Islamist movement formally on 23 January 2005. (translator’s note, a year prior to the Legislative elections): a unilateral truce, reached together with the Islamic Jihad (that had instead broken it on several occasions), which had turned words into facts: that there would be the end of the season of terrorist attacks made by Hamas inside Israel as indicated within the confines of the 1949 armistice, the Israel within the Green Line, in other words. The ending of suicide attacks in Israeli cities, substantially bringing an end to the Intifada as well as (Hamas’s) participative choice is interpreted by the Palestinian population as a precise political proposal: an alternative to those who had governed and controlled them, holding the hegemony up to that moment. A proposal that poses at the same time new de facto limits to Hamas’s resistance strategy. The Islamist movement has not been, therefore, chosen only as a protest against the corruption, patronage and inefficiency of Fatah, which as a party is often confused with the PA. Corruption, patronage and inefficiency that are related, at least from a temporal point of view, with the failure of the Oslo Accords and the “facts on the ground” realised by the Israelis.

“The people of Hamas were considered people who are serious, who did not enrich themselves at the expense of the population, in fact, they continued to live in normal neighbourhoods and in the refugee camps.” (Caridi, p. 171).

5) An extremely offensive smear, oft repeated, is that Hamas’s followers and its leaders are a “bunch of illiterates” or “religious fanatics”. Almost all the leaders are (or were, given the number of assassinations within their ranks, the past tense is de rigueur) university graduates in fields ranging from medicine and physics to jurisprudence, economics and theology, is testament itself that this smear is merely to throw dirt on them and paint them as having read only religious texts and therefore “under-developed” when compared to other movements. Education has always been one of the pillars of Hamas and its charity work. The people of Palestine don’t need to be told this, it is a reality for them, where in many cases without this foundation, Palestinians would be left wanting in this area.

6) The inflexibility of Hamas is another myth, especially yanked out when speaking of the 1988 Charter (Mithaq). Shiekh Hamed Bitauri, “religious authority of Nablus, president of the Union of the Palestinian Ulemas, known for his radical positions had no problem confirming that ‘the Charter is not the Qu’ran. We can change it. It is only the synthesis of the positions of the Islamist movement in its relations with the other factions, and its politics.’ Aziz Dweik, founder of the Department of Geography of the University of Nablus, later to become the spokesman of the Palestinian Parliament after the 2006 elections, and imprisoned in Israeli jails since the summer of that year, went even further, declaring the political and pragmatic necessity of distancing from the Mithaq of 1988 to Khalid Amayreh, Palestinian journalist that is sensitive to Islamist positions, he said that ‘Hamas would not remain as a hostage to rhetorical slogans of the past like those of the ‘destruction of Israel’.” (Khalid Amayreh, Hamas Debates the Future: Palestine’s Islamic Resistance Movement Attempts to Reconcile Ideological Purity and Political Realism, in “Conflicts Forum”, Nov. 2007, p.4) (Caridi p. 90).

Haniyeh has mentioned on many occasions that the Charter has been surpassed in its substance by the other official documents, the most important of which, the Electoral Programme of the Reform and Change List (the list in which Hamas ran for office). This programme is structured like a document that goes far beyond the needs of a political campaign, according to the leader of Hamas, and it indicates the policy of the movement. It was not written in the heat of the revolution of the Intifada, and reflects the evolution of the party. The changes present are not ideological so much as ones of a strategic and political nature. The positions have been reiterated so many times in interviews and public interventions, it seems incredible that the complexity and maturity of Hamas should by now not be apparent to everyone. It is clear that they are still dedicated to the liberation of Palestine, but they are attempting to achieve it through reaffirmation of the rights of the people, knowing full well that as a party, Hamas is not equipped to overthrow the occupation in any practical way or to destroy what they recognise as a reality.

Many of us who follow events in the Middle East hope that they do not surrender to pragmatism so far as to recognise Israel not only as a reality, but as a “Jewish State”, however, we must watch from the sidelines and evaluate facts. The people of Palestine will be vigil about what rights are being surrendered, if any, and many of us believe that backs to the wall, they will not capitulate and lose what they know is theirs for reasons of political expediency. Hamas too is aware of this fact.

7) Hamas has been far less divisionary than its principle counterpart, Fatah. The Gaza “coup” that shocked and saddened the world was actually a preventive measure to the thwart the planned takeover by the Fatah forces faithful to Dahlan (in collaboration with Israel). That Hamas was the party that was awarded victory by its own people has never been recognised by the “international community” that nevertheless pushed for elections and insisted that this was the necessity for Palestinians, because this would mean that the resistance had been granted legitimacy and would become policy within the governing body, the rejection of negotiations as sub-alternates with Israel, which was Fatah policy, had been officially sanctioned by the populace and it would only be a matter of time before the programme would become policy. So, any steps by the Fatah “Security Forces” to overtake Gaza would actually have been the coup. But in the backwards way of viewing events, fuelled by disinformation, the tragic bloodbath between Palestinians prevented the real overthrow of democracy that would have taken place had Dahlan had the chance. Again and again, Hamas has sought to work together with the opposition party, and this is something they would not tolerate in the vain hope that their economic advantage and political nulla osta from the boy’s club would allow them to command even in absence of the popular mandate to do so.

8 ) It’s not necessary to use propaganda to show to Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and in exile, and even to many within Israel, the ongoing destruction of the Palestinian civilisation and people. Blockades, bombardments, assassinations, war, checkpoint humiliations, restrictions, separation of families, imprisonment and further abuses are not isolated incidents, but they are the daily bread and water of Palestinian life. No one needs to invent a rage over a phantasmagoric enemy. There is a real one that is subjecting the people of all ages and conditions to humiliation, deprivation and death. Showing a man in a mouse costume to insist that children are being indoctrinated in hate might go down well with the uninformed masses, but a glimpse into the reality makes Farfur look like the sweetest kind of way for a child to assimilate and tolerate that he or she is a prisoner doomed for life to suffer in the most atrocious way for being born as a lesser being in the oppressors’ eyes.

9) The worst smear against Hamas is the one to keep them as the symbol of evil: that they are a terrorist group, financed by “rogue States in the axis of evil”. Bearing in mind that their financing is abysmally inferior to the gigantic economic and “military aid” package given to Israel by America, Canada and many other nations in the “international community” in an official way, why should the claim of foreign financing be considered as unacceptable when it is simply the way the that Israel keeps afloat through billions of dollars annually, up front, and heaven only knows what other financing comes in through the thousands of “charities” that are really little more than fronts for mass immigration to Israel to curtail Arab growth? If Zionism and its charities are considered as legitimate and noble, why are Islamic ones put on blacklists and the donors treated as if they are financing terrorism? There is a double standard here.

That Hamas has rejected terror operations against civilians and did its best to do so in the service of achieving a realistic improvement for the life conditions of its people is an authenticated fact, corroborated by none other than the USA Congressional Research Service, a Think Tank that basically presents its conservative and Israel-friendly positions to the Congress so that they become policy. In fact, in the document coordinated by Jim Zanotti http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R40101.pdf  Israel and Hamas, Conflict in Gaza (2008-2009), we see that the quoted “reason” for the onslaught of Gaza to “cleanse it of Hamas”, the rockets fired into Israeli territory, was nothing but an excuse that the West drank down with gusto as if it were cherry juice. The extremely rudimentary rockets were recognised as NOT having been launched by Hamas, and not only that, Hamas was viewed as being able and willing to suppress the attacks. It is significant that the first victims of the Israeli attacks in Gaza were the regular police forces who had just been trained, perhaps also for this purpose. Zanotti writes:

For the first five months, the cease-fire held relatively well. Some rockets were fired into Israel, but most were attributed to non-Hamas militant groups, and, progressively, Hamas appeared increasingly able and willing to suppress even these attacks. No Israeli deaths were reported (although there were injuries and property damage), and Israel refrained from retaliation.

Nevertheless, each party felt as though the other was violating the terms of the unwritten ceasefire. Hamas demanded—unsuccessfully—that Israel lift its economic blockade of Gaza, while Israel demanded—also unsuccessfully—a full end to rocket fire and progress on the release of Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit from Hamas’s captivity.

Israel cited the sporadic rocket fire as justification for keeping the border crossings and Gaza’s seaport closed to nearly everything but basic humanitarian supplies. Hamas, other Arab leaders, and some international and non-governmental organizations involved in aiding Gazan civilians complained that Israel was reneging on its promises under the unwritten cease-fire agreement.

If that were not enough, the author, certainly not sympathetic in any way to Hamas, makes statements about the aftermath of the war where even Israel admits that Hamas was not responsible for the rockets:

Since Israel’s unilateral ceasefire began on January 18, 2009, there have been about 40 sporadic rocket launches into southern Israel, far fewer than occurred on average per day just before Operation Cast Lead. Moreover, Israeli officials believe that smaller militant groups, such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, and not Hamas, have fired the rockets, as they did during the cease-fire (although it is possible that Hamas is enabling or acquiescing to these attacks while preserving deniability).

So, Israel used the excuse of Hamas rocket launches to justify the elimination of Hamas (by means of destruction of the entirety of Gaza) through what they call “military operations” but the rest of humanity knows is war, while they were aware that Hamas was neither the author nor the facilitator of the rockets, any kind of excuse they pull out of the magic hat to justify their actions should fall on deaf ears. Complaints about arms smuggling through the most rudimentary of tunnels should stink to high heaven when we see the Defense Budget Appropriations for US-Israeli Missile Defense Programs in that same Congressional Report. Iron Dome, David’s Sling and other “military aid” costing the American people billions of dollars are described briefly. For every five ineffective bottle rockets that are smuggled through a tunnel, the USA is flying in full cargoes of arms and cases of cash to be spent by Israel for their military “needs”. The double standards here also draw innocent blood in violation of international law at the expense of your hard-earned money. Again, from the Congressional report:

Israel may have used weapons platforms and munitions purchased from the United States in its military operations in Gaza, reportedly including, among others, F-15 and F-16 aircraft, Apache helicopters, and, according to Israeli press reports, GBU-39 small diameter guided bombs approved for sale by the 110th Congress following notification in September 2008.

Additionally, all unilateral truces between Israel and Hamas (called by Hamas, not by Israel) were broken in every case by Israel. In many cases, making incursions into the Occupied Territories, which legally they are prohibited from doing, as civilian populations under occupation (even if the “settlers” have left, Gaza is kept under siege by Israel) are required to be protected by the occupier, not attacked. Israel, using weapons and planes supplied for them by the good graces of the people of the United States, bombarded streets where their targets (politicians and clerics that Israel terms as “militants” if not worse) were located, killing in an indiscriminate way anyone in the range, children included. If that’s not terrorism, the word has no meaning.

These are only a few of the myths in circulation. They represent just a portion of the lies, disinformation and hasbara that circulates about one of the major Palestinian parties, born from within, developing as all parties do, from below, and legitimised by fair and legal elections. Debunking these lies is a duty. One doesn’t need to agree to the entire programme of Hamas, but one is obligated to recognise that they are entirely different from the image that they have been straightjacketed into. What Jessica Rabbit said in the film, “Who Framed Roger Rabbit” could very well apply to Hamas: “I’m not bad, they just draw me that way.”

This article is part of the Palestine Think Tank and Tlaxcala initiative The First Word War against Disinformation. If you would like to contribute your own original articles to this initiative, send them to contact@palestinethinktank.com or to tlaxcala@tlaxcala.es

visit www.tlaxcala.es and www.palestinethinktank.com

The site witnessed violent disturbances two weeks ago when Israeli paramilitary police stormed the Haram Al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary) in an effort to arrest Palestinians who had repulsed an attempt by a group of Jewish fanatics who were trying to arrogate "prayer rights" at the Islamic shrine.

Dozens of Palestinians were injured, some quite seriously.

Following the incident, hundreds of Muslims from Jerusalem and also from Arab towns and villages in Israel decided to maintain a constant presence at the mosque in order to repulse new attempts by Jewish extremists to seize a foothold at Al-Aqsa compound. On many occasions, Israeli police forces threatened to storm the Noble Sanctuary if the sit- in didn't end. Meanwhile, they maintained a constant presence outside the compound. But on Sunday, the Israeli government decided to lift the siege, effectively allowing participants in the sit-in to leave peacefully.

The deal apparently was part of a behind-the-scenes understanding between Israel and Jordan whereby Israel agreed to reinstitute the status quo ante at the site and to refrain from provoking Muslim sensibilities. According to the Jordanian-Israeli Peace Treaty, Jordan retained the role of custodian of Al-Aqsa Mosque. Jordan had harshly criticised Israel for the "standoff", and unconfirmed reports indicated that the Jordanian government threatened to expel the Israeli ambassador from Amman if the provocations continued.

Indeed, King Abdullah II warned in an interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz last week that the irresponsible Israeli behaviour with regard to Al-Aqsa Mosque could spark off a huge conflagration in the region and "destroy everything". Jordan and other Muslim countries witnessed large anti-Israel protests following Friday congregational prayers.

In addition to Jordan, several Muslim countries also filed protests with Israel, warning the Israeli government that any attempt at a gradual Jewish takeover of Islam's third holiest site would be viewed as crossing an ultimate red line by Muslims, and would also put an end to any semblance of peacemaking efforts in the region. The protests prompted Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to publicly deny that Israel was harbouring hostile intentions with regard to Al-Aqsa Mosque.

"Last week extremist figures tried to undermine Israel's stability. This is an extremist minority that spread lies about Israel digging under the Temple Mount [Haram Al-Sharif]. This is a lie," he said.

Another Israeli official, Trade and Labour Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer warned that Israeli Arabs were beginning to "link up" with Hamas against Israel. "A certain alliance is forming between Israeli Arabs, specifically the Islamic Movement, and Hamas," Ben-Eliezer told Israeli state-run radio, adding that Israel would eventually pay a heavy price if this was permitted to continue. Muslim leaders in Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied Palestinian territories scoffed at these statements, calling them "brash lies".

"Israel is trying to tell the Muslim world that this is a confrontation with Hamas. This is a lie, because Al-Aqsa Mosque belongs to the entire Muslim umma (nation) and Israel is trying to demolish the mosque or at least arrogate part of it in order to build a temple for Jews," said Sheikh Raed Salah, head of the Islamic Movement in Israel.

Salah was arrested briefly last week on charges of "incitement against the state" and of "making contacts with a terrorist organisation" — an allusion to Hamas. Both Salah and his deputy, Sheikh Kamal Khatib, have also been barred from entering Jerusalem for 30 days. Israel has accused Salah and other Muslim leaders of carrying out "subversive activities" and "orchestrating" claims about an Israeli conspiracy against Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The restoration of calm at Al-Aqsa Mosque seems to vindicate the view of Muslim leaders that the main source of tension was Jewish provocations, particularly the repeated attempts by messianic Jewish fanatics to enter the mosque — not as ordinary tourists, but as provocateurs and troublemakers. Sheikh Ikrema Sabri, a chief imam and preacher at Al-Aqsa Mosque, said Muslims in Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine would never stop resisting and protesting efforts by Jewish intruders to establish a foothold or gain "prayer rights" at the Muslim shrine.

The current relative calm is unlikely to last for long, however, given the determination of messianic Jewish groups that are bent on demolishing Islamic holy places in Jerusalem in order to build a Jewish temple on their ruins. Some of these groups, such as the Temple of Faithful, believe that Jews won't attain redemption until Al-Aqsa Mosque is destroyed and a Jewish temple is erected in its place. According to extremist Jewish doctrine, the ensuing violence that would see the death of a huge number of people would expedite the appearance of a Jewish Messiah, or Redeemer, who would bring about salvation for Jews and rule the world from Jerusalem.

Messianic Jewish groups, which exert a lot of influence on the Israeli government and parliament, and even the army, seem to show little deference to any government decision to maintain status quo ante arrangements at Al-Aqsa Mosque esplanade where the Muslim Waqf (religious endowments authority) has been managing the holy site since 1967. A few days ago, a number of Jewish intruders disguised as foreign tourists entered the mosque despite tacit Israeli assurances to the contrary. Similar attempts, coordinated or uncoordinated with the government, are expected in the coming days and weeks.

Moreover, it seems that the current right-wing Israeli government fully identifies with the declared and undeclared goals of the extremists, despite any public stand to the contrary. Indeed, not a single member of the current government has criticised — let alone denounced — the fanatics for their repeated provocations.

This week, Sheikh Salah alluded to Israeli government collusion with messianic fanatics. He said nothing short of a full liberation of Al-Aqsa Mosque from the Israeli occupation would shield the Muslim sanctuary from harm. "The Israeli government is the prime mover of all plots against Al-Aqsa Mosque. The important thing is not what they say to the media, but what they do at, around and especially beneath Al-Aqsa Mosque."

            –Famed British Historian Professor Arnold Toynbee

I wholeheartedly agree with Professor Vasillopulos's assessment on the hypocrisy, double standards and marked subjugation of U.S. foreign policy vis à vis Palestine to Israel's interests and its powerful American lobbies who have unprecedented influence on Congress. Israel's very creation arose out of Western colonialism, first the British who had the audacity to gift a land they did not own, a land under Ottoman rule, to European Jews out of domestic political expediency, followed by America, a government ruled by corporations and special interests, in this case the powerful Jewish lobby.  Israel's ethnic cleansing of 750,000 Palestinians from their land in 1948 – 1949, its total destruction of 450 Palestinian villages, including the destruction of mosques and churches, was simply accepted by western colonial powers as a necessary consequence of an Arab military onslaught on the small Jewish state, something that was a proven blatant lie as documented by Israel’s own documents. Tragically Israel’s brilliant propaganda, media campaigns and effective political public relations to indoctrinate the Western population were successful. The Arabs were too incompetent to even understand the use and power of such instruments.    Israel’s prowess to influence and determine Western public opinion has allowed it to defy all international agreements, laws, U.N. Resolutions, world opinion, even U.S. policy as evidenced by Obama’s forced backtracking on his initial call for Israel’s freezing illegal settlements.   

Obama’s silence on the Goldstone Report once again shows who runs U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

While Israel can tell the world “No”, the Arabs sadly don’t even know the word exists.   

In 1949 President Truman was so outraged (the man responsible for Israel's creation) by the mass expulsion of Palestinian refugees he convened the Lausanne Conference in Switzerland to pressure Israel to stop its ethnic cleansing and accept UN Resolutions 181 (Partition of Palestine) and 194 (right of return of Palestinian refugees).  

Israel rejected Truman's proposal while the Arabs accepted it prompting his envoy Ambassador Mark Etheridge to write Truman: " Since we gave Israel birth we are blamed for her belligerence and her arrogance and for the cold-bloodedness of her attitude toward refugees…Israel must accept responsibility….her attitude toward refugees is morally reprehensible….Her position as conqueror demanding more does not make for peace.”

Since then many U.S. politicians have quietly expressed their anger and frustration at Israel's continued Zionist expansionism in the Holy Land, but none have ever had the courage to stand up to this little nation while in office that manipulates the most powerful nation on earth to pay and die for Israel's wars from Lebanon, to Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, the Gulf, Afghanistan, and now the deja vu campaign to "bomb, bomb, bomb" Iran.

Yet while we as Arabs and Muslims can reiterate the historical facts regarding the rogue nation of Israel and its chosen method of existence that wholly depends on wars, assassinations, terrorism, mass imprisonment and the wholesale starving siege of Gaza, we should be honest with ourselves and proclaim that Arab political and economic incompetence, paralysis, hypocrisy, backbiting, and self sabotage regarding Palestine is the other side of the coin to decades of Palestinian suffering. Fifty-seven Muslim nations, 1.6 Billion Muslims, 50% of the world's oil wealth, 60% of its gas wealth, trillions of dollars of investment in Western governments and institutions, are shamefully paralyzed to face one small nation of 6 million Jews.  Western politics revolves around money, media manipulation, myths, lies and propaganda, something Arabs are well accustomed to in their own nations.

There is no true political, economic, social or media presence for Arabs and Muslims in America. They are silent, fearful, uneducated and inexperienced in living and dealing with America's culture, tend to herd themselves by ethnic group and fight whether there should be a barrier between men and women in the mosques, or whether Muslim men and women can gather for a lecture, yet allow such women to mingle, work, and go to school with Non-Muslims.

I strongly believe that we as Muslims must blame ourselves for our state of affairs and avoid the usual scapegoating that "powerful forces" such as Israel, the E.U., and America hinder our progress or our justified right to reclaim our lands and resources. Our "intellectuals" have adopted and imitated the Western mantra that progress can only come if one abandons religion. Rather than Islam being the problem, Muslims are the problem and Islam is the solution.

That is why as a Muslim I am deeply proud of the Turkish government and the Turkish people for being the sole Muslim nation to publicly repudiate Israel on its slaughter in Gaza. While Arab leaders convene "summits" on Palestine their private agenda is to attack Hamas and Hezbollah, the only two resistance parties in the entire MidEast against Israel. The shame and betrayal of Mahmoud Abbas to withdraw consideration of the Goldstone Report is another hallmark that even Arabs don't value Arab blood as long as their chairs are protected.

Muslim wealth is bailing out Western economies and not benefiting the current confused Muslim generation lost between little faith and overwhelming American cultural influence.  Why is our wealth not building schools, hospitals, better roads, working on finding precious water, creating manufacturing jobs, building sewage plants, collecting garbage and using the media to improve our knowledge of Islam, its morals, and goodly behavior.  We build towers, buy luxurious toys such as planes, cars and camels, while neglecting the betterment of human lives.    Arab Satellite channels open their programs with readings from the Quran only to follow up with a music video of barely dressed women gyrating their bodies to the most obnoxious simplistic drum beat.

Each of us as Muslims is responsible for learning, implementing, and protecting our faith. Each of us is responsible for ourselves, our families, our neighbors, community, nation, and Ummah. Our silent acceptance of our corrupt till death do we part rulers has led to our failed societies. 

We need a renaissance of intellect, of education, scientific and analytical and skills, in fact, a rebirth of a highly motivated Ummah that rejects the status quo and begins the journey to a faith based enlightenment that can only result in our victory against our own demoralizing failures and the ultimate victory of salvation in the hereafter.

I share the pessimism of Muslims around the world that we're not ripe for a personal and nationalistic revolution, but what's the alternative? Should Muslim blood saturate the earth to replace our stolen oil before we awaken to our demise?

Either we change, die, or die trying.

Mary Rizzo: Could you briefly tell us about the work you do? 

Khalid Amayreh: I am a journalist who since time immemorial has found himself, first as a human being, and second as a journalist, right in the middle of the fray of the enduring Palestinian plight. For example, I remember I knew all the details of Israeli commando operations and massacres when I was merely 7 years old. 

When I went to the US in 1976, I wanted to study Computer Science, then Business Administration. However, as I saw Zionist circles on campus at the University of Oklahoma try somewhat successfully to change the black into white and the big lie into a virtual truth, I decided to study journalism. 

Which I did.  Now, I am fully-engaged in my work, writing nearly daily columns for a host of media outlets on three continents. Eventually, the internet became my ultimate domain because what I do say, and I always have much to say, is not particularly liked by the politically-correct media. Hence, I can say that in a certain sense, the internet has substantially freed us from the traditional media colonialism. 

I am quite satisfied with what I have been doing. My articles are published and posted around the world in several languages, including Arabic, English, French, Spanish and other European languages. Many of my articles are posted on my website. It is www.xpis.ps.   

MR: You have in the past several years faced some difficult situations. Two of these that we are aware of are your denial of a visa to leave the West Bank for conferences in Europe and the other was your arrest and brief detention. Both of these were the doing of the Palestinian Authority. Why do you believe they have put these restrictions on you? 

KA: Yes, my success as a journalist, especially my ability to communicate the Palestinian narrative to Western audiences drew negative reactions from the Israeli security authorities. You know the Shin Beth, Israel’s chief domestic security agency, controls nearly every aspect of our life despite the existence of the Palestinian Authority. Hence, the Shin Beth constantly sought to persecute and harass me in the hope that I would tone down my outspoken criticism of the Israeli occupation and its often barbaric treatment of our people. In this context, they refused to grant me a press card, they refused to allow me access to Jerusalem. And finally, they imposed a harsh travel ban on me. In fact, I am still barred from leaving the West Bank. This is the behaviour of a country that claims to be a democracy.

As to the PA, it is very much slave of Israel. This is why I am also constantly harassed by the PA security apparatus. The PA doesn’t like my writings, and seeing that neither carrot nor stick would stop me, they often incarcerate me for a short period until a media outcry ensued in which case they would release me, hoping that next time I would exercise self-restraint, or more correctly self-censorship.  

MR: You live in one of the areas where settlers have made any kind of co-existence in the same territory as the indigenous population impossible. In your view is the Hebron experience a typical one that would be reproduced whenever there would be closer contact between Jews and Palestinians, or is it in some way different? 

KA: The settlers are mostly genocidal fanatics who would go to any extent, including cold-blooded murder, to reach their goals. And their goals can be summarized in one phrase, and that is the annihilation of the Palestinian people. 

I’ve met numerous settlers, and from my conversations with them, I can say that most of these people represent the Nazis of our time. What else can one say of a people who tell you that you either agree to be enslaved by them or you will be deported and expelled from your own country? And if you said ‘NO’, then you would have to be physically exterminated.  These people are really depraved and sick. They would quote strange quotations from a host of religious books to justify their genocidal ideology. The brutal ugliness of their mentality has no limits.

What is more dangerous is that they don’t stop at the theoretical and ideological levels. They often translate their venomous and virulent views into cold-blooded murder of innocent Palestinians.  And in most cases, the pro-settler Israeli justice system turns a blind eye to their murderous behaviour and lets them get away with impunity.

MR: You often refer to the actions of today’s Israelis as being similar to those of the Nazis, and you present in detail many of these crimes and abuses against especially unarmed civilians that indeed are strikingly similar. Do you believe there is a danger or risk in the use of this analogy?

KA: Well, this is a very good question. First of all, we have to remember that the holocaust didn’t start with Auschwitz or Bergen Belsen and other concentration camps. It started much earlier with comparatively innocuous things like the enactment of anti-Jewish laws in the early 1930s. Earlier, there was Hitler’s infamous book, Mein Kampf. Eventually there was the Kristalnacht, and we know the rest of the story.

Today, any serious observer scrutinizing the collective psychology and behaviour of the Israeli Jewish society would most certainly find many serious similarities between the Jewish state and the Third Reich. In Germany, they had the master race mantra, here in Israel they have the chosen people mantra.

In Germany they had the expansionistic concept known as Lebensraum; and here in Israel they have the settlement scheme. In Germany, they had the racist classification of people into Übermenschen and Untermenschen, while here in Israel almost everything is defined through the prism of being  either Jewish or Goy. The list goes on and on.  Do you know that there are rabbis in Israel who openly teach that non-Jews are animals and whom the Almighty created in a human shape only in deference to Jews. I am not speaking about marginal or obscure figures. I am speaking about rabbis with thousands of followers who are backed by powerful political parties represented in the government and the Knesset.

Ask any average settler how he or she views Palestinians or non-Jews in general, and they will tell you that they are animals and that their lives have absolutely no sanctity.

In short, the Zionist-Nazi analogy is more than legitimate. It is an objective reality.

MR:  Is it possible that there is the danger of a new Palestinian genocide comparable to that of ’48 with the discussions of “population transfer” of the Palestinians who live in Israel that are heard by several political movements that are in power in Israel, or is this population somehow protected and facing more danger are those in the Occupied Palestinian Territories?

KA: The answer is definitely yes. I am saying so because Palestinians have always relied for their very survival on the good will of the international community and world public opinion. Hence, should the world community go into a brief slumber, I have no doubt that Israel would seize the opportunity and embark on the unthinkable.

More to the point, we must view the criminal Israeli onslaught on the people of Gaza nine months ago as a precedent that could be repeated again and again.

Finally, it is crystal clear that the Israeli Jewish society is drifting menacingly toward fascism. For example, today the very survival of the Benyamin Netanyahu’s government depends to a very large extent on the support of three manifestly racist political parties representing the extreme religious right. These are “Habayt ha’Yahudi,” “Echud Leumi,” and Shas, a formerly moderate Charidi party which has been moving steadily toward religious jingoism.

I am speaking about religious parties that see nothing wrong with the mass murder of innocent people. They always can quote from ancient books to justify their morbid ideology. Also, imagine how the world will look like when these racist groups reach power in Israel and seize control of Israel’s huge nuclear arsenal.

And this is not a matter of “if” but rather a matter of “when” it will happen, because it is only a matter of time before the fanatics of Gush Emunim and other Judeo-Nazi elements reach power in Israel. 

MR: Palestinians in Israel comprise twenty percent of the official population. Why is it that, after Azmi Bishara, whose fate is now in exile, and a very few others, this large sector of population is under-represented in their parliament? Would it not be helpful to have more representation? 

KA: The Arab community in Israel is under-represented because of a host of factors. But the main factor is that the Israeli system is designed to keep the Arab community marginalized. Today, Israeli leaders from “right” and “left” are increasingly brazenly advocating ultimate ethnic cleansing of Israel’s Arab citizen. Tzipi Livni, the leader of Kadima, said on numerous occasions that Israeli Arabs would have to seek national fulfilment in the future Palestinian state. Her remarks are nothing short of a euphemism for expulsion and ethnic cleansing.

If this is the view of a respected  “liberal,” and “centrist” politician, imagine the kind of attitudes the right with its religious and secular camps would have toward Israel’s Arab citizens.

MR: You have documented many of the acts against the Palestinian people. If you could put things in an order of those that should be resolved before the others, out of this selection, what would your suggestion be and why: the ending of the siege of Gaza, the dismantlement of the checkpoints, the dismantlement of the Wall, international recognition of Hamas as the legitimately elected representatives of the Palestinians and in the 2006 Legislative elections, release of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails, release of Palestinian prisoners from Palestinian jails, a freeze on settler expansion in the West Bank and Jerusalem?

KA: I think all aspects of the Palestinian plight are inextricably entwined. For example, the internal Palestinian problems stem mainly from the Israeli occupation. It was Israel after all which took draconian measures against our people following the 2006 elections when Hamas won the polls. This eventually led to the contention between Fatah and Hamas which culminated in the ousting by Hamas of Fatah militias from Gaza following a failed coup attempt against the elected government by Fatah forces backed and armed by the United States.

But, it is true, we just can’t solve and resolve all the problems facing our people in one fell swoop.  The situation in Gaza remains very harsh and the survival of our people there is imputed first and foremost to their tenacity, resilience and steadfastness, not Israeli magnanimity.

The Palestinian prisoner issue is also a nagging nightmare that is constantly haunting our people. We are talking about nearly 10,000 prisoners many of whom are held without charge or trial because of their non-violent opposition to the Israeli occupation. Their continued detention is undoubtedly a repulsive reflection of the brutal ugliness of the Zionist mentality.

MR: Do you believe that the Palestinians should aim at establishing a new popular uprising, or should they wait and see if the Palestinian Authority can find a unity government or bring an end to Israeli occupation by themselves.

KA: Normally, uprisings, especially in the Palestinian context, are not planned. They just happen when the powder keg reaches the boiling point. But I tend to accept the hypothesis that another Intifada is only a matter of time, given the unmitigated occupation and repression as well as the scandalous failure of the peace process.

As to forming a new unity government, it is really difficult to accord this subject a lot of importance. After all, what is the point of forming a government that has no sovereignty and is subject to the draconian restrictions of the Israeli occupation?

MR: Do you hold out hope that the Obama Administration can bring about at least a bit of improvement for Palestinians, or is it equally subject to the Israel Lobby? 

KA: No, not any longer. Until recently, I thought, probably naively, that Obama might prove himself to be a man of his word. However, his utter failure to stand up to the arrogant Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has exposed the American president as just another functionary of the establishment.

Moreover, what many in the West doesn’t realize is that for Israel to give up the spoils of the 1967 war, the Jewish state would have to be forced, even physically, to do so.

However, in light of Obama’s obsequious discourse vis-à-vis Netanyahu, especially with regard to the settlement issue, it is increasingly obvious that the US leader is not mentally or politically capable of doing what it takes to force Israel to end the 42-year-old occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.

The task of forcing Israel to end the hateful occupation would require a radical transformation, even a revolution, in American political thinking. And I just don’t see this happening in the foreseeable future.

MR: Why, in your view, have the Palestinian Islamist parties, especially Hamas, not had the strong support of the Ikhwan in other Arab nations, especially following the rejectionist stance of the so-called International Community following the democratic elections? Is it because the project of Hamas has a stronger nationalist nature to it, or might there be other reasons that you have reflected upon?

KA: I think they do as evidenced in the huge demonstrations organized by Islamic organizations throughout the Muslim world during the Israeli blitz against the Gaza Strip. However, we have to keep in mind that most Islamic parties and organizations are based in despotic and authoritarian states. Hence, the often tight restrictions imposed on Islamist activism do have a detrimental impact on the extent to which Islamists can render tangible material support to Hamas.

But the Islamists are giving extremely viable financial support to Palestinian Islamists without which Hamas would have had a much harder time facing international sanctions.

We also have to remember that Hamas is mainly an asset, not a liability, for Islamic activism around the world, which means that support for Hamas by Islamic groups in the Arab-Muslim world is not exactly altruistic in nature but is also motivated by a certain degree of expediency. 

MR: The division of the Palestinian people along many lines, while an internal problem, does prevent more firm opposition to the military occupation of Palestine. Do you think there is a way to overcome the divisions, or are they destined to increase with the introduction of measures such as Dayton’s “Security” forces in the West Bank, for example?

KA: Well, in the final analysis, Palestinian divisions are a symptom of the Israeli occupation. They are not a home-grown malady but rather a foreign-induced phenomenon sustained through political and economic manipulation of certain objective Palestinian needs. After all, we are very much a prisoner population who have been relentlessly used by the Israelis as a field of experiment for over 40 years.

I believe that the ultimate raison d’être of the “Dayton forces” is to crush public opposition to any prospective “peace” deal that would be imposed on the Palestinian people.  Needless to say, such a deal would be tantamount to a real liquidation of the Palestinian cause. However, I really doubt whether these forces would succeed in their mission in the long run.

The Palestinian cause is simply so deeply rooted in the collective conscience and psyche of our people, so much that it is inconceivable that these kids would succeed in morphing our people into submission. That would be anti-historical antithetical to the nature of things in Palestine.

MR: Recently, the first group of Palestinian refugees from the Al-Tanaf, Al-Waleed and Al-Hol refugee camps in Iraq have been “settled” in the USA. What do you think of this kind of programme?

KA: Naturally, we are very suspicious about any resettlement of Palestinian refugees anywhere in the world. But I am certain about one thing, namely that the refugee plight and the right of return will continue to define the Palestinian question.

I am saying so because the refugee problem is the Palestinian problem.

MR: What kind of personal experiences does the average Palestinian living in the West Bank have with the Israelis?

KA: Well, it is safe to say that the mental landscape of every Palestinian man, woman and child is overwhelmed with the Israeli nightmare. Ours is a landscape shaped by home demolitions, land seizure, evil roadblocks and checkpoints manned by trigger-happy soldiers, humiliating inhuman treatment, cruelty, terror and unrelenting criminality. Ours is a real holocaust minus the gas chambers.  We are after all the longest suffering people on earth, and we continue to suffer on a daily basis.

Today in every junior high school in America, students read Anne Frank, while in every high school Elie Wiesel’s ‘Night’ is requisite reading. This is the man who says rather brazenly that he readily identifies with Israeli crimes and that he couldn’t bring himself to say bad things about Israel. 

The victims of the first Kristalnacht enjoy the world’s approbation and sympathy, while at the same time having succeeded in demonizing an entire people for whom Kristalnacht still remains a night without end.  

MR:  It seems that access to information about the reality of Palestine, especially of the hardships brought on by the war, the checkpoints and the blockade of Gaza, should enlighten the public that there is a humanitarian emergency. What, in your view, is preventing the international community and the Arab nations from expressing moral outrage and demanding their leaders to hold Israel accountable for these situations? 

KA: I think the Arab masses would want to help the Palestinians, and they are actually helping. However, for most Arabs helping the Palestinians, especially Hamas, involves a certain risk as most regimes view identification with Hamas as connoting opposition to the regimes itself. This is true in American-allied states such as Egypt and Jordan.

As to people around the world, I think the overall outlook is positive. I think a growing number of people are now willing to take to the streets to voice their solidarity with our people. But what we need to do is to keep up the good work and try as hard as possible to isolate the evil entity.

MR: Do you believe that there is a great deal of fear in the Palestinian people which prevents them from voicing denouncements of the corruptions of the PA and the PLO before it? Or could some of this be because the allocation of funds is filtered through these organs and people need to make a living?

KA: Of course there is. The Palestinian Authority is effectively a police state without a state, and the corrupt people and their supporters, friends and cronies occupy powerful positions in the PA hierarchy. Take for example the millions of dollars arrogated by Yasser Arafat’s widow, Suha. It is widely believed that the former “First Lady”! received millions of dollars from the PLO as part of a financial settlement which very few Palestinians know about. As to the justice system, it is very much subservient to the political level and the security apparatus. This is how the donor countries, e.g. the US, are shaping Palestinian “democracy.” 

MR: What can the exiled or Diaspora Palestinian community do for their brothers and sisters in Palestine?

KA: Palestinians in the Diaspora have a grave responsibility to carry out. They should constantly communicate our plight to the world, they should always be eloquent spokespersons for their people and their cause. But in order to be successful and effective they have to organize themselves and try to enlist local support for Palestinian grievances in their respective places of residence. My ultimate advice to Palestinian expatriates is: make as many friends as possible for our just cause. And don’t allow yourselves to be diverted from the central goal, and that is to create and effect pressure on the Zionist regime.

And don’t get yourselves involved in any activities that might be misconstrued as “anti-Semitic.”  Judaism is not our enemy.  

MR: What can “internationals” do to help?

KA: “Internationals” and other solidarity activists have a hugely important job to do. They are witnesses to what Satanic Zionism has been doing to the Palestinians. Israel would want to gang up on us while the eyes of the world are shut. It is very much like the way a murderer or a thief behaves. They don’t want to be seen committing their crimes.

In fact, I can safely claim that had it not been for these courageous men and women, the level of Israeli terror against the Palestinians could have been much worse.

Therefore, I would like to salute each and every one of these heroes who have been sacrificing their time, energy and careers in protecting an unprotected people. You are the good Samaritans of our time.  So come here, bring your friends, and don’t forget your cameras. May God bless you all.

MR: You are often considered to be especially sensitive to and close to the positions of the Islamist parties, and very often, there are more than a few false representations of them, including for example that Hamas had help from Israel in its foundation, with some even saying Mossad was involved, that they won the elections only because they represented a “protest” vote, and more crucially, that their operations are not resistance, but are rather terrorist acts. Evidence points away from all of these positions, yet they are part of an interpretation trend as much in “the left” as for “moderates” and “neo-cons”. Why do you think that despite evidence, for instance, Hamas always maintained their unilateral truces, while Israel engaged in targeted assassinations of high-ranking leaders of Hamas, people across the board are so quick to accept these false representations as legitimate?

KA: I am not affiliated with any political group. This is because I had long realized that affiliation with an ideological or political party would interfere with and be detrimental to my work as a journalist. Besides, the little philosopher inside me always tells me to be constantly free-minded.

I remember that poet who described fanatical adherence to a political party. He said: I always voted at my party’s call, and never thought for myself at all.

Having said that, I also realize that it is imperative that people must support just causes and speak up the truth even in the presence of power. This is why it is paramount for my mental and psychological health that I must stand against such vices as oppression, arrogance, immorality, mendacity, selfishness, hypocrisy, rapacity and racism. I know it is not easy to swim against the current. However, it is also true that silence or indifference or inaction in the face of evil is morally disastrous in the long run. We mortals live a few decades in this life. It is essential therefore that we lead a dignified life shaped by our concerns for freedom and justice and sublime human spirit.

As to Hamas being helped by Israel, I think this is a form of disinformation by the anti-Islamist camp aimed first and foremost at besmirching Hamas.

The way Hamas has been behaving and acting since its foundation more than 20 years ago should be a clarion refutation of all these lies and insinuations.

This is not to say though that Israel has not tried and is not trying to pit Palestinians against each other. But this is not the same as saying that Hamas was created by Israel or that its growth was facilitated by the Israelis.

After all, Islamic fundamentalist groups are a global phenomenon and by no means confined to occupied Palestine.

MR: What do you think the final status might be in terms of statehood and what do you foresee as a timetable for this?

KA: It is very difficult to figure out how and when this conflict will end. What is clear though is that it won’t come to an end in the foreseeable future. I am convinced that the increasingly-religious conflict will continue for several more decades. However, in order for the conflict to reach an exhaustive conclusion, Zionism would have to disappear.

A final point, I strongly believe that time is not working in Israel’s favour as Israel is going to find it increasingly difficult to live normally in a hostile environment. Fifty years from now, Israel will be surrounded by more than 700 million Arabs and Muslims. And Jews themselves would be a small and dwindling minority in mandatory Palestine.

And like Albert Camus said “in world where everything can be denied, there are forces undeniable, and on earth where nothing is sure, we have our certainty.” And I think the dismantlement of Zionism is a historical certainty.

Maybe it’s because I’m a numbers guy
Because if I had a dollar for every time an Iraqi died since 2003 
I’d be a millionaire

And don’t get me wrong
Sometimes I don’t know who I hate more
The governments in the West 
Or the politicians in the East
Who sell their souls quicker than the oil they export
Straw men who use Palestine as a tool to line their pockets
And don’t give a nickel to their people
Quisling governments
Who stitch mouths shut for a check from Washington and AIPAC
How can you be their prototypical anti-Semite
If you are signing peace accords to oppress your own people?

And then Orientalists and idiots talk about how 
We can’t have democracy in the Middle East 
Because of what happened in Gaza
A Hamas boogyman wrapped in democratic elections 
Rahm Emanuel wants to educate me and my people about democracy gone wrong
Why doesn’t he try implementing one in Israel first?
Instead of bowing down to terrorists like his father and the IDF
Lauding a third rate, racist, European society that’s imploding quicker
Than its moral standing in the world
Enlightened like 1950s Afrikaners and slave traders
Just because the house is beautiful
Doesn’t mean the bones you built it on have fully decomposed

The Israeli left is about as alive as Ariel Sharon
I’m sick and tired of asking for permission to resist
From antiquated leftists and progressives
Who care more about keeping it Kosher than moving things forward
I put down my pen and waving fist to resist with college kids and Palestinians
Boycott and divest!
Because who cares about preserving a living when governments are killing civilians
Complicity by silence and reserve units bombing Gaza
Your academics and scholars, theater groups and practitioners, are part of the problem

And if logic doesn’t fit into your long term plan of rejecting
My right to return, I’m sorry
Maybe one day you’ll return to reality
Where my people have babies quicker 
Than Zionists can concoct Jordanian options 

I don’t want your sympathy or introspective confessions
Won’t sit on my hands till they loose oxygen
Like the people of Balata and Rafah
Vote for Barack Obama
And pretend that his 22 day silence was golden
While emaciated children starved to death
Surrounded by their parent’s corpses

This can’t be America the Beautiful
A criminal with a few positive attributes
Doesn’t alleviate genocide
Bombing Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq
Into oblivion doesn’t make you historic
It makes you as blind and bloodthirsty 
As the white men that came before you
Apathetic hipsters now excited about a president
Who broke history, but not poverty, occupation, or corporate interests

I’d rather proudly walk through the graveyard of peace accords 
And failed dialogue sessions
Than see my people just as occupied or third class citizens
We are the gavel that will slam down like a verdict
We are not waiting for Israel or America or the Supreme Court to approve it
We’ll boycott Lev Leviev, Caterpillar and your apartheid companies
We’re taking back the right of return and the keys to a country 
Because we never asked you to go back to Europe or sit in open air prisons
I’m not asking for your advice, I’m explaining the decision
You can stay here, with us, but only as equals
It’s not that you’re Israeli, it’s that you’re wrong
That’s why I fight for my people!

As the month of Ramadan draws to a close, many Palestinians are devoting the last ten days of the holy month to gaining more  spiritual enrichment through I’tikaf or uninterrupted spiritual engagement. 

Many people are going for I’tikaf this year, motivated by a desire to gain Allah’s blessing and also encouraged by a relative relaxation of the normally harsh Israeli restrictions on the entry of Palestinians to al-Quds. 

The Israeli occupation authorities this year allowed men over 50 and women over 45 to enter Jerusalem on Fridays. However, worshippers are still subjected to meticulous and often humiliating searches.  

Palestinian worshippers on their way to Jerusalem at a checkpoint near Bethlehem 

This, however, seems to have little bearing on the number of Muslims wanting to access the Haram al Sharif, or Noble Sanctuary, of Jerusalem. 

Wakf officials estimate that an average of 200,000-250-000 Muslims prayed at the al-Aqsa esplanade every Friday. The number is expected to rise significantly on the last Friday of Ramadan, known in local folklore as “al Juma’a al Yatima” (the lone Friday)

According to Muslim traditions, reward for a single raka’a (a ritual posturing) at the Aqsa Mosque is multiplied 500 times. In Ramadan, the heavenly reward is multiplied 70 times. 

Worshippers, withdrawing from worldly preoccupations, spend many hours reading the Quran, the literal words of God,  making ritual prayers, and beseeching the Almighty for spiritual grace and blessing.  

Islamic charities catering for the Mosque and the worshipers provide thousands of meals for the sunset meals marking the end of the day’s fast. 

The charities also bring in worshippers who can’t afford the expenses of the trip. 

Prior to sunset, the faithful sit down awaiting the Athan or call for prayer, marking the end of another fast’s day.  

Allah is the most great,  

I bear witness that there is no god but Allah.  

I bear witness that Muhammed is the Messenger of God.  

Come to prayer  

Come to Prosperity  

Allah is the Most Great.  

There is only one God   

  Preparing for the evening meal at the Aqsa Mosque 

As the timeless words, which include Islam’s articles of faith, are chanted through loudspeakers, the fasters take a few dates and a glass of water before performing the Maghrib (sunset) prayer in congregation. The prayers lasts for only 5-7 minutes, and each part begins with the recitation of Suratul Fatiha, or Opening chapter of the Quran:

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.  

Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the universe;  

 Most Gracious, Most Merciful;  

 Master of the Day of Judgment;  

Thee do we worship, and Thy aid we seek;  

 Show us the straight way;  

 The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace;  

Not those targeted by thy wrath, nor those who go astray.  

Following the usually delicious meal, many people rest for an hour or so, awaiting the Tarawih prayers, which last for an hour during which a portion of the Quran’s 30 portions  is recited. The entire Quran is recited in Tarawih prayer during the holy month.  

Laylatul Qadr  

The Ramadan spiritual season reaches its climax with Laylatul Qadr, translated as “the Night of Power,” or “Night of Destiny.” 

This is the night during which the Almighty sent down the Quran  to the lower heaven, before revealing it to the Prophet Muhammed verse-by-verse through the archangel Gabriel. 

In the Quran,  Laylatul Qadr is accentuated as an occasion of unmatched spiritual importance.  

We have indeed revealed this (the Quran) in the Night of Power:  

And what will explain to thee what the night of power is?  

The Night of Power is better than a thousand months.  

Therein come down the angels and the Spirit, by Allah’s permission, on every errand:  

Peace!…This until the rise of dawn!  

It is generally assumed it occurs on the 27th night of the holy month and Muslims are strongly recommended to spend the night in prayer, contemplation and supplication. 

This is exactly what tens of thousands of Palestinians do. And as always, it is expected that many more thousands of people will be heading for al-Masjidul Aqsa to spend the night there in prayer and reflection. 

Catering for the hundreds of thousands of worshippers are several organizations, including al-Aqsa Association for Waqf and Islamic Heritage, headed by Sheikh Ra’ed Salah, the prominent Palestinian Islamic leader and founder of the Islamic movement in Israel. 

According to the organization’s spokesperson, Mahmoud Abu Atta, more than 100,000 meals have been donated through the charitable group by donors, mostly from the 1.5 million-strong Arab community across the Green Line ( Israel ). 

Other donors, including the government of the United Arab Emirates, have also donated money covering hundreds of thousands of meals at al Masjidul Aqsa. 

In addition, thousands of people are bussed to Jerusalem from all over occupied Palestine nearly free of charge in order to keep the place occupied. 

Sheikh Ikrema Sabri, one of the chief khatibs (preachers) at the Aqsa Mosque lauded the “impressive influx” of Muslims to Islam’s third holiest place. 

“Al hamdulillah (praise be to Allah), this is an important message to the Zionist occupiers of our country, that Muslims will never ever abandon this place of paramount sanctity,  and that they will never allow those coveting  this place and conspiring  to destroy it to attain their sick goals.” 

Sabri’s words are not only received well by the huge multitude but are also internalized as is evidenced by the obviously unmitigated attachment of Palestinians to the place. 

One young man from a village near al-Khalil (Hebron) remarked that without al-Masjidul Aqsa and al-Quds, the entire Palestinian issue loses relevance. 

“Al-Quds is the heart of Palestine, and the Aqsa Mosque is the heart of Jerusalem. Which means that the Mosque is the heart of the heart of Palestine.  Hence, I can’t even imagine that Muslims would even contemplate letting it down. 

“I am not speaking about stones and ancient buildings, I am speaking about the essence of the Islamic Umma’s religious and spiritual existence. Hence, I can’t even imagine how the Muslim Umma can live without al-Quds and al-Masjidul Aqsa.  

“Can a person live without his heart?”

source: www.xpis.ps; Palestinian Information Center

A drawing by Nour Naser from Gaza

A child from Gaza sent us this drawing after the Israeli attack on Gaza. The barbed wire is evident in the drawing that talks of the siege on the city, and the sky is almost blocked by the Israeli planes that are raining on them lots of missiles and fire, while Palestine is bleeding exactly like the injured children who are dying. The faces of the dying children are full of sadness and sorrow, their home has been bombed, yet the Israeli soldier is still firing at them and at the ambulance that came to their rescue.
A picture or a drawing speaks better than a thousand words can.

Romi Elnagar: Art therapy enables children to deal in nonverbal ways with traumatic events in their lives.

Many who work with children who have experienced traumatic events, such as child psychologists, believe it is crucial for children to express their feelings about those events if they are to recover from their suffering.  Art is a way for children to communicate the full range of emotions, and one of the most important ways to express feelings of anger, pain and fear.  Child psychologists have found that art therapy works to enable children to show in nonverbal ways what they have experienced and to deal with traumatic events in their lives.

For example, the organization Darkness to Light, which deals with child sexual abuse, uses art therapy in its work, and says, "Anyone who has experienced psychological trauma may have difficulty expressing their experience directly or effectively in words…Art is a non-threatening way to visually communicate anything that is too painful to put into words." (1)

People working with child survivors of the horrendous civil war in Sierra Leone also used art as part of the healing process.  Children can show in pictures events that are too traumatic to be even brought to the surface of consciousness.  Often, it is only when a child begins to draw that he can even remember what he has suffered, as painful events are brought to consciousness in the pictures he makes.  Elsewhere in Africa, children's drawings of torture, rape and murder have been so detailed and so powerful that they have been used to bring a case in the International Criminal Court against janjaweed groups in Darfur.

I am more concerned, however, with helping children to deal with and overcome their terrible experiences through their art, and in particular, those children who have suffered the devastating and brutal Israeli Occupation of Palestine.

There are some organizations and individuals working on the West Bank and Gaza to help children overcome the traumas caused by seeing the helplessness of parents and caretakers in the face of vicious genocidal oppression, the hopelessness of poverty, starvation and incarceration in Gaza, which has been called the largest open-air prison on the planet and the brutality of daily beatings, violence and murder.  While art therapy cannot be expected to right these wrongs, it may help to make young victims able to achieve a humanity that their oppressors can only envy, if they were even able to comprehend it.

Giving these children in the Occupied Territories and Gaza the tools to show what they have witnessed furthermore enables adults in their lives to understand and to validate their experiences.  Artistic expression can nurture dignity and self-respect when individuals feel powerless in the face of oppression and violence.  Helping children to regain a lost sense of safety and peace is what art therapy is all about, for Palestinian children and for the young victims of war, genocide and oppression everywhere.

These are the goals of organizations like the Palestinian Child Arts Center in Hebron, and Hope and Play.org (a British organization that works with refugee children worldwide).  Another organization, the Arab Resource Center for Popular Arts in Lebanon (al-Jana)  says, "…the belief of Al-Jana [is] that the challenges that face these so called "marginalized communities" have enriched their existence and as such have contributed to a stronger sense of community building; creative problem solving; and communal initiative and resiliency. Their vibrant culture reflects this resourcefulness and deep human spirit." (2)

In Jenin, a Freedom Theater provides a refuge for children from a world of Israeli raids and harrassment.  The director of the theator, Juliano Khamis, says, "Art cannot free you from your chains, but art can generate and mobilize discourse of freedom.  Art can create debate. Art can expose."  (3)

Most of all, children's art can expose the ordeals they have suffered, and by doing so, pave the way for healing.

(1) http://www.darknesstolight.org/KnowAbout/articles_art_therapy.asp
(2) http://www.al-jana.org/thome.htm
(3) http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/general/2008/09/20089513844349738.html

Romi Elnagar is a Palestinian Mothers’ Network Member, retired elementary schoolteacher with master's in art education

(in the photo: People in Johannesburg March in Solidarity with Palestine.)

I am writing to express my dismay and disappointment with both your attendance at the national conference of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies – a racist organization by any standards – as well as the content of your speech at that forum.

I am a naturalised South African of Palestinian origin. I spent more than five years in  Johannesburg, during which I earned a PhD from the University of Johannesburg and lectured at the-then Vista University in Soweto and Rand Afrikaans University in Johannesburg.

I would like to take issue with the manner in which you express your support for the two-state solution: "It is a solution that fulfils the aspirations of both parties for independent homelands through two states for two peoples, Israel and an independent, adjoining, and viable state of Palestine" (emphasis mine). Allow me, Mr. President, as a resident of Gaza, to express my shock with the fact that – only 8 months after the Gaza massacre, in which 1500 civilians, including 434 children, were brutally murdered – you still believe that there are two symmetrical sides. You even call it the "Israeli-Palestinian conflict!" Was that your belief in the 1970's and 80's; that there were "two-sides" to the South African "conflict"? Were there two equal parties, namely White and Black, with equal claim to the land and equal historical responsibility for the-then status quo? No doubt, this sounds like a bizarre interpretation of South African history and one which we Palestinians find equally astounding when applied to our history and our reality today.

Mr. President, these words of yours are even more disturbing, given your own involvement in the commendable struggle against the brutal, anti-human apartheid system and the notion of "independent homelands" which were based on the separation of human beings. Your struggle as Black South Africans, was morally superior to apartheid because it was inclusive where apartheid focused on separation; it was embracing where apartheid focused on division; it was life-affirming where apartheid was violent and murderous.

The South African anti-apartheid goal, adopted by anti-apartheid activists all around the world was unequivocal: the end of the racist system and ideology of apartheid. There could be no toenadering (rapprochement) with apartheid ideologues; no creation of homelands and puppet leaders: the system had to be dismantled in its entirety. Many South Africans supported by a sustained global anti-apartheid campaign, sacrificed their lives to bring down the Bantustansan euphemistically, called independent homelands by the apartheid regime.  Mr. President, Steve Biko, Oliver Tambo, Chris Hani, the Mxenges, the Slovosac to mention but a few anti-apartheid heroes must have listened to the speech to the JBD and wondered what happened to the universal values and human rights espoused by the ANC.

Comrade Jacob (if I may),

I would like to brief you on the nature of the powerful party, i.e. Israel – with whom your post-apartheid government still, amazingly, maintains exceptional diplomatic and economic ties.

Unlike the new post-apartheid South Africa, which you helped to create, in the State of Israel all human beings are NOT equal. There are fundamental artificially created and selectively rewarded  a level of of citizens in the state. Israel defines itself as a Jewish State. It, therefore, creates a bizarre distinction between "nationality" and "citizenship." Almost 22% of the citizens of Israel are Palestinians who are excluded from such a definition. Israel thus, by definition is NOT the state of its citizens, but rather that of "The Jewish People", most of whom, like the members of JBD whom you were addressing, have no birthright connection to it. The question which begs an answer is what the status of those Palestinian citizens in a Jewish state is? The answer is, as every single – to use a word you must abhor "non-white" South African knows: Racism.

The delegates at the national conference of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies, Jewish, but at the same time, South African citizens "enjoy full rights" in Israel, rights that apartheid Israel denies to us, the indigenous people of this land. They also call us "Israeli Arabs",  "Jerusalem residents", "Arabs of the territories", not to mention the refugees living in the Diaspora, whose mere mention always spoils any party, and whose right to return and compensation is sanctioned by International Law (UNGA resolution 194).

Israeli nationality, therefore, is non-existent. Instead, there is "Jewish Nationality". To make such a bizarre term comprehensible, think of "White Nationality" as opposed to South African. In your speech before the JBD, you state very eloquently that "(m)uch as we are conscious of who we are culturally and otherwise, it must not take away the national identity, as we should be South Africans first".

The International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crimes of Apartheid, Article 2, Part 3, clearly defines apartheid as:

"[a]ny legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, including the right to work… the right to education, the right to leave and return to their country the right to a nationality, the right to freedom of movement and residence."

This definition, in its entirety, clearly applies not only to the Palestinian people residing in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but also those living in Israel itself. This is precisely the reason that the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Situation in the Occupied Territories, a fellow South African, John Dugard, concluded that "the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid appears to be violated by many practices".

If you were born to Palestinian parents living in Israel – a fate you have been spared, Mr. President – you too would be denied the rights of  "Jewish Nationality" and been forced to submit to institutionalized inferiority or choose to resist it.

Furthermore, ICSPCA (quoted above), Article 2, Part 4, makes it crystal clear that:

"[t]he term 'the crime of apartheid',' shall apply to "any measures including legislative measure, designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate measures and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups The expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof.."

Comrade Jacob, the word apartheid never appears once in your speech before the JBD! A listener would never know that you were speaking to an audience who actively support apartheid in another country.

Did you know that racist laws used to forbid Black property ownership in white areas in apartheid South Africa are in force in apartheid Israel? Indigenous Palestinian citizens of Israel are not only prohibited from living on land owned by "Jewish institutions",  but are also not allowed by force of "law" to reside in any areas designated "Jewish" either.

I, myself, Mr. President, a resident of Gaza, like so many Palestinians, have legal title to my parents' land in Israel, but have no "legal" right to it because my parents' property, like that  of millions of other Palestinians', was taken away from us and given over to Jewish ownership. The facts are that Jews owned only 7% of Palestine before 1948; today 93% is considered "state land" and can only be owned by Jews or Israel.

This is only one example, Comrade Jacob, of the nature of the state your government deems "democratic"and "friendly" despite its past strategic ties with apartheid SA. In your presidential campaign, you were quoted singing "kill the Boer!" And yet, in your speech, you "unequivocally" condemn "all forms of violence from whatever quarter", particularly where civilians are targeted!

I fail to understand this contradiction. Is this a reflection of the difference between comrade Jacob and President Zuma? Do you, as president, think that Palestinians have no right to resist their occupation and dispossession? You even equate our resistance with the War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity committed by the Israeli Occupation forces in the West Bank and, in particular, in Gaza.

Is it too much, comrade Jacob, for us, representatives of Palestinian Civil Society organizations to ask your government to sever all diplomatic ties with apartheid  Israel, and endorses not to say lead the growing global Boycott Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel? Is that really too much to ask a democratic post-apartheid South Africa for?

Is this the embodiment of Fanon's prophecy about the "Pitfalls of National (Racial?) Consciousness?"  Is it because the Black Middle class which your government represents and which has taken power from the White Middle class is underdeveloped? Fanon, whom you  must have read while on the run from the apartheid police, says that this national middle class "has practically no economic power, and in any case it is in no way commensurate with the bourgeoisie of the mother country which it hopes to replace." Is this why you are prepared to kowtow to the South African Jewish community which "has been called one of the most tightly-knit in the world, overwhelmingly united in its support for Israel?"

Your government, Mr. President, turns a blind eye to the war crimes of its own citizens against Palestinians. The South African war criminal David Benjamin was allowed to freely move around South Africa and share his tactics of support and defence for the  Israeli Occupation Forces in its recent onslaught against the Gaza Strip with impunity. There are seventy other South Africans that are known to have links with the destruction of the Israeli Occupation Forces who enjoy the same impunity. It is left to individuals and civil society organizations in South Africa to take action against these criminals that should rightly be the task of the government.

Your post-apartheid government, Mr. President, unashamedly, supports the two-state solution: one for Palestinians (Muslim and Christians), and one for Jews. In other words, you support the re-birth of Bantustans, albeit in the Middle East this time. The two-state solution is a racist solution, comrade Jacob. If you did not accept it for yourselves in South Africa, why force it on Palestinians instead of supporting us as we demand the right to our homeland every single inch of it?

Mr. President,

A politics based on narrow-minded, selfish pragmatism was rejected by all anti-apartheid forces, locally and internationally during the years of the anti-apartheid struggle. What was promoted, instead, was adherence to universal principles of equality and dignity.

I truly hope you will reconsider. I know that it is my constitutional right as a citizen of the New South Africa – which I am proud of – to address you directly. I do so to express my deep disagreement and dissatisfaction with your government's Middle East policy and its continued support for the apartheid policies of the Israeli government, given that this support undermines and actively harms the Palestinian struggle for liberation and self-determination.

Sincerely,
Professor Haidar Eid
Gaza, Palestine

- Dr. Haidar Eid is Associate Professor in the Department of English Literature, Al-Aqsa University, Gaza Strip, Palestine. Dr. Eid is a founding member of the One Democratic State Group (ODSG) and a member of Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI).

source: http://www.palestinechronicle.com/ and the author

Barakeh explained that the new ruling of the government against the Nakba was a clear sign of collapse of the Israeli State. He added “we have said that we are Palestinian citizens and our roots belong to our homeland, and not to the establishment of the rule of the zionist Jews ruling in Israel”.

Barakeh announced that on Thursday, October 1 2009, a general strike and a protest against the racist policies of the government of Israel will take place.

He said that the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee in Israel took a decision yesterday, Wednesday, September 2 2009, during their meeting held in Nazareth, to hold a general strike on the first of next month.

In the meeting, held in Nazareth, it was decided that the strike will take place on the same day that the events of October 2000, which left 13 Palestinian-Arabs (Israeli citizens) dead, are commemorated.

The one-day strike will include all sectors in Arab towns. This is a serious move, since it has been a few years since the last general strike in the Arab sector. The last time a general strike was called in the Arab sector was in the year 2005, in protest of the decision to close the cases against police officers suspected of firing gunshots during the events of October 2000.

Barakeh said: two days ago the committee’s Follow-up Committee on Education threatened to declare a rebellion if the singing of the Israeli national anthem and encouragement to serve in national service were imposed in Arab schools.

He explained the decision: “This strike will be a protest call against the racist wave that has been sweeping this country on all levels. On the level of the government and its ministries’ conduct, the denial of the Arabs’ rights – at least in anything to do with October 2000 and the murder in Shfa-amr (Shfaram), where the victims are being brought to court instead of hunting down the perpetrator to see who assisted him”.

“Because of the demolition of houses in Wadi Ara without providing any alternatives to the home-owners, and the serious state the local authorities are in. In the Arab education system, we are not talking about computers, but about school benches.”

According to the leading Communist Party of Israel member, “There are 9,000 classrooms missing, and at the rate of construction of the Education Ministry, it will take another 51 years to close this gap. The racist atmosphere has become a favorite arena for frustrated politicians.

“Anyone seeking fame finds it in racist whims against Arabs – the ministers of infrastructure, education, transportations, whoever. Whether it’s an idea to change traffic signs by Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz, or the spreading of Zionist education and rewarding schools for military and national service recruitments rates by the education minister”. MK Barakeh said that Gideon Sa’ar “must understand that he is the education minister, not the defense minister. This is an irrelevant condition to be placed by an education minister”.

He added, “We decided on this move early and we will work until the day of the strike in every city and village and form public commissions to get the broad public on board.

MK Barakeh warned the government, he said: “I would like to warn the government and its extensions not to aggravate its attitude towards the Arab public, but to internalize the message we wish to convey  that we seek life and equality. Threats against the Arab public from the government and the opposition will be futile and will not help. I hope that a large part of the democratic Jewish public is attentive to our demands and concerns.”

SOURCE: http://www.kawther.info/wpr/2009/09/03/palestinian-arabs-wave-of-racism-in-israel

(photo by Daniela Spano "Nelle Mani di Nonna")
I woke up yesterday morning to find an email from my father, who is on a business trip in Europe at the moment, informing us that my grandmother had a stroke Sunday and passed away.

The last time I heard Bibi's voice was August 8, my wedding day. She called to congratulate us as I walked out of a salon. If there was ever such a thing as "mixed feelings", it's feeling happy to hear from your grandmother on your wedding while cursing the distance and displacement created by your homeland's turmoil. I fought off tears to avoid smudging the bridal make-up I'd just had applied.

Author's note: This article was started and mostly completed in December 2008. Then the Israeli massacre in Gaza intervened, followed by an intensification of organizing efforts for the Batsheva Dance Company protests After that, it gathered dust in the Drafts folder while I moved cross-country. An extended, remix version of "People Not Places" was just dubbed "Greatest Hip-Hop Song for Palestine Ever" by blogger Will on Kabobfest. The text that appears below is substantially the same as the one completed last December.

Recently, I got an e-mail from someone about a Jewish Israeli-American rapper who uses the stage name, "Invincible" (pictured at left). The message was a forward of an e-mail from the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN) promoting Invincible's song, "People Not Places." One of IJAN's points of unity is "Challenging the privileging of Jewish voices in conversations and negotiations about Palestine." It is, at least partly, in this spirit that I proceed.

So, I listened to the song and read the lyrics. My first impression was of appropriation of Palestinian culture even though Invincible is not entirely insensitive to the issue of "Erasing the culture." It is said that imitation is the highest form of flattery but I wonder. There is a harmful, ongoing process of Jewish appropriation of Arab culture–"theft" is what some people call it.

For example, Israeli linguist Ghil'ad Zuckermann says "Modern Hebrew" is "a semi-engineered Semito-European hybrid language." He continues, "The formation of so-called 'Israeli Hebrew' … was facilitated at the end of the nineteenth century by Eliezer Ben-Yehuda … to further the Zionist cause. … it was not until the beginning of the twentieth century that the language was first spoken." Some words for this new language were simply invented but others were adapted or lifted from Arabic.

Consider sabr, the English transliteration of the Arabic name for the prickly pear cactus. As Farsoun and Zacharia, authors of Palestine and the Palestinians, note:

The prickly cactus bush called the sabr became a national symbol because it dots Palestine, marking the areas of destroyed villages. In Palestinian folklore it is known as a symbol of patience and perseverance. Like the enduring cactus, the Palestinians remained steadfast (samedoun or samedin) in their struggle despite great pressures threatening to separate and destroy the people's relationship with their land and cultural heritage.

To many Jews, though, the sabra (Hebrew for the same plant) is a metaphor for the idealized, tough Israeli-born Jew.

On food, Jana Gur writes:

The Zionist enterprise brought to Israel Jews from all over the world, each carrying memories of food they grew up on. At first, the ethos was rejection of everything that reeked of Diaspora and an eager, almost childish, embrace of the Levant. The infatuation with falafel and hummus, staples of Arabic cuisine, started there. … While not a single Israeli will claim that this chickpea and tahini concoction [hummus] is anything but Arabic, the status it has reached in Israel is unprecedented anywhere in the Middle East.

Gur's "not a single Israeli" remark is, perhaps, not so easy to sustain (see here and here). Or see the web site of Sabra Hummus (yes, that "sabra") where hummus is referred to as a "Mediterranean" food. (An Israeli company, the Strauss Group, owns a 50% stake in the company that makes Sabra Hummus and, therefore, Sabra Hummus is being boycotted by people of conscience).

In the aptly titled "Culinary Zionism: an ingathering of the edibles," Eythan-David Volcot-Freeman writes:

When asked to define "Israeli food," Diaspora Jews invariably point to hummus, falafel ["Israel's national snack"], and shawarma. … Presented with the same query, a sabra (native-born Israeli) would likely describe a typical Israeli meal featuring Middle Eastern hummus as a starter … The early halutzim (settlers) found inspiration in their Arab neighbors, whose lifestyle recalled that of the biblical Hebrews. Shawarma, falafel and hummus soon became "sabra" foods.

And here is a passage from "The Jewish Keffyieh":

"I hate the idea" confesses Hasan Nusseibeh, 27, a teacher at Al-Quds University. "They stole our land I guess it’s normal that they steal our Keffiyeh too", comments his little sister Sahar, a student. Their brother Munir reminds that this country dress is part of the culture of the region and that "Israelis are looking for new bonds with this ground". He believes that the "keffiyeh" is only another "effort" they're making in this sense. This young lawyer then enumerates the previous cases of cultural appropriation: traditional dress and embroidery, falafel and hummous. "Soon they'll claim that the Konafa (Arabic pastry) is Jewish!" jokes Ma'moun M. Kassem, responsible for an Italian NGO, who accuses Israelis of being "arrogant" and "thieves".

Pictured at the left is Naji al-Ali's character "Handala" in front of prickly pear cacti. Handala and the key he holds are symbols of the Palestinian refugee right of return. This particular image comes from a mural design for display at San Francisco State University. The mural was held hostage to the demands of Zionists that Handala and the key be removed and so they were.

Overall, Invincible's rap song "People Not Places" calls to mind Edward Said's critique of Orientalism–"A Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient." Here, we have Invincible, an Israeli-American Jew, using a primarily Black spoken word form with the backing of an Arab instrumental track to speak out about the Palestinian Nakba or catastrophe.

In Orientalism, Gustave Flaubert's representation of an Egyptian dancer stage-named Kuchuk Hanem is described by Said: "she never spoke of herself, she never represented her emotions, presence, or history. He [Flaubert] spoke for and represented her." Have things changed so much since Flaubert's time?

Today, the Palestinian voice or 'cause' is frequently mediated through or represented by Jews like Invincible, Ora Wise, Anna Baltzer, Norman Finkelstein, Jeff Halper, Noam Chomsky, Joel Kovel, Michael Lerner, Gila Svirsky, Phyllis Bennis, Susan Nathan, Marc Ellis, Hannah Mermelstein, Daniel Barenboim, Uri Avnery, Mitchell Plitnick, David Wesley, etc. (on mainstream representations of Arabs/Muslims by the predominantly Jewish Hollywood, even by Jewish actors, see "Planet of the Arabs").

The problem is twofold: First, these folks don't typically content themselves with bringing their message to primarily Jewish audiences; rather, they crowd out Palestinian and other non-Jewish voices–they disproportionately occupy the finite social space devoted to 'Israel-Palestine.' And, thus, they enable–inadvertently or not–others who are uncomfortable having Arabs represent themselves. One result is a self-fulfilling prophecy I've personally heard too often: "People won't come to hear Arabs."

Commenting on an earlier draft of this section, a friend wrote "… its high time that more anti-Zionist Jews should step up to the plate. We always hear about the deep moral failings of 'the good Germans' of the Nazi era: where are all 'the good Jews'?" The "good German" is, of course, a trope for Germans who did not oppose the Nazis in the 1930s and 40s. My reply is yes, but the "good Germans" should have been working on/against other Germans not explaining to the French or Swedes that "we're really good people and not all Germans support the Reich's occupation policies." And, certainly, the "good Germans" should not have been displacing Roma/Sinti, Poles, Jews, and other victims of the Nazis and lecturing them and their allies on the 'proper,' philo-Teutonic way to oppose the Nazis.

Frankly, there is something perverse about the prominence in the US Palestinian solidarity movement of so many people who hail from and identify with the oppressor group, especially when one considers that Jews comprise less than two percent of the US population. Do/should we allow male "allies" to so dominate the discourse on sexism? How about White "allies" controlling discussion of anti-Black racism? I know of only one historical parallel and that is the early American anti-slavery movement. Dominated by Whites, it was conservative, reformist rather than abolitionist, segregationist, and had no room in it for the likes of articulate former slaves such as Frederick Douglass or Sojourner Truth. Needless to say, it was largely counterproductive and racist, too.

The second problem is that their presence and prominence allow Jews to strongly influence the agenda and the parameters of 'acceptable' discourse. This often, but not always, means a focus on the occupation of 1967 but not the occupation of 1948, a reiteration of the narrative of Jewish victimhood and the crucial importance of combating 'anti-Semitism', support for the "two-state solution," and a blackout of the BDS campaign. This is understandable as we are all creatures of our own backgrounds and experiences but it is not excusable. To paraphrase Said: For a Jew working on Israel-Palestine there can be no disclaiming the main circumstances of her actuality: that she comes up against Palestine as a Jew first, as an individual second. And to be a Jew in such a situation is by no means an inert fact.

Let us now examine Invincible's lyrics. In the first verse she says:

museum of the holocaust
walkin outside- in the distance-saw a ghost throwing a Molotov
houses burnt with kerosene-mass graves-couldn't bare the scene
it wasn't a pogrom-it was the ruins of Deir Yassin

Prior to this she contrasts "a land without a people for people without a land?" with "But I see a man standing with a key and a deed in his hand". It is clear that she means to expose hypocrisy by contrasting Yad Vashem with the massacre at Deir Yassin but why is it that a pogrom is not a pogrom if it happens to Arabs? As a rapper, words are her medium. Can it be that she does not know that "pogrom," usually applied to attacks on Jews, can also refer to attacks on non-Jews? Even former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert referred to Jewish violence against Arabs as a "pogrom." And since when are rappers bound by linguistic convention? If that is the issue then why not smash that Judeo-centric convention and liberate the word? If that was Invincible's actual intent then it is by no means obvious.

And why is it that the 1933-1945 pogrom(s) detailed in Yad Vashem are implicitly bearable/'bareable'(?) but the pogrom of 1948 against Arabs in Deir Yassin is not? Is it because Jews were the perps just three years after the end of WW II? And as one of my Arab sisters pointed out "ghost throwing a Molotov" is obscure. Why is that? Who's throwing Molotov cocktails at whom? Is all this, as Edward Said put it in "Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims," some expression of discomfort with "treading upon the highly sensitive ground of what Jews did to their victims"?

Invincible begins the chorus with "my Ima misses people not places". Invincible's "Ima" (Hebrew for mother) is not unknown to me. Although her mother, Tamar, lives in the US now, she is a determined Israeli nationalist who does not shrink from interjecting her opinion at Palestinian solidarity events to support Israel and the "two-state solution" to permanently lock-in the violent theft by Jews of 78% of Palestine in 1947-48.

In an interview last Summer, Invincible said, "Recently my mom took a trip back home and her sister kicked her out of the house for protesting the Wall." But her mom is not above getting her own licks in. Just last month she chastised me for quoting Palestinians who dare to refer to "Israeli apartheid" and said that Palestinian calls for cultural and academic boycotts of Israel are "wrong." Further, Tamar, is a member of a Zionist synagogue that poses it's children with armed Israeli soldiers and supports a rabbi who gave a justification for torture from the bima.

So, Invincible's Ima seems pretty committed to Israel as a Jewish place even if she doesn't "miss" it. It is clear that Invincible does not let her mother's remark go unchallenged. As she (and Abeer) indicates, the places and the people cannot be so easily disconnected. But, perhaps, one lesson of this is that Invincible should consider focusing even more exclusively on challenging Zionism within the nerve center of Zionism–the Jewish community.

Certainly, as Israeli Jew, she potentially has entree to the Jewish community that few, if any, non-Jews, esp. Arabs, could hope to achieve. Anti-Zionist Jews can't expect gilded invitations from the Jewish mainstream but there are plenty of Jewish communal events to infiltrate and quietly subvert or to protest and disrupt. No doubt this, in part, explains her connection with the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network but the organization appears afflicted by many of the shortcomings discussed by Gilad Atzmon concerning a not dissimilar Jewish group (see Atzmon's "'NOT IN MY NAME'  An analysis of Jewish righteousness").

Invincible, again in the chorus, tells us "You'll never be a peaceful state with legal displacement." True enough but why not openly and forthrightly interrogate the very "legality" of this "displacement" when in fact all of it violated international law whatever Israeli law may say? "You'll never be a peaceful state with phony legal displacement" works, doesn't it? Also, the implication is that the state will be peaceful when the displacement ends but how realistic or desirable is it that "Israel" would continue to exist if Palestinians were allowed to return?

In the second verse, Invincible tells us:

This aint about a Quaran or a synagogue or Mosque or Torah
The colonizer break it into acres and dunums

This denial of religious motivations in invading and occupying Palestine comes just a few lines after Invincible acknowledges performing a profoundly religious act at one of the most important sites in Judaism:

At the wailing wall I’m rollin a wish
Then stick it in between the hole in the bricks

Although in recent decades Islam has become more prominent as an important ideology in organizing the resistance of Jewish occupations of Lebanon and Palestine (Hizbullah and Hamas were both founded in the 1980s), it is true that–on the part of Palestinians–the conflict in Palestine is not mainly about religion. In "Zionism from the Standpoint of its Victims," Edward Said notes, "… Jewish colonizers in Palestine (well before World War I) always met with unmistakable native resistance, not because the natives thought that Jews were evil, but because most natives do not take kindly to having their territory settled by foreigners."

Conversely, the Zionist invasion and occupation of Palestine is very much "about" synagogue and Torah. "The colonizer" who broke it "into acres and dunums" was a Jewish colonizer on a self-consciously Jewish mission to suppress or remove non-Jews in order to build a Jewish country. As with the Molotov thrower discussed above, Invincible obscures the identity of the "colonizer"–the power of naming is foregone. This is a pattern Invincible repeats in the third verse:

200 year old Olive trees uprooted the groves
to build a wall now Their future enclosed

Who uprooted those groves? Who built that wall? Again, the power of naming is kept in check.

The 'secular Zionism' fairy tale is one that distracts folks from, as Ludwig von Mises put it, "the ideology that generates war"–in this case, Judaism. As noted elsewhere, in The Jewish State, Theodor Herzl, the key figure of modern political Zionism, claimed, "we [Jews] feel our historic affinity only through the faith of our fathers …" and the Jewish "Faith unites us." In The Origins of Zionism, David Vital writes "characteristically, on the day [in 1897] before the [first Zionist] Congress opened, a Saturday, Herzl attended the morning service at the local synagogue and was duly honoured by being called to the reading of the Law …" (p. 355). Also, Herzl described the reaction of his "only spiritual mentor and intimate confidant," the Chief Rabbi of Vienna, Moritz Guedemann, to Herzl's book, The Jewish State, as follows: "Guedemann has read the first proofs and writes me in rapture. He believes that the tract will strike like a bombshell, and work wonders."

And as the Chief Rabbi of Britain, Hermann Adler, said in a sermon published in the Jewish Chronicle in 1898: "Every believing and conforming Israelite must be Zionist …" Adler's successor, Hertz, gave a clear and strong religious imprimatur to the infamous Balfour Declaration before its issuance. After a visit to Palestine in 1925, Chief Rabbi Hertz affirmatively described Jewish colonization there as follows: "Religious zealots and fanatic free-thinkers alike rejoice in the redemption of the soil by Jewish labor, and look upon it as the holiest of human duties." In 1967, the immediate past Chief Rabbi of Britain, Immanuel Jakobovits, called "upon the Anglo-Jewish community to mobilise all its resources in the defence of Israel" which had just launched the Six-Day War. In 1977, Jakobovits wrote:

The origins of the Zionist idea are of course entirely religious. The slogan "The Bible is our mandate" is a credo hardly less insistently pleaded by many secularists than by religious believers as the principal basis of our legal and historical claim to the land of Israeli … Modern Political Zionism itself could never have taken root if it had not planted its seeds in soil ploughed and fertilised by the millennial conditioning of religous memories, hopes, prayers, and visions of our eventual return to Zion … No rabbinical authority disputes that our claim to a Divine Mandate (and we have no other which can not be invalidated) extends over the entire Holy Land within its historic borders and that halachically we have no right to surrender this claim.*

With reference to Jakobovits' "credo" above, in 1936, when asked about the basis for the Jewish claim to Palestine, Ben-Gurion told the British Peel Commission: "The Bible is our mandate." On the matter of Judaism and Zionism see also the 1942 statement declaring Zionism to be an "affirmation of Judaism" and signed by 757 Rabbis–"the largest number of rabbis whose signatures are attached to a public pronouncement in all Jewish history."

Returning Invincible's lyrics, am I the only one uncomfortable with Palestinians being likened to slow, passive marine mammals? Granted, it's not as bad as Israeli general and government minister Rafael Eitan likening Palestinians to "drugged cockroaches" (NY Times 11/24/2004) but, still, it is dehumanizing. From the third verse:

Disguising lies extincting lives like manatees
Callin it a transfer? Please-
More like a catastrophe!
Birthright tours recruiting em, confuse em into moving in

"confuse em into moving in"? Please. This comes across as another example of the victimizer cast as victim. Jewish victimhood of one form or another is a persistent theme and as Norman Finkelstein has observed:

… The Holocaust has proven to be an indispensable ideological weapon. Through its deployment, one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, has cast itself as a "victim" state, and the most successful ethnic group in the United States has likewise acquired victim status. Considerable benefits accrue to this specious victimhood–in particular, immunity to criticism, however justified.

So, why is Invincible reinforcing one of Zionism's most potent weapons? The entire song is a narrative of a Birthright Israel trip. In notes, Invincible writes:

The song takes the listener on a journey through a haunted "birthright" tour where the buried Palestinian significance of each location comes to light. Along the route i expose the process of historic and continued colonization as being even deeper than land seizure and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, but one that is invested in erasing the Arabic language, culture, and memory.

Is Invincible or the (at least partly autobiographical) protagonist of the song the only Jew capable of seeing through Zionist propaganda? Is she the only one who can "superimpose the truth"? Do those Jews who emigrate to Israel have no responsibility for their choices, no duty to learn, see, and refuse to become colonizers and instruments of injustice? How can it be that they are just confused?

If the Birthright Zionists are portrayed as passive in "People Not Places," they are not the only ones. Except in one instance, i.e. "their grandkids is the ones that's throwing rocks at borders," Palestinians are merely passive victims, not a resisting people with their own sense of agency.

It's time to bring this to a close. Some will no doubt object to my critique above. It may be argued that Invincible has the support of some Palestinians such as Abeer, who performs on "People Not Places." I would point out that even Gone with the Wind had Black actors. It's not for me to judge Abeer or, for that matter, Butterfly McQueen or Hattie McDaniel but I think the comparison bears some consideration.

The Billy Jack movies of the 1970s–starring Tom Laughlin, a White man playing an American Indian–also come to mind. As Amanda J. Cobb (Chickasaw) observes in Hollywood's Indians, the films:

… say more about white Americans coming to terms with their feelings about the Vietnam conflict than they do about the lives, experiences, or feelings of actual Native American people. These images have contributed to the conceptualization of American Indians not as distinct nations of people or as distinct individuals or even, in fact, as people at all, but rather as a singular character or idea, "the Indian" - an idea that helps whites understand themselves through "play." … Using the idea of the Indian, especially in terms of "playing Indian," time and time again is an act of cultural appropriation - an act that threatens the continuance of Native cultures and Native sovereignty.

Summing up, in the first part of this post I examined how Jews and, in particular, Israeli Jews have appropriated or stolen Arab culture. With that background, I situated Invincible's performance of "People Not Places" in the context of Edward Said's work on Orientalism. In the second part I took a closer look at the lyrics of "People Not Places" and argued, implicitly, that they validate concerns about cultural appropriation and Orientalism. It is my hope that this article will prompt a larger discussion about Jewish representations of Jews, Palestinians, and the Israel-Palestine conflict and also about the dearth of Palestinian self-representations of their own lives and issues.

Note
* Except as otherwise noted, the source for the preceding three paragraphs is Immanuel Jakobovits, The Attitude to Zionism of Britain's Chief Rabbis as Reflected in Their Writings, (London: Jewish Historical Society of England, 1981).

Thanks to LH, H. Samuel, LN, Khawla, and Joseph for their pre-publication comments on this post.

Michelle J. Kinnucan's writing has previously appeared in CommonDreams.org, Critical Moment, Palestine Chronicle, Arab American News, Electronic Intifada, Palestine Think Tank and elsewhere. Her 2004 investigative report on the Global Intelligence Working Group was featured in Censored 2005: The Top 25 Censored Stories (Seven Stories Pr., 2004) and she contributed a chapter to Finding the Force of the Star Wars Franchise (Peter Lang, 2006). Click here for information on how to contact her.

WRITTEN BY SAMEH HABEEB AND AYMAN QUADER

If you are a young Gazan, how do you react to siege, blockade and war? It's time to hear about the struggle to be constructive in the midst of so much hatred and destruction, and to ask how long it can survive.

26 – 08 – 2009

The Gaza Strip has lost 1,400 lives and a further 5,000, mostly civilians, have been maimed and wounded in the latest attack waged by the Israeli government. This came on top of an illegal, yet relentless siege that has dragged on and on for over two years, preventing 1.5 million Gazans from having access to the basic necessities of life, and to the wider world. You might well ask how young people respond to this blockade. Some of course resort to violence. But others have chosen a different tack.

The right to resist derives from the basic values of justice and freedom. It is not confined to the use of force. Millions of people in this world believe in solving conflicts through peaceful means, without shedding blood and causing more hatred. One day this noble struggle could even replace the violence used by humanity against their fellow human beings. Rockets, guns, tanks – as decisive as they are today – have little to say to the wider cultural struggle for a civilised existence.

The first ‘Intifada' uprising was a Palestinian show-case for a unique kind of resistance in which heavily armed Israeli soldiers were confronted by children with stones. That intifada mutated through several phases before it helped us to secure the Oslo agreement in 1993. More and more Palestinians nowadays are revisiting a non-violent resistance that has emerged from their history if only because it has been so dogged by violent conflict and by war.

In the West Bank, the International Solidarity Movement inspired a non-violent movement of resistance in which locals only became involved when Israel started to build the annexation wall. The people of the Gaza Strip started their movement with a different sort of retaliation, this time against the blanket of silence which was the first stage of Israel's siege. Our response was ‘voices instead of bullets'. In the Gaza Strip, by mid-2007 we were engaged in numerous actions which drew international activist attention in our direction for the first time.

Sameh Habeeb, who was coordinator for the Popular Committee Against the Siege (PCAS) when Israel closed down all the border points, cut the electricity dead and with-held all fuel supply, remembers that moment as a turning-point:

"At first, there was just a stunned reaction of helplessness. We all rushed around wringing our hands about what could be done. We were entering an extremely challenging phase in which the question was: how to involve a wider public in our activities? Gazans are notorious for their loyalties and their endless capacity for confrontation. We thought we were in for a very difficult time indeed. But it turned out to be easy.

We realized that it was precisely at that moment, so in need of a clear way forward, that we must bring people onto the streets. We issued a call throughout Gaza to everyone who would listen. It took almost 5 days before any media outlets paid any attention to what we were saying. Then it started. Even the Israeli media were calling us to ask what was going to happen next. The Israeli government called on thousands of reserve soldiers who were promptly deployed along the borders with Gaza. We had promised some kind of action on a specific day – and as the day loomed, the Israeli media carried reports speculating on what might occur. Some predicted that tens of thousands of us would break through the borders with Israel."

The action day arrived and began early with massive media coverage from our side: ‘Human chain to challenge the siege.' Literally tens of thousands of people of all ages did indeed respond: schoolchildren, university students, labourers, women and children and many ordinary people hurried to the Salah El Din. The chain stretched from Rafah to Beit Hanoun and was around 36 kilometers long. The people went to the borders without guns in the manner of Ghandi to make a united protest. However, accorind to Al Jazeera, clashes erupted between youths and the soldiers who fired at them.

Since that memorable day, Jamal El Khoudary, chair of PCAS has launched numerous symbolic activities to end the siege. "Our approach to struggle has many means at its disposal. This is why Palestinian factions, political parties and individuals across the board participate in our actions. Through non-violent actions, we have been able to move the mainstream. However, you have to face the fact that you are always, at any minute, liable to be fired on." This is the price we have to pay to call attention to what is happening to us.

On January 26, 2008 the Palestinian International Campaign to End the Siege on Gaza, led byDr Eyad Sarraj, proclaimed an international day of action against the siege imposed on the Strip. It is important that there is an international response to this call, but at the core of this activity was the coming together of organizations working for peace and solidarity in Palestine, civil society bodies, and human rights advocates and Gazan academics, with Israeli peace activists also wanting to extend solidarity to the people of Gaza in numerous joint actions and events. On that day thousands of activists demonstrated on both sides of the borders between Israel and Gaza. More activists came to Egypt and tried to cross over to Gaza.

The campaign launched a call to gather a million signatures to end the siege of Gaza. Teams of volunteers grouped in villages, towns and neighborhoods of Gaza to collect these names. The aim was to present them to the United Nations, and two hundred thousand signatures had been secured when all this was brought to a rude halt by the Israeli war.

Dr Eyad Sarraj, who is amongst various callings, an international peace campaigner said on that day, "The principal goal of this demonstration is to join the hands of both Israeli and Palestinian peace activists who want to end the siege and all kinds of violence. The most decisive factor in breaking the siege will be through a change in Israeli public opinion." The slogans were: ‘No Movement, No Life' and ‘Humanity, Not Humiliation: Peace, Not Punishment'.

By late 2008 this movement of civic protest was growing new dimensions. Seeing the Palestinians so committed to such actions, international support of various kinds began to build. The Free Gaza movement managed to send three boats into Gaza surrounded by such a media fanfare that the Israelis were not able to touch them. The sea of Gaza has been under a blockade for many years: the last boat to arrive was 41 years ago. They made their fourth attempt during the attack on Gaza, and this time, the boat was destroyed. The crew and cargo of the fifth, Spirit of Humanity, have just been seized by the Israeli government who have imprisoned those on board, including the Nobel Peace prize winner, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, and sequestered or destroyed the toys, medicines and tree seedlings. But our message continues to spread.

Then there is the music. In the beginning of November 2008, the Popular Committee Against the Siege organized a candle-lit protest carried out by young children in Gaza City to protest at the closure of the power station providing electricity to the northern Gaza Strip. The protest started only minutes after the main Gaza power station shut down and the entire city was plunged into total darkness. Gaza's residents started marching alongside the children in the city's streets while the children held candles, singing in both, English and Arabic. Indeed, kids are the light of hope of Gaza, when they call for the freedom that comes through peaceful means. The people of Gaza are finding their own ways of struggling against this inhumane collective punishment.

Many people who don't know Gaza reckon that we live under some kind of Hamas-Taliban Puritanical rule. It is't true, and we are proud to have been involved in what we called the first ‘opera show' ever in Gaza, starring an Italian artist who was willing to come over on one of these boats. On November 27 2008, this concert, ‘Sing for Freedom', organized by a group of young people in the Gaza Strip, was a great success. The aim was to find a new way of breaking the siege, through a resilience that young people can discover together through song, dance, poetry, and hip-hop, announcing to their audience and to the world that their spirit is strong, and that they will never give up their demand to live in freedom, justice and peace in Palestine.

These are just a few examples of the kind of actions that show Palestinian aspirations for a dignified, thriving and humane life that we all hope to see one day. Many unanswered questions still fill our heads. Is this movement effective in challenging Israeli occupation? Should Gazans give up armed resistance? Will non-violent resistance bring back our rights? When if ever will Israel stop killing peace activists in Gaza and the West Bank? (The last victim was Basam abu Rahma, Basam who believed in non-violence, but who was met by death for his beliefs….)

Things are looking bad in the West Bank, where Israel has dealt a particularly bleak hand to President Abbas, who, after returning to the road map in the agreement in Annapolis, clamped down on all sorts of armed resistance with the help of Premier Fayyad. In the end, how was this received? His efforts were greeted by more settlement-building, more invasions and more arrests throughout the West Bank. And in Gaza? More and more people were beginning to look to non-violent resistance under their siege conditions: then came the last war. People are bound to argue for a return to armed resistance. What should one say in return?

We asked three of our acquaintances in Gaza to comment:

* Nadine Rajab, a 25-year-old human rights advocate, says, "As a Palestinian citizen living under siege and under occupation in Gaza, I think resistance has a few legitimate aspects: the general humanitarian dimension, the religious dimension and the national dimension. There are many legitimate means of non-violent resistance such as demonstrations, boycotting products and civil disobedience. But we should engage in both non-violent and violent resistance, because we are part of the society and it is our duty to do so."

* Muhammad Ghates, a 25-year-old young man working in the Gaza Strip has a different view. His brother was killed by the Israeli army in 2007: "Israel is a state that only survives on instability in the region. It has launched several wars against its neighbours since its establishment. Israel only agreed on peace after it was defeated by the Egyptians in 1973. Israel can be made submissive again through resistance and fighting. Maybe non-violent resistance can pave the way, but it can never be the decisive factor." Ghates believes that Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 due to the heavy resistance of the Gazan people. He contrasts this with over four years of non-violent resistance in the West Bank that has come to nothing. It may have drawn worldwide attention to the wall issue, but this in turn has resulted in no identifiable pressure on the Israeli state, "My family is pro-resistance and my brother was killed while defending Gaza. We aspire to liberate our country through resistance and fighting as we are under occupation. When the Nazis were invading Europe, nations and populations had the right to resist. But our case is different: we are not granted that right. Our resistance is described as terrorism, regardless of the fact that we are under occupation. It seems Israel as a country only understands the language of power and blood not peaceful means. This was quite clear in their last bloody war on Gaza: everybody was under attack. My house too was damaged. It was a target though I'm a normal citizen and I have never lifted a finger against Israel."

* Another young 21 year-old student living in Al Nuserat camp in the middle of the Gaza Strip says, "Our peaceloving children insist on facing up to Israel, but in a different way. They have escaped into patriotic songs to sympathize with each other. Furthermore, they light candles to express simplicity and innocence. They also draw pictures and write words on walls to show the suffering e.g. even before this gruelling war I saw a picture of a Palestinian child who had written on his chest in Arabic letters, "I'm hungry". I do believe that the non-violent path of activism could be more fruitful than militant resistance."

source:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/email/non-violent-action-in-gaza

source: http://peaceforgaza.blogspot.com/2009/08/non-violent-action-in-gaza.html

Ayman T. Quader

As we used to fast when we were young, we did not think a great deal of the deep meanings of fasting, we only felt that we are getting stronger, we felt like heroes being able to defeat our own temptations and weaknesses, fighting our battles against dribbling mouths when we used to bring our noses as close as we could to a big bowl of desert in the fridge without sinking in, especially in a weather that was boiling hot, almost like being smacked by a whip of fire through a window overlooking hell.

Of course we needed to watch TV to keep us occupied. I used to watch the English version of Sesame Street and I envied the Cookie Monster while the clock was ticking away the moments until we heard the loudspeakers from the mosques declaring that it is time to dig in, drink and eat whatever we wanted. We thanked God that we were not one of the many poor people around the world who have nothing to eat all year round. We knew that hunger and deprivation are the enemies that we should fight and defeat when we grow older.

Writing a couple of weeks ago about the top Syrian actor Duraid Laham and his seasonal work for Ramadan, triggered my appetite to write about an important aspect very closely connected with Ramadan, though it has nothing to do with fasting, faith, or any other form of religious rituals.

Anyone who lived long enough in the Middle East would have noticed that people get glued to their TV sets in Ramadan. Ramadan turned to be the season of drama and entertainment on TV channels. Most television channels compete to steal the time of the Muslims who are supposed to be offering more of their time for worship and charity work, but since I worked a significant time of my life in TV stations, I felt the need to vent some of my bottled views before my memories go frothy.

Ramadan is the month most production companies get geared for all year round, the majority of satellite channels will never release their best production of Drama but during this month, after all, it is the only time of the year all members of all families follow the same routine of eating their meal at almost the same second in each city, and most of them do that while watching TV.

Ramadan has turned out to be a month of trade, entertainment and consumerism, even though we are supposed to consume much less than any other time of the year, since we are not eating 3 meals a day, and supposed to share what we have with the needy, but quite the opposite happens. People stand in long queues to buy things normally they do not need, and in amounts that looks like we are going to be struck with a famine, or subjected to a nuclear attack and might starve to death while in hiding for the rest of our lives.

Shopping for dates, juices, meats, sweets, disposable cups, new utensils and everything that can go down the pipes is accompanied with entertainment to make such experience a memorable one. Entertainment on TV screens in Ramadan is a completion and a race because the revenues of advertising rise like no other time of the year, promoting things that we have already bought, and hypnotizing us to think that we still need to buy some more to stay alive otherwise we will collapse out of sheer depravation.

Getting ready for Ramadan starts in the Arab world in fields of entertainment through the silver screen, everyone in the media market rolls up his sleeves, writing sarcastic scripts, historic or hysteric 30 episode series since Ramadan is almost 30 days, and fishing for new faces to play the new soup operas and dramas, and many cooking shows.

Dramas on TV during Ramadan are almost a racing competition between two leading countries in this field, Egypt and Syria. Egypt is known for producing social drama, while Syria is in the lead of documenting historical drama. The social drama in Egypt does not need a great deal of financing, most of the work can be made on comparatively limited budgets, the story can be written easily about everyday life, and the locations of shooting are usually indoors in an apartment.  Studios are where most of the activities go. The costumes cost is minimum; no research is needed as such for most aspects. Unlike the Syrian drama that costs a great deal, since in general its arguments are subjects of the past, and talks about important turning points of history, thus lots of research goes into documents, costumes, antiques, horses, locations and huge numbers of actors involved every year.

In general Syrian drama comes at the lead regarding the amount of work documenting the Palestinian plight and the suffering of the Palestinian refugees. One of its best dramas aired in the past Ramadan was ‘Altaghreebeh Alfalasteeneyeh’ or the Palestinian Exodus, starring Jamal Suleiman (in the photo with the author) and Khalid Taja from Syria and Juliet Awwad from Jordan and a long list of leading actors and actresses.

Syria remained the strong guard and protector of Arabic literature, language and theatrical traditions, while the language of other works of the Arab world’s productions has been deformed beyond recognition.

The society has changed even in Syria, but it is still the only country whose drama offers us the chance every Ramadan to have a little peek into the past, to experience what being colonized was like, and how women used to be totally isolated from men, and how the structure of the family was different, and how responsibilities were distributed. The competition in the field of drama in Ramadan sometimes develops into diplomatic tension, it touches certain spots of pain of our fading history.

The main characteristic difference between both dramas is that the Syrian drama is almost always highlighting the collective efforts; the hero is the nation or the group, unlike championship in Egyptian drama that is claimed by individuals. Every successful Syrian drama reflects every participant as a star or a hero regardless of how humble the role is, because the work itself is gigantic, as a collective championship. The Egyptian drama on the other hand is characterized by a leading role for a leading actor or actress, and should there be two actresses in the lead, it is inevitable that interruptions of work would happen and debates are published regarding whose name should appear on the top.

The Syrian individual is far from wanting to be the ultimate hero in drama or politics. In any Syrian drama one can be very lucky to see tens of leading actors, iconic figures playing different roles.

The dramas from Jordan, the Gulf countries and the North Africa come in second place.

The Jordanian drama is almost unique in being the first in the Arab world to focus on the Bedouins’ society, culture, and their rich content of oral literature and history. This kind of drama proved very successful in the Gulf region and Iraq, it reminds the people in the Gulf of a few years back before the oil messed up their serene environment, and before the skyscrapers out shadowed their kind, caring neighbourhoods, and before being invaded by hundreds of foreign imported lifestyles that made them feel like a minority in their own home countries. The drama production in the Gulf is comparatively new, it is almost their own taste, and not as widely circulated as Egyptian or Syrian dramas which are considered easier to understand because of the Egyptian and Syrian simple dialects all Arab countries got used to. On the other hand, North African drama (Morocco, Algeria, Libya and Tunisia) have difficult dialects to understand, this discouraged many TV channels from buying their works.  All the previously mentioned, besides other factors, lead TV channels to adopt exclusivity and selectivity policies.

But some privately owned satellite stations take advantage during the holy month of Ramadan to promote what can be described as non modest line of production to satisfy the taste of some and fill a certain gap, while other satellites, mainly state owned, have to put their brakes on as a sign of respect of the fasting viewers and the holy month. This of course attracts different lines of advertising.

In general the majority repent partially then the minute Ramadan starts packing its bag, all absurdity and sluggish production comes back on the screens in a flash.

And since TV production is a business, those who claim to be pious start to work on faith related programmes, some investors have both kinds of channels; the ones that sell viewing time using women’s bodies, and the ones that promise the viewers paradise in the afterlife where they can enjoy equally beautiful women. Women are in the mind of the producers, regardless of the media season. Some might wonder why an investor in low standards content of entertainment would want to invest in an Islamic channel. I would say that some hope to be forgiven for the junk they have been producing all year round, it is somehow like feeding the poor a piece of bread, hoping to be forgiven for eating pork…doing some good hoping to mask the bad. Some even think that the Almighty does not know how to handle their tax books. More like spraying the skunk with some cheap perfume.

Ramadan is also the season of polishing the images of some Sheikhs of Fatwa, they are invited like movie or entertainment stars, some Sheiks even have their own fans, but of course they appear on their own kind of religious channels.

The funny thing is, some TV satellite investors find it more economical to mix both lines. One minute you have a religious program aired with someone preaching until you are convinced that you are so corrupt and guilty deep down to your bones that you are going right away to hell before even being given the chance to change your pyjamas, the other minute the programme is followed by a video clip or an interview with one of the so many so-called female artists who believe deeply in the mission of economising, since they wear only the minimum size of hugging outfits, which might shrink even further during the interview. Many of them strive hard to stretch the hem over their thighs or cleavages while mentioning God repeatedly and talking about how blessed they are that God helped them swarm well while they perform their belly dance, even though many do not even know the difference between dance and stomach ache.

The thing is…some of those entertainers can’t stay away from the glamour of the screen, they have to appear on the screen for one reason or another, a month is too long a period to be deprived of lights, and surprise… surprise… they are invited to appear as guests of talk shows to teach us about our faith and talk to us about manners and how we can develop and better ourselves, and of course to fit in with the Ramadan spirit they would thank God for being able to be good belly dancers.

The majority evade talking about the occupation in Palestine, or what is happening in Iraq. They are great spirits; very sensitive souls that they do not want to ruin the appetite of the good audience, that they sedate their conscious before coming to the studios.

The historic dramas in general are not about our present struggles in Palestine or Iraq; such issues are not encouraged because they might lead the viewers to question present time corruption. The investors also know that they should be on the safe side to get the work accredited by the largest number of censorship committees in the Arab world and to be able to sell the product. Hence the drama is manipulated and dwarfed and deformed to portray what can be described as manhood stands… showing local fights in the streets, and howling males to gather the gang of friends or tribe members to protect the honour of someone’s sister because she looked out of a window, or was seen talking to a boy.

In the midst of the time Iraq was torn apart and was bleeding to death, we have been introduced to the new budding stars of Iraqi refugees on TV, who are on their way to stardom through shows and competitions of talents. No one should complain that Arab satellites do not care about Iraq; here we are bringing you the most beautiful Iraqi young girls to entertain you. The Iraqis are doing fine. The Palestinians are living a normal life too, the Gaza people are fasting all year round, and fasting is good for their health. No one dares to say that they are fasting all year round against their will. 

“The ultimate goal…is, in time, to take over the Land of Israel and to restore to the Jews the political independence they have been deprived of for these two thousand years…The Jews will yet arise and, arms in hand (if need be), declare that they are the masters of their ancient homeland.”

Zionism is best described as an abnormal nationalism. This singular fact has engendered a history of deepening conflicts between Israel – leading an alliance of Western states – and the Islamicate more generally.

Jewish ‘nationalism’ was abnormal for two reasons. It was homeless: it did not possess a homeland. The Jews of Europe were not a majority in, or even exercised control over, any territory that could become the basis of a Jewish state. We do not know of another nationalist movement in recent memory that started with such a land deficit – that is, without a homeland.

Arguably, Jewish nationalism was without a nation too. The Jews were a re-ligious aggregate, consisting of communities, scattered across many regions and countries, some only tenuously connected to others, but who shared the religious traditions derived from, or an identity connected to, Judaism. Over the centuries, Jews had been taught that a divinely appointed Messiah would restore them to Zion; but such a Messiah never appeared; or when he did, his failure to deliver ‘proved’ that he was false. Indeed, while the Jews prayed for the appearance of the Messiah, they had no notion about when this might happen. In addition, since the nineteenth century, Reform Jews have interpreted their chosenness metaphorically. Max Nordau complained bitterly that for the Reform Jew, “the word Zion had just as little meaning as the word dispersion…He denies that there is a Jewish people and that he is a member of it.”

Since Zionism was a nationalism without a homeland or a nation, its pro-tagonists would have to create both. To compensate for the first deficit, the Zionists would have to acquire a homeland: they would have to expropriate territory that belonged to another people. In other words, a homeless nationalism, of necessity, is a charter for conquest and – if it is exclusionary – for ethnic cleansing. At the same time, the Zionists would have to start creating a Jewish nation out of the heterogeneous Jewish colons they would assemble in their newly minted homeland. At the least, they would have to create a nucleus of Jews who were willing to settle in Palestine and committed to creating the infrastructure of a Jewish society and state in Palestine. For many years, this nucleus would be small, since, Jews, overwhelmingly, preferred assimilation and revolution in Europe to colonizing Palestine.

A Jewish nation would begin to grow around this small nucleus only if the Zionists could demonstrate that their scheme was not a chimera. The passage of the Zionist plan – from chimera to reality – would be delivered by three events: imposition of tight immigration restrictions in most Western countries starting in the 1900s, the Balfour Declaration of 1917, and the rise to power of the Nazis in 1933. As a result, when European Jews began fleeing Nazi persecution, most of them had nowhere to go to but Palestine.
In their bid to create a Jewish state in Palestine, the Zionists could not stop at half-measures. They could not – and did not wish to – introduce Jews as only one element in the demography of the conquered territory. The Zionists sought to establish a Jewish state in Palestine; this had always been their goal. Officially, they never acknowledge that the creation of a Jewish state would have to be preceded, accompanied, or followed by ethnic cleansing. Nevertheless, it is clear from the record now available that Zionists wanted nothing less than to make Palestine “as Jewish as England is English.” If the Palestinians could not be bribed to leave, they would have to be forced out.

The Zionists were determined to reenact in the middle of the twentieth cen-tury the exclusive settler colonialism of an earlier epoch. They were determined to repeat the supremacist history of the white colons in the Americas and Oceania. By the measure of any historical epoch, much less that of an age of de-colonization, the Zionist project was radical in the fate it had planned for the Palestinians: their complete or near-complete displacement from Palestine. A project so daring, so radical, so anachronistic could only emerge from unlimited hubris, deep racial contempt for the Palestinians, and a conviction that the ‘primitive’ Palestinians would prove to be utterly lacking in the capacity to resist their own dispossession.

The Zionists faced another challenge. They had to convince Jews that they are a nation, a Jewish nation, who deserved more than any nation in the world – because of the much greater antiquity of Jews – to have their own state, a Jewish state in Palestine. It was the duty of Jews, therefore, to work for the creation of this Jewish state by supporting the Zionists, and, most importantly, by emigrating to Palestine. Most Jews in the developed Western countries had little interest in becoming Jewish pioneers in Palestine; their lives had improved greatly in the previous two or three generations and they did not anticipate any serious threats from anti-Semitism. The Jews in Eastern Europe did face serious threats to their lives and property from anti-Semites, but they too greatly preferred moving to safer and more prosperous countries in Western Europe, the Americas, South Africa, and Australia. Persuading Jews to move to Palestine was proving to be a far more difficult task than opening up Palestine to unlimited Jewish colonization. Zionism needed a stronger boost from anti-Semites than they had provided until the early 1930s.

The Zionists always understood that their movement would have to be driven by Jewish fears of anti-Semitism. They were also quite sanguine that there would be no paucity of such assistance, especially from anti-Semites in Eastern Europe. Indeed, now that the Zionists had announced a political program to rid Europe of its Jews, would the anti-Semites retreat just when some Jews were implicitly asking for their assistance in their own evacuation from Europe? This was a match made in heaven for the anti-Semites. Once the Zionists had also brought the anti-Semites in messianic camouflage – the Christian Zionists – on board, this alliance became more broad-based and more enduring. Together, by creating and continuing to support Israel, these allies would lay the foundations of a deepening conflict against the Islamicate.

Zionism was a grave assault on the history of the global resistance to imperialism that unfolded even as Jewish colons in Palestine laid the foundations of their colonial settler state. The Zionists sought to abolish the ground realities in the Middle East established by Islam over the previous thirteen hundred years. They sought to overturn the demography of Palestine, to insert a European presence in the heart of the Islamicate, and to serve as the forward base for Western powers intent on dominating the Middle East. The Zionists could succeed only by combining the forces of the Christian and Jewish West in an assault that would almost certainly be seen as a new, latter-day Crusade to marginalize the Islamicate peoples in the Middle East.

It was delusional to assume that the Zionist challenge to the Islamicate would go unanswered. The Zionists had succeeded in imposing their Jewish state on the Islamicate because of the luck of timing – in addition to all the other factors that had favored them. The Islamicate was at its weakest in the decades following the destruction of the Ottoman Empire; even a greatly weakened Ottoman Empire had resisted for more than two decades Zionist pressures to grant them a charter to create a Jewish state in Palestine. The first wave of Arab resistance against Israel – led by secular nationalists from the nascent bourgeoisie classes – lacked the structures to wage a people’s war. Taking advantage of this Arab weakness, Israel quickly dismantled the Arab nationalist movement, whose ruling classes began making compromises with Israel and its Western allies. This setback to the resistance was temporary.

The Arab nationalist resistance would slowly be replaced by another that would draw upon Islamic roots; this return to indigenous ideas and structures would lay the foundations of a resistance that would be broader, deeper, many-layered, and more resilient than the one it would replace. The overarching ambitions of Israel—to establish its hegemony over the central lands of the Islamicate – would guarantee the emergence of this new response. The quick collapse of the Arab nationalist resistance in the face of Israeli victories ensured that the deeper Islamicate response would emerge sooner rather than later. As a result, Israel today confronts – now in alliance with Arab rulers – the entire Islamicate, a great mass of humanity, which is determined to overthrow this alliance. If one recalls that the Islamicate is now a global community, enjoying demographic dominance in a region that stretches from Mauritania to Mindanao – and now counts more than a billion and a half people, whose growth rate exceeds that of any other collectivity – one can easily begin to comprehend the eventual scale of this Islamicate resistance against the Zionist imposition.

In the era preceding the rise of the Nazis, the Zionist idea – even from a Jewish standpoint – was an affront to more than two millennia of their own history. Jews had started migrating to the farthest points in the Mediterranean long be-fore the second destruction of the Temple, where they settled down and con-verted many local peoples to the Jewish faith. Over time, conversions to Judaism established Jewish communities farther afield – beyond the Mediterranean world. In the 1890s, however, a small but determined cabal of European Jews proposed a plan to abrogate the history of global Jewish communities extending over millennia. They were determined to accomplish what the worst anti-Semites had failed to do: to empty Europe and the Middle East of their Jewish population and transport them to Palestine, a land to which they had a spiritual connection – just as Muslims in Bangladesh, Bosnia, and Burkina Faso are connected to Mecca and Medina – but to which their racial or historical connections were nonexistent or tenuous at best. Was the persecution of Jews in Europe before the 1890s sufficient cause to justify such a radical reordering of the human geography of the world’s Jewish populations?

A more ominous implication flowed from another peculiarity of Zionism. Unlike other white settlers, the Jewish colons lacked a natural mother country, a Jewish state that could support their colonization of Palestine. In the face of this deficiency, the career of any settler colonialism would have ended prematurely. Instead, because of the manner in which this deficit was overcome, the Zionists acquired the financial, political, and military support of much of the Western world. This was not the result of a conspiracy, but flowed from the peculiar position that Jews – at the end of the nineteenth century – had come to occupy in the imagination, geography, economy, and the polities of the Western world.

The Zionists drew their primary support from the Western Jews, many of whom by the middle of the nineteenth century were members of the most influential segments of Western societies. Over time, as Western Jews gravitated to Zionism, their awesome financial and intellectual assets would become available to the Jewish colons in Palestine. The Jewish colons drew their leadership—in the areas of politics, the economy, industry, civilian and military technology, organization, propaganda, and science – from the pool of Europe’s best. It can scarcely be doubted that the Jewish colons brought overwhelming advantages to their contest against the Palestinians and the neighboring Arabs. No other colonists, contemporaneous with the Zionists or in the nineteenth century, brought the same advantages to their enterprise vis-à-vis the natives.

Pro-Zionist Western Jews would make a more critical contribution to the long-term success of Zionism. They would mobilize their resources – as well-placed members of the financial, intellectual, and cultural elites of Western societies—to make the case for Zionism, to silence criticism of Israel, and generate domestic political pressures to secure the support of Western powers for Israel. In other words, the Zionist ability to recruit Western allies depended critically upon the peculiar position that Jews held in the imagination, prejudices, history, geography, economy, and politics of Western societies.

The Jews have always had a ‘special’ relationship with the Christian West; they were special even as objects of Christian hatred. Judaism has always occupied the unenviable position of being a parent religion that was overtaken by a heresy. For many centuries, the Christians regarded the Jews, hitherto God’s ‘chosen people,’ with disdain for rejecting Jesus. Nevertheless, they incorporated the Jewish scriptures into their own religious canon. This tension lies at the heart of Western ambivalence toward Jews; it is also one of the chief sources of the enduring hatred that Christians have directed toward the Jews.

In addition, starting in the fifteenth century, the Protestants entered into a new relationship with Judaism and Jews. In many ways, the Protestants drew inspiration from the Hebrew bible, began to read its words literally, and paid greater attention to its prophesies about end times. The theology of the English Puritans, in particular, assigned a special role to the Jews in their eschatology. The Jews would have to gather in Jerusalem before the Second Coming of Jesus; later, this theology was taken up by the English Evangelicals who carried it to the United States. Over time, with the growing successes of (Jewish) Zionism, the Evangelicals slowly became its most ardent supporters in the United States. The obverse of the Evangelical’s Zionism is a virulent hatred of Islam and Muslims.

Most importantly, however, it was the entry of Jews into mainstream European society – mostly during the nineteenth century – that paved the way for Zionist influence over the politics of several key Western states. The Zionists very deftly used the Jewish presence in the ranks of European elites to set up a com-petition among the great Western powers – especially Britain, Germany, and France—to gain Jewish support in their wars with each other, and to undermine the radical movements in Europe that were also dominated by Jews. Starting with World War II, the pro-Zionist Jews would slowly build a network of organizations, develop their rhetoric, and take leadership positions in important sectors of American civil society until they had gained the ability to define the parameters within which the United States could operate in the Middle East.

Serendipitously, it appears, pro-Zionist Jews also found, ready at hand, a rich assortment of negative energies in the West that they could harness to their own project. The convergence of their interests with that of the anti-Semites was perhaps the most propitious. The anti-Semites wanted the Jews out of Europe, and so did the Zionists. Anti-Semitism would also become the chief facilitator of the Jewish nationalism that the Zionists sought to create. In addition, the Zionists could muster support for their project by appealing to Western religious bigotry against Muslims as well as their racist bias against the Arabs as ‘inferior’ non-whites.

The Zionists would also argue that their project was closely aligned with the strategic interests of Western powers in the Middle East. This claim had lost its validity by the end of the nineteenth century, when Britain was firmly established in Egypt and it was the dominant power in the Indian Ocean. Indeed, the insertion of an exclusionary Jewish colonial settler state into the Islamicate geographical matrix was certain to provoke waves of resistance from the Muslim peoples. Western interests in the Islamicate were not positively aligned with the Zionist project. Yet, once Israel had been created, it would provoke anti-Western feelings in the Middle East, which, conveniently, the Zionists would deepen and offer as the rationale for supporting and arming Israel to protect Western interests against Arab and, later, Islamicate threats.

Israel was the product of a partnership that seems unlikely at first blush, between Western Jews and the Christian West. It is the powerful alchemy of the Zionist idea that produced and sustained this partnership. The Zionist project to create a Jewish state in Palestine possessed the power to convert two historical antagonists, Jews and Gentiles, into allies united in a common imperialist enterprise against the Islamicate. At different times, the Zionists have harnessed all the negative energies of the West – its imperialism, anti-Semitism, Crusading zeal, anti-Islamic bigotry, and racism – and focused them on a new project, the creation of a surrogate Western state in the Islamicate heartland. At the same time, the West could derive considerable satisfaction from the success of the Zionist project. Western societies could take ownership of, and revel in, the tri-umphs of this colonial state as their own; they could congratulate themselves for helping ‘save’ the Jewish people; they could feel they had made adequate amends for their history of anti-Semitism; they could feel they had finally paid back the Arabs and Turks for their conquests of Christian lands. Israel possessed a marvelous capacity to feed several of the West’s egotistical needs.

As a vehicle for facilitating Jewish entry into the stage of world history, the Zionist project was a stroke of brilliance. Since the Jews were influential, but without a state of their own, the Zionists were going to leverage Western power in their cause. As the Zionist plan would unfold, inflicting pain on the Islamicate, evoking Islamicate anger against the West and Jews, the complementarities between the two ancient adversaries would deepen, and, over time, new commonalities would be discovered or created between these two antagonist strains of Western history. In the United States, the Zionist movement would encourage Evangelical Christians – who looked upon the birth of Israel as the fulfillment of end-time prophecies – to become fanatic partisans of Israel. The West had hitherto traced its central ideas and institutions to Rome and Athens; in the wake of Zionist successes, it would be repackaged as a Judeo-Christian civilization, drawing its core principles, its inspiration from the Old Testament. This reframing would not only underscore the Jewish roots of the Western world: it would also make a point of emphasizing that Islam is the outsider, the eternal adversary opposed to both.

Zionism owes its success solely to this unlikely partnership. The Zionists could not have created a Jewish state in Palestine by bribing the Ottomans into granting them a charter to colonize Palestine. Despite his offers of loans, investments, technology, and diplomatic expertise, Theodore Herzl was repeatedly rebuffed by the Ottoman Sultan. It is even less likely that the Zionists, at any time, could have mobilized a Jewish army to invade and occupy Palestine, against Ottoman and Arab opposition. The Zionist partnership with the West was indispensable for the creation of a Jewish state.

This partnership was also fateful. It produced a powerful new dialectic, which has encouraged Israel – as the political center of the Jewish diaspora and the chief outpost of the West in the heart of the Islamic world – to become ever more aggressive in its designs against the Islamicate. In turn, a fragmented, weak and humiliated Islamicate, more resentful and determined after every defeat at the hands of Israel, has been driven to embrace increasingly radical ideas and methods to recover its dignity, wholeness, and power, and to seek to attain this recovery on the strength of Islamic ideas. This destabilizing dialectic has now brought the West itself into a direct confrontation against the Islamicate. This is the tragedy of Israel. It is a tragedy whose ominous consequences, including those that have yet to unfold, were contained in the very idea of an exclusive Jewish state in Palestine.

M. Shahid Alam is professor of economics at Northeastern University. This is an excerpt from his forthcoming book, Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism (Palgrave Macmillan, November 2009). He may be reached at alqalam02760@yahoo.com. http://aslama.org/