Friday, November 30, 2007

Not A Happy Anniversary For Some

I failed to note that yesterday was the 60th anniversary of the decision by the United Nations to partition Palestine into both Arab and Jewish homelands (here), something I would consider to be a mistake with repercussions extending into infinity.

Anyway, this timely and highly controversial opinion column was published in the Bucks County Courier Times yesterday written by Susan Abulhawa who, according to her bio, is a freelance writer, a member of Al-Adwa (Palestinian right of return), a writer for Palestine Media Watch and Dissident Voice, and founder of Playgrounds for Palestine (no online link is available for this column).

(By the way, I think the timing of the publication was accidental, knowing what I know about how the paper operates with its opinion columns. Also, I’m sure I’m wading into a mess with this post, but I thought much of what Abulhawa said was too important to ignore.)

In 1988, we gave up 78 percent of our homeland to try and pick up the pieces of our lives on the remaining 22 percent of Palestine. This was, and remains, the only true (brave or otherwise) concession ever made in the so-called “Middle East Conflict.”

Next came Camp David, then Madrid, then Oslo, then another Camp David, Taba, Wye, (deep breath) Sharm el Sheikh, The Disengagement, The Road Map. Through it all, Israel continued to divide, carve out, confiscate and settle that 22 percent. They scattered us into a diaspora, shut down our schools, bombed damn near every inch of the West Bank and Gaza, herded us into ghettos, set up check points all around us and employee every tool of imperialism, times 10, to get rid of our subjugate us as a cheap labor force.

Now we arrive at yet another surreal meeting in the clouds; Annapolis. Everyone is invited except the PLO – the sole and only legitimate representative of the Palestinian people – and the democratically elected members of the Palestinian Authority (that would be Hamas).

At this meeting, Israel will throw us a few bones, like releasing some prisoners (who will most likely get rounded up again when the hype dies down) while it is intentionally starving 1.4 million human beings in Gaza. Annapolis will serve only to move Israel a little closer to stamping out the “refugee problem,” those Palestinians and their descendants whose homes, farms, property and history Israel stole.

Palestinians are the natives of the land that was called Palestine for the last several thousand years until 1948 when Jewish foreigners changed its name to Israel. We are the natives in every sense of the word: historically, legally, culturally, ethnically, and even genetically!

True, there were Jewish tribes in that land some 3,000 years ago. There were also Canaanites, Babylonians, Sumerians, Philistines, Assyrians, Persians, Romans, Byzantines, and Brits. Palestinians are the natural descendants of all of these peoples who passed through that land, intermarried and converted between religions. When you understand this, it becomes clear why Palestine has always been a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious society. In other words, the idea of “tolerance” and co-existence that the West fought to attain and claims to cherish and hold dear was already a reality in Palestine.

Israel has taken that ideal, turned it on its head, and beat it to a pulp so every Jew in the world can have a place where he or she can go and see none but fellow Jews. Remarkably, the world sees nothing wrong or out of the ordinary with this and would like us to simply live with it, negotiate with a juggernaut military power that has made no secret of its desire and intent to take all of Palestine and get rid of as many of us Gentiles as it possibly can.

Never in history has the world so cruelly called on an oppressed, robbed, and battered native people to sit down with their oppressors to “negotiate” for their freedom. Even worse, what we are expected to negotiate away are our basic human rights, in order to have a few check points removed so we can call those ghettos – surrounded by a 20-foot concrete wall with guard towers – a “state.”

We are being asked to give up our natural right to return to the homes from which we were forcibly removed because, and only because, we are not Jewish. We are asked, as native Muslims and Christians, to give up our natural right to live and thrive in Jerusalem as we have for all of time. We are told that we should not expect to have the right to control our own water, economy, airspace, or borders.

Why?

Why should we accept such an inferior status and inferior fate? We are not children of a lesser god that we should be expected to relinquish God-given, self-evident rights accorded and upheld for the rest of humanity. We are not animals to be disposed of so that every Jew in the world can have dual citizenship, a sort of summer country in the Hamptons.

Would anyone have thought to support the desire of white South Africans to live as separate and superior humans and expect black South Africans to “negotiate” with the apartheid government for their basic human rights? Of course not! Anyone with a mind and conscience took for granted that blacks have equal rights as whites. That is self-evident and non-negotiable. So is our right as non-Jews in Palestine to be accorded the same rights and privileges as Jews in our ancestral homeland. Human dignity and equality simply should not be topics of negotiation in the 21st century.

Even more vulgar is Israel’s insistence that we recognize its right to be a state of the Jewish people. This country that stole everything from us – our homes, our holy places, our trees and farms, our institutions, our history and heritage, the cemeteries where our grandparents and forefathers are buried – because we are not the right kind of human in their eyes. They want us not only to attest that such an affront to humanity is legitimate and appropriate, but that it is somehow a right!

Let me, as one disposed and disinherited Palestinian, say with all the force of my love and anguish for my country, my family, and my countrymen, that I do NOT recognize such right. A right is something inherently and unquestionably just. Jewish exclusivity and entitlement at the expense of non-Jews is not a right, for God’s sake, it is racism!
Right off the bat, I should say that I think Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state is “self-evident and non-negotiable,” to quote Abulhawa. I can only imagine the suffering she has endured as a result of the partioning of her homeland, and I’m sorry about that, but it’s not fair to carry out reprisals against innocent Israelis because of this dunderheaded act that took place a little over 60 years ago, and such reprisals would surely ensue if the Jews were somehow made to relocate from Israel.

And by the way, speaking of what is euphemistically called “the fence,” I’ve noticed that the incidents of bombings of innocent Israelis has greatly decreased since it was constructed. Yes, it is a blight and an affront, but so is blowing up school buses and shopping plazas and thus killing innocent people (as well as bulldozing homes).

Also, the total non-apologia for Israeli blood on Palestinian hands was unsettling to read, as far as I’m concerned. And I should note that Abulhawa has written to the Courier Times before and generated some venomously hostile letters in response (which takes a measure of courage, you must admit), and I’m sure that will be the case again over this.

Despite my reservations, what Abulhawa wrote is important and should be added to the dialogue that should take place between responsible leaders of nations (including, God willing, a Democratic president after 1/20/09).

And finally, Abulhawa notes the unresolved issue of the “right of return” for Palestinians. How ridiculous is it, then, for us to criticize the Iraqi "government" over not having resolved that issue when we haven’t found a way to address it with the Palestinians either (and as always with Bushco, anything passes from it right to our Middle East “ally” as far as I’m concerned).

Update 12/18/07: Fair is fair.

2 comments:

Words in Waiting said...

Dear Doomsy - I'm happy to see that you posted my editorial to stimulate discussion and you sound like a reasonably open-minded individual. But I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I advocate reprisals against innocent Israelis ["but it’s not fair to carry out reprisals against innocent Israelis because of this dunderheaded act that took place a little over 60 years ago, and such reprisals would surely ensue if the Jews were somehow made to relocate from Israel."] I said, nor implied, no such thing. In fact, as the daughter of refugees and as a dispossessed human being, the last thing I would ever advocate or endorse would be the disposession of others. For most Israelis, that land is the only country they know, and as such, it is their country. But that land also belongs to us and there is more than enough space for both people. But what I do not endorse is the right of every Jew to hold dual citizenship if they want while we are scattered in awfully disorienting diaspora and refugee camps that aren't fit for human beings. I also do not endorse one people ruling and oppressing another. I don't endorse teh kind of exclusivity and privilege for one group of people based on nothing but religion - which is the same thing as privilege based on skin color. Such racism is not 'self-evident and non-negotiable' no matter how you couch it.

as for courage, you can't imagine how much of that it takes for every Palestinian to get up each morning! You can talk about suicide bombings all you want, and as awful as they are, they don't amount to an iota of what Israel inflicts on Palestinians. And for the record, the first suicide bombing did not occur until over 500 Palestinians were killed in the second Intifada. further, Israel has no room to wag its finger at us, considering that they bombed and blew up plenty of buses, public places, hotels, etc. before they had sophisticated weaponry to do the same on an horrific scale.

doomsy said...

I never once said that you endorsed violence yourself, nor would I do that. And of course, I would never advocate that course of action for anyone else (at this site, I make an exception for bin Laden, though, but nobody else). But you know far better than I that violence reigns in that part of the world on both sides.

I am always interested to learn more about this issue; I could probably spend years doing so. And I wanted what you wrote to receive whatever larger audience I am able to provide because this information is utterly squashed, again, for reasons you know at least as well as I do.

Thank you for your comment.