Comments on: Pro-Palestinian Zionist

By: Nadia

Nadia — Tue, 01 May 2007 22:29:17 +0000

I’m rabidly binationalist, but the right of return is in international law and I don’t see any kind of bilateral treaty or established Palestinian state necessarily taking any legimitacy from any individual Palestinian’s desire to exercise that right. It seems like the two state solution’s popularity is in serious decline these days, though, so I wonder how realistic it is to expect even that to happen in my lifetime.

By: Miriam (Egypt & Israel & USA)

Miriam (Egypt & Israel & USA) — Tue, 01 May 2007 21:09:50 +0000

Hi Ray and Yaman, I think that the conversation you are having is an interesting one. The divergence in your opinion reminds me a lot of that which I encountered at an event recently at NYU which featured Rafi Dajani of the American Task Force on Palestine and Riham Barghouti, who heads an organization in NY calling for Boycott, Sanctions and Divestment. I’ll post that as a separate entry since it’s long, but in general it was really interesting to hear Riham support one state, and a full right of return, and to hear Rafi talk about two states and the necessity of working within the limits of the current political discourse (largely determined by America and Israel). However, when I asked the speakers whether they saw each other as competition/foes, Barghouti surprised me; she said that the likelihood of what she was calling for happening was slim, but she thought it was important to raise the stakes of what is possible, so that when the two sides sit down at the negotiating table there is something to give up. Go for the moon kind of philosophy, and I guess there is a difference of opinion as to whether a two-state solution with an agreed-upon and multifaceted solution to the refugee problem bears any resemblance to the stars.

I suppose the most important take-away lesson, if you buy it (I’d love to hear what you think) is that the message of SJP and groups with less mainstream demands can actually have an extremely powerful impact on widening the public discourse and actually make the realization of the goals of Salaam Al-Ann etc. more likely, and these groups should not be positioned as foes.

By: yaman

yaman — Tue, 01 May 2007 01:52:36 +0000

The people behind MuzzleWatch and involved in Jewish Voice for Peace are all great people. I really have to disagree with Ray’s position that they only care about being listed as co-sponsors, or that they don’t reach out to other groups, or that they partner with “two-faced groups” (whatever those are). I personally know a number of them, and some of them even work with a group I’m involved in (Students for Justice in Palestine). They are an important organization, and they provide a good outlet for liberal Jews or Zionists who feel out of place with the “mainstream” (but quite reactionary) Jewish/Zionist groups in the US. Of course, the cost of this for them is that they face constant harassment from others, and even from Palestinians and others who disagree with them. While they can be legitimate criticized on a few issues (sometimes I tend to think that they are too soft on certain issues), I don’t think any of these justify a boycott.

That said, Ray, I haven’t heard of your group, but I just read about it on your website. I think it’s rather disingenuous of you to say that the reason other Palestinian advocacy groups might oppose it is because you “denounce suicide bombings as immoral crimes,” as if the rest of them support that kind of attack. I don’t think that’s so right, and I think it probably has more to do with the following principles that your group espouses: 1) accepting the creation of 2 religiously or ethnically defined states in one contiguous piece of land; 2) in effect renouncing the right of return; 3) treating Palestinians and Israelis as if they are in equivalent positions, and as if the violence either way is always equivalent, whether measuring it quantitatively or qualitatively, just to name a few. My point is that there are many legitimate reasons why your group is encountering opposition, besides that everybody else is “two-faced” or supports terrorism.

By: Ray Hanania (Palestine/USA)

Ray Hanania (Palestine/USA) — Mon, 30 Apr 2007 22:47:51 +0000

Jewish Voices for Peace (I am assuming there is only one, correct?) is a good organization. However, sometimes their local chapters partner with really extremist groups in the Arab community, as they have done recently in a Chicago-based event to which I was invited … the groups seem to spend most of their time worrying abut how should be listed as “co-sponsors” at the end of event notices. They never reach out to other groups, and tend to partner with grousp that I think are two-faced in the Arab community, groups that claim they support peace, but advocate the “One State” solution which is not a solution at all in my personal Palestinian opinion. Groups that advocate two-states have been excluded from their events … for example, we have a group called Salam al Ann in Chicago and several Palestinian groups in Chicago won’t work with us. Why? Because we support two-states, denounce suicide bombings are immoral crimes and call for compromise on issues such as the Palestinian Right of Return … while also hammering Israeli government policies that we feel are wrong, also.

Anyway, the mainstream media loves these leftist groups because they fill a “need.” The media (as a friend pointed out in another comment elsehwere) is a business. That doesn’t mean they don’t go out of their way to muzzle some voices and augment others. They can afford to do that because covering the Middle East is not a moiney-making revenue source so they can be driven by bias in MidEast coverage and not worry about losing money, unless they become excessively critical fo Israel and too supportive of the Palestinians.

Just some random thoughts I wanted to share

Ray Hanania
http://www.hanania.com