"How Do You Feel About This?"
It is very easy to dismiss an act from afar, to forget that it takes place, and to react with indifference. It is even easier when you never have to deal directly with the people who are affected by this. On Mideast Youth, it is very hard to ignore issues that we are facing on a daily basis. We have people representing various countries who are each experiencing conflicts and injustices on various levels and to varying degrees. It is because of this that we are able to confront each other, people who represent different sides of these issues, and ask tough questions of one another.
Esra’a and I have recently been discussing an article which we found to be very distressing and unfortunately also very indicative of what many Palestinians have gone through and continue to go through. This particular incident, although by far not the worst, is something we feel most people can relate. It is about a Palestinian family who worked tremendously hard to build a home for themselves, their children and their elderly parents. However, instead of a sanctuary, it turned out to be an even more effective base from which the Israeli army could observe Nablus. They have had to endure their private property being raided, their privacy violated while having neither the power nor the support to change it.
In the past, we have rarely had the opportunity to directly confront an Israeli and ask, “How do you feel about this?”
We understand that many people, Palestinians, Israelis and the international community are sick of talking about this conflict and are sick of all the associations people make that are so dependent on nationality and religion. But this is important. We cannot go on ignoring what is really happening merely to feed other people’s interest or out of fear of being labelled anti-Semitic or a supporter of terrorism.
People ask us all the time whether we condemn the attacks of the suicide bombers and the anti-Semites. And we do. So why, more often than not, when we ask the same of the attacks against the Palestinians we are confronted with the same response… Security? Why are criticisms of the actions of the Israeli government completely undermined by the incessant accusation of anti-Semitism?
So we ask you, how do you feel about this as a human being? Where do you stand on this? Is there any moral justification for the quartering of soldiers in a private home? We hope that this post will not be misinterpreted or be taken as offensive. We believe that this is a legitimate question that demands answers, if we are to ever find an acceptable alternative.
We share this platform for a reason, other than it being a place for us all to co-exist, it is also our duty to confront one another about these realities. As hard as these realities are for us to deal with and discuss, they are even harder for those who have to live it.
Escaping reality is rarely productive, there are some things that we must face. This conflict is one of them. Allow us to move on from pointing fingers, we each already have our own ideas and instead allow us to move on to the real issues, what is happening in reality right now so that we can work together to achieve the only thing that is needed and deserved, a solution. Share with us your opinions, your feelings, the way we are sharing it with you right now. Allow us to understand your stance. We hope this thread will lead to a more productive dialogue.
Join the Conversation
Tamara, I was born in Israel, but left there when I was seven years old. My family goes back in Israel some 200 years. The parents of my grandmother were one of the first sixty families to found the city of Tel-Aviv. And I do love Israel, in many ways, and for many reasons.
You ask if it is just for the Israeli army to occupy an innocent Palestinian family’s home for security reasons? No, it is not just. Some may consider it necessary in the name of self-defense, but it is certainly not an example of justice.
Here’s the thing, Tamara. There will be no justice, until a just solution is found. If justice is what you want, then you have no choice but to bring justice to Israelis and to Palestinians, because justice is what they both deserve and what they both need.
In my heart, I fervently believe, based on everything I know about Israelis, that given half a chance, they could be convinced to buy into a just solution, including a compromise on Jerusalem, on settlements, on refugees, on borders, and all the rest. I believe this because I know Israelis to be peace loving people. I believe this because I know the offer that Clinton and Barak put on the table in the year 2000. I also believe that Israel could be used to revitalize the stagnant economies of the Middle East, which in and of itself, will also bring a good measure of justice.
What I am not sure of, is whether the Palestinian people as a whole, are ready to give up the idea of destroying Israel, for the sake a peace and justice. I am not saying this out of anger. I am saying it simply because groups like Hamas make it very clear, on a daily basis, that they are intent on destroying the Jewish State. And their influence seems to be stifling the wishes of the people on the street who secretly yearn for the peace and justice that you so rightly speak of.
You mean the offer that offered everything Israel wanted and next to nothing the Palestinians wanted? WOW these Israelis are saints.
That’s funny since none of the Palestinians I know don’t seem to share this destroy Israel mentality. You must know some fucked up Palestinians.
Yaaa for theocracy… yaaa for Hamas then. If Hamas represents an average Palestinians then baby killing Israeli soldier represents your average IDF soldier and Kach represent your average Israeli civilians. The day you look at both sides of the conflict with the same eye, you will see the truth, until then good luck trying convince yourself that you are fair. That reminds me, settlements are still expanding… ohh the good Jews… I think I am going to cry by their good nature of stealing people’s land and killing babies.
Hamas offers them food and little bit of social services that these abused Palestinians yearn for hence they support them. Reality bites but maybe if you use your “Common Sense” you might understand something.
I think we have to distinguish between talking about the people and the people in power. You say the Israeli people are in support of peace, and I do beleive you. But I do not think that the Israeli government is interested in anything that would be good for the Palestinians. The same can be said about the Palestinian people and their support for peace vs. the actions and desires of groups in power in Palestine. As long as we don’t make this distinction we will be unable to move on. It is those in ‘power’ who need fighting, not the innocent people of either ‘nation’.
Jina, feisty as ever. That’s a good thing, as long as you don’t hit too far below the belt. Let’s look at some of your points.
The offer put on the table by Clinton and Barak in 2000 was as follows: between 94% and 96% of the West Bank, 1% to 3% of Israeli land to offset the 4% to 6% that Israel would retain for security purposes, all of Gaza, a Palestinian state with Arab Jerusalem as its capital, complete control of East Jerusalem and the Arab Quarter of the Old City, as well as the entire Temple Mount. Israel would retain control of the Western Wall. Israel agreed to accept a limited number of refugees on humanitarian and family unification grounds, but most refugees would live in the Palestinian state. In addition, 30 billion dollars in compensation would be paid to the refugees. Finally, most of the settlements would be dismantled.
Does that offer seem to you to be “everything the Israelis wanted and next to nothing the Palestinians wanted?” Well Jina, that couldn’t be the case, because at Taba, a few weeks later, Arafat seemed willing to reconsider his rejection, but by that time the Second Intifada was in full swing.
Now, you say that the Palestinians you know don’t want to destroy Israel. That is probably the case with you and with me. The trouble is that the majority of people elected Hamas, and therefore, Hamas speaks for the people, even if Hamas does not adequately represent the will of the majority. And Hamas speaks very openly about its intentions, with words, and with missles fired on a daily basis.
In terms of “killing babies” and the like, let me ask you this, Jina: How would Iran respond if a neighboring state decided to launch, on a daily basis, hundreds of mortars and missles, which wounded and killed, and threatened several hundred thousand people? How did Jordan react when Palestinians threatened the rule of law? How did Syria react in Hama when Palestinians began to assert themselves? The death of any child, and of any innocent person, is an insult to God. But it will happen when you are dealing with self-defense. And yes, I wholeheartedly believe that Israel is involved in self-defense and that given the chance, Israel would jump at the chance for peace, as it did with Egypt and Jordan.
And yes, Hamas does consolidate support among the poor by offering social services and charitable handouts. This is all well and good, and is a good strategy for them. But it is not a good strategy for the Palestinian people. There is a high price to pay for all this so called charity. That price is oppression. That price is a dead end life. What is needed is good paying jobs, and Israel could and will make that happen as part and parcel of a peace deal.
Palestinians deserve justice, and deserve a good life. But they have to become open to that possibility. Jews are not bloodthirsty creatures, unlike the way they are depicted in some of these crazy ass cartoons. Jews believe in life, and many of them believe in helping others. Many of them would like nothing better than to partner with the Arab world for the sake of peace, prosperity, and freedom. Even to the most skeptical: what is the harm in giving it a try?
Tamara, I agree with you that the average person on the street is good, and does not want to kill. But unfortunately, we are all at the mercy of the people we choose to put in power. It is our responsibility, and often our risk, to challenge those in power who don’t respresent our best interests. That is true in Israel, and in the rest of the Middle East.
Well, failed agreements, resentment, bitterness and accusations aside, the question is whether soldiers should use civilian dwellings as billets and observation points. First, the question here is: Is Israel and Palestine at war? Hey, stop laughing, I’m serious here. I’m asking this because troops on both sides in WWII regularly used whatever shelter was at hand, including commandeering whatever civlian dwellings were needed. It’s a particularly distasteful one, but there seem to be very few military forces left in the world who respect the principle of trying to avoid civilian involvement. And, to be quite honest, the record of the Palestinian militias in this is pretty much non-existent. The heart of the tactic of guerilla warfare is that the guerilla militia uses the civilian population as camoflauge, counts on the reluctance of the opposing force to indiscriminately kill, and exploits the atrocities that inevitably result to promote their cause.
I’m no fan of the IDF, but this is the heart of it: The Palestinian militias specifically target civilian areas in their attacks, and at the very least show no consideration at all for the principle of civilian detachment in their tactics and strategy. Why is it assumed that their opponent, the IDF, will refrain from taking the same course? Are they supposed to be better than that?
How can a political and military entity be judged unworthy of existence and at the same time be assumed to be ethically superior to the forces that oppose them?
Jina, just a brief note on being Jewish and theocracy. The idea of “Jewish” identity is quite complicated, but “secular Jew” is not an oxymoron. 6 million people (including many members of my family) were not killed in the Holocaust because they were practicing a Jewish religion, but because of their belonging to a particular ethnicity/culture. There is a very vibrant debate within Israel about what it means being “Jewish” and it would be a really wrong generalization to equate “Jewishness” to theocracy.
Jina, many countries are connected between “church and state” and are not necessarily practicing “theocracy”. Many European countries fit into this category where they have an established state religion with a Christian centered identity, even if now-a-days the population is relatively secular and pluralistic. Look at the UK, not only are they a (constitutional) monarchy, the Queen is also they head of their church. Even the now very liberal Scandinavian countries have Lutheranism as their state religion. None-the-less, even without the official state religion, many of these countries still have more religious affiliated parties such as the Christian Democrats in Germany who considered more conservative.
It should also be pointed out that within the Palestinian variation of a consitution, Islam is listed as their state religion. Now, if we take a look at the region of Middle East and its surroundings: Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Mauritania, Islamic Republic of Pakistan. These are just the countries that openly identify with a religion within their names, though a country like Pakistan, even if its government system is a bit shaky at the moment, is certainly not like IRI. I’ll even add to the list countries from that region that just identify with their name with a certain ethnic group. Countries from that region that use ethnicity as the defining feature in their name:Arab Republic of Egypt,United Arab Emirates, Syrian Arab Republic… Of course, even with the ethnic titled countries, some have state religions themselves, along with others not listed.
Ironically, Israel, though known as the ‘Jewish state’, actually does not have a declared state religion…
As a Jew I am disgusted by what Israel is doing to Palestinians right now. There are reasons for it, but there are also reasons why Palestinians shoot rockets. Hamas has claimed that they are interested in a ceasefire, they may be bluffing but I think that Israel should call them on their bluff and agree to a ceasefire. I am also angry that when the Abbas/Fayyad government went into Nablus and restored law and order, Israel did not remove all checkpoints around the city. Such actions leave me wondering how serious Olmert is about peace. I am also angry that my government (the U.S.) has not done anything to bring Israel back to the negotiating table or done anything about illegal Israeli settlements, or other acts that Israel does to undermine peace. Please take note that their are many Jews who feel like I do, even though we may call ourselves pro-Israel.
Thanks Greg, I think your stance on this is both brave and noble. I just wish that more people of this mentality would populate this website, instead of people who are purely interested in Israeli PR and hiding behind a fancy (yet fake) reputation, denying crimes and spewing racism in the process. It hurts many of us, and we react poorly as a result of this pain. Though I won’t apologize to Gila, Curious, and the others who took part in this and defended her racism. I believe all racism should be treated with disrespect.
Oh, I thought this was another thread. But my comment still stands. I was actually intending to use it on this post.
*shrugs* Place your labels all you want, but all it will cause is misinterpretation. If you believe all racism should be treated with disrespect, practice what you preach. I’ve seen stuff flying on both ends, which has been confronted by Greg. I was just saying that that bias and bigotry is formed by life experience. It doesn’t make it right, but a first step to try to get past that is trying to meet with those who cause you harm. I never denied anything, nor wanted any comments erased. I just things were getting to be overheated and not really productive. And I didn’t realize that Jina wasn’t also staff, I thought I recalled that he was the webmaster, but I was mistaken. Hence, my staff term. As for why this topic hasn’t received many responses, simply put, it’s hard to add what was already said. If it makes people feel here better to have a long list to say it’s a shitty thing that the Israeli government practices, alright. I’ll add to the call. It’s a vile practice. The better question is to ask what can be done after. Cheers.
Enlighten me. Where haven’t I practiced what I preach?
You never condemned it. You defended it, reacting just as poorly as anyone else you complained about, and I consider that to be just as bad, if not worse. There is no justification for racism. Why didn’t you fling these comments at Gila then instead of making such a silly and provocative comment that wasn’t even well intentioned? Why doesn’t she take the first step at “meeting the other” instead, especially if she was the one making such hideous and bigoted comments about Arabs and Muslims? It’s not difficult to know why you let such things slide.
Adding what exactly? Hardly anything was said. You’re always ready to fight and call everyone else “babies” when you disagree with them, but when it comes to apologizing for your mistakes, or mistakes happening in your name, you and the rest of the commenters there back out because this reflects poorly on what you believe in.
I do think it’s really hypocritical. Really.
I can go and pick out your comments from the line, then you can argue yes or no, and nothing really great comes out of it. Nothing helpful nor productive. And I as I said, I was just pointing the background of the folks. Gila is angry, Jina is angry and other folks are because of harsh background that formulate their opinions and biases. If they are willing try and get past that or at least converse, then why not let try? Certainly it must be pointed out when folks say something wrong, but it can be done without igniting a fire. Especially Mediterranean/Mid East folks get a bit hot under the collar from real life experience. I’m not sure what I should be apologizing for, but again, if it makes peace here, I apologize for offending you or anyone else.
I meant “my” in the second to last line…
That’s not what you felt before. If it was, you wouldn’t be running around calling everyone else rabid hyenas and children while defending no one else but Gila simply because she represents who and what you are, even if she is a total raging racist.
Actually, she was part of that comment too with the hyena bit. And thanks for the label again.
Anyways, I need to get some work done. Have a good night, afternoon, morning, or whatever the time zone is like on your end. Cheers.
I don’t know why you keep talking about labels. I made a sincere comment and see no labels towards you there except for what I called Gila, and that’s only because she brought it on herself by implying that “Arab nations/Palestinians” (apparently all or the majority) are immoral terrorists. Excuse me if I was utterly offended and disgusted at such idiocy.
Ah. It would have made the whole story simpler if you just pointed that way. It’s better to be direct and to the point with the refutation, which helps dense people, which I fit into that category at times, by highlighting the issue shutting people up.
It’s generally I have a distaste for the name calling/ heckling approach. I think it just inflates and makes unwanted individuals more important than what they are. It’s like how in Germany you’ll have a group of 10 inbred neo-nazis marching and then several hundred anti-neo-nazi protesters who then proceed to kick the asses of neo nazis. The ones who gain from it are the neo-nazis because they get television air time and they get additional police protection for the next round. It’s better to ignore their ridiculous “march” or keep the protest from reverting to a bar brawl.
I may have misunderstood what you implied earlier, but I did criticize Gila. I just got the insinuation that you were applying a label on me, but I guess I was wrong. My apologies if that is the case.
Ah. It would have made the whole story simpler if you just pointed that way. It’s better to be direct and to the point with the refutation, which helps dense people, which I fit into that category at times, by highlighting the issue shutting people up.
It’s generally I have a distaste for the name calling/ heckling approach. I think it just inflates and makes unwanted individuals more important than what they are. It’s like how in Germany you’ll have a group of 10 inbred neo-nazis marching and then several hundred anti-neo-nazi protesters who then proceed to kick the asses of neo nazis. The ones who gain from it are the neo-nazis because they get television air time and they get additional police protection for the next round. It’s better to ignore their ridiculous “march” or keep the protest from reverting to a bar brawl.
I may have misunderstood what you implied earlier, but I did criticize Gila. I just got the insinuation that you were applying a label on me, but I guess I was wrong. My apologies if that is the case.
Now I will stop procrastinating and finish my work…
Curious:
I do not believe there is an “after” if this injustice remains to be dismissed and/or silenced. There is no “after” if the first step, which is to acknowledge and honestly apologise for these mistakes, is skipped. I am not very satisfied with the way many Israelis on this and other websites dodge these types of issues. You keep asking us to find solutions. Well, stop denying your problems, and maybe solutions will come after people start standing up for all human rights and not just the ones of their own.