Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
What "Peace" Really Means to Israelis
Two months ago I returned from a two-week family visit to Israel. Although I am an activist for Palestinian rights, I decided that this visit would be entirely private. Living for two weeks with my brother, his wife and their two little girls in their tiny apartment in a North Tel-Aviv suburb, gave me an opportunity to observe and see what daily life is like for Israelis at the moment.
I did not do anything particularly noteworthy. I went for long walks in the streets of Tel-Aviv and visited many of the places that I knew from my past. I shopped at the local supermaket and had coffee at the nearby shopping mall. I watched local TV and even went to the gym. For two weeks I joined ordinary life in Tel-Aviv. Rather than talk, I did a lot of listening. I speak fluent Hebrew, of course, so it was easy to blend in and people spoke freely around me. Australian media likes to emphasise how hard life is for Israelis, and I wanted to see for myself.
The most obvious thing about Israeli society is how profoundly insecure Israelis feel. They are nervous and twitchy and live with extremely high levels of anxiety. Not that any of this was new to me but there did seem to be a new edge to it. When a bomb exploded in the Ha'carmel Market in central Tel-Aviv, I was at the gym. I looked around me and within moments everyone was on their mobile phones reporting to, or checking on their loved ones. A young woman right next to me in the weights area sighed to herself with anguish, "not again".
Since my adolescence, I was used to having my bags checked whenever I entered a public building like a cinema or a supermarket anywhere in Israel. Despite my 13 years in Australia, the reflex to open my bags was still there. What was different this time was that now security guards also have an electronic detector to scan your body. These days even small businesses like restaurants and coffee shops have their own security guard up the front. There is a small 'security levy' of 2 NIS added onto your bill to help the business pay for the security guard, but you aren't required to pay it.
Israelis have always talked about peace, sung about it, made art and poetry about it as if it is something almost supernatural, some kind of a paradise that they yearn for but that has nothing to do with their everyday reality, and that they have no idea how to create. But what peace really means to these exhausted, anxious Israelis is to be left alone. It was sad and disturbing to see how desperately Israelis hold on to what they believe is 'normality'. They are desperate to be 'like everyone else' in any other Western country, go to work, go shopping, go out to bars and coffee shops with friends. They feel outrage and desperation when Palestinian militants occasionally disrupt this routine of 'normality'. To some degree I can sympathise with that. After all one of the main reasons I left Israel was that I found this way of life unbearable.
When life is so difficult I suppose it is human to wish your difficulties away. But here is where the problem really lies. When an individual, a group or an entire society live with a dark secret or are in denial about something important in their past, they cannot experience peace. It is simply impossible to live a 'normal' or peaceful life on a foundation of lies and secrecy. Denying the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in 1948, trying to not think about the consequences of long years of brutal occupation, and just wishing for it all to go away is no more than a fantasy.
In family therapy there is an accepted principle that unless serious injustices are addressed, there cannot be real peace. Families that protect dark secrets always pay a heavy price. I watched Israeli intellectuals on TV engage in genuine discussion trying to analyse and understand why things are so bad in Israel. They raised every possible reason for the situation other than the most obvious one - Israel's history. It was excruciating to watch but also familiar. I have never seen a society so steeped in denial as Israeli society.
The entire spectrum of Israeli politics is in denial about Israel's history and this is why I do not have much faith in the Israeli Left. The handful that are not in denial like Dr Ilan Pappe who visited Australia last year, or Dr Uri Davis, exist outside this spectrum. Their research into the events of 1948 and the circumstances surrounding the birth of the state of Israel is not discussed on public television and is not in Israeli history books. The average Israeli does not even know who they are. Although published by reputable publishers like Cambridge University Press, Dr Pappe's books have so far been refused publication in Hebrew. The reason offered is that they lack academic merit.
The way most Israelis perceive their own history is as if they have always been the weak victim. The question of whether or not it was morally right or even wise to create a state at the expense of another people is never raised. No one in the mainstream questions the validity of democracy in a country where the right for citizenship is based on race (you can only become an Israeli citizen if you can prove that your mother is Jewish).
When Israelis engage in 'peace talks' it is important to understand their basic position. They have no real interest in a solution that goes to the core of their problem. They are like an individual who wants his or her symptoms to go away but refuses to do anything about their real causes. A wish 'to be left alone' is not much of a basis for a sustainable peace, at least not without another act of ethnic cleansing. Five million Palestinians are there to remind Israel of its past, and they are not going anywhere.
If a day comes, and I hope it does, when Israelis decide to stop living in denial, they will have to realise that real peace will only come through justice. Justice in this context means one thing, that the ideal of an exclusively Jewish state at the cost of an entire people might have to be abandoned. Only a bi-national state and a right of return for the Palestinian refugees will come close enough to rectifying some of the injustices committed in 1948 and since. Having been ethnically cleansed, this is also what the Palestinians are entitled to under international law and common human decency.
This could be Israel's atonement. It will also be Israel's opportunity to free itself from carrying this burden of guilt that I believe is making their lives and the lives of the Palestinians a nightmare. Yes, it will be a challenge. But it will offer a possibility of real and sustainable peace both for Israelis and for Palestinians, possibly for the entire region. Continuing with the mentality and policy of denial will lead nowhere, and will continue to cost the lives and wellbeing of many more people and communities.
Avigail Abarbanel is a former Israeli and a former Staff Sergeant in the Israeli military. She is a psychotherapist/counsellor in private practice in Canberra Australia and an activist for Palestinian rights.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article3548.shtml
The most obvious thing about Israeli society is how profoundly insecure Israelis feel. They are nervous and twitchy and live with extremely high levels of anxiety. Not that any of this was new to me but there did seem to be a new edge to it. When a bomb exploded in the Ha'carmel Market in central Tel-Aviv, I was at the gym. I looked around me and within moments everyone was on their mobile phones reporting to, or checking on their loved ones. A young woman right next to me in the weights area sighed to herself with anguish, "not again".
Since my adolescence, I was used to having my bags checked whenever I entered a public building like a cinema or a supermarket anywhere in Israel. Despite my 13 years in Australia, the reflex to open my bags was still there. What was different this time was that now security guards also have an electronic detector to scan your body. These days even small businesses like restaurants and coffee shops have their own security guard up the front. There is a small 'security levy' of 2 NIS added onto your bill to help the business pay for the security guard, but you aren't required to pay it.
Israelis have always talked about peace, sung about it, made art and poetry about it as if it is something almost supernatural, some kind of a paradise that they yearn for but that has nothing to do with their everyday reality, and that they have no idea how to create. But what peace really means to these exhausted, anxious Israelis is to be left alone. It was sad and disturbing to see how desperately Israelis hold on to what they believe is 'normality'. They are desperate to be 'like everyone else' in any other Western country, go to work, go shopping, go out to bars and coffee shops with friends. They feel outrage and desperation when Palestinian militants occasionally disrupt this routine of 'normality'. To some degree I can sympathise with that. After all one of the main reasons I left Israel was that I found this way of life unbearable.
When life is so difficult I suppose it is human to wish your difficulties away. But here is where the problem really lies. When an individual, a group or an entire society live with a dark secret or are in denial about something important in their past, they cannot experience peace. It is simply impossible to live a 'normal' or peaceful life on a foundation of lies and secrecy. Denying the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in 1948, trying to not think about the consequences of long years of brutal occupation, and just wishing for it all to go away is no more than a fantasy.
In family therapy there is an accepted principle that unless serious injustices are addressed, there cannot be real peace. Families that protect dark secrets always pay a heavy price. I watched Israeli intellectuals on TV engage in genuine discussion trying to analyse and understand why things are so bad in Israel. They raised every possible reason for the situation other than the most obvious one - Israel's history. It was excruciating to watch but also familiar. I have never seen a society so steeped in denial as Israeli society.
The entire spectrum of Israeli politics is in denial about Israel's history and this is why I do not have much faith in the Israeli Left. The handful that are not in denial like Dr Ilan Pappe who visited Australia last year, or Dr Uri Davis, exist outside this spectrum. Their research into the events of 1948 and the circumstances surrounding the birth of the state of Israel is not discussed on public television and is not in Israeli history books. The average Israeli does not even know who they are. Although published by reputable publishers like Cambridge University Press, Dr Pappe's books have so far been refused publication in Hebrew. The reason offered is that they lack academic merit.
The way most Israelis perceive their own history is as if they have always been the weak victim. The question of whether or not it was morally right or even wise to create a state at the expense of another people is never raised. No one in the mainstream questions the validity of democracy in a country where the right for citizenship is based on race (you can only become an Israeli citizen if you can prove that your mother is Jewish).
When Israelis engage in 'peace talks' it is important to understand their basic position. They have no real interest in a solution that goes to the core of their problem. They are like an individual who wants his or her symptoms to go away but refuses to do anything about their real causes. A wish 'to be left alone' is not much of a basis for a sustainable peace, at least not without another act of ethnic cleansing. Five million Palestinians are there to remind Israel of its past, and they are not going anywhere.
If a day comes, and I hope it does, when Israelis decide to stop living in denial, they will have to realise that real peace will only come through justice. Justice in this context means one thing, that the ideal of an exclusively Jewish state at the cost of an entire people might have to be abandoned. Only a bi-national state and a right of return for the Palestinian refugees will come close enough to rectifying some of the injustices committed in 1948 and since. Having been ethnically cleansed, this is also what the Palestinians are entitled to under international law and common human decency.
This could be Israel's atonement. It will also be Israel's opportunity to free itself from carrying this burden of guilt that I believe is making their lives and the lives of the Palestinians a nightmare. Yes, it will be a challenge. But it will offer a possibility of real and sustainable peace both for Israelis and for Palestinians, possibly for the entire region. Continuing with the mentality and policy of denial will lead nowhere, and will continue to cost the lives and wellbeing of many more people and communities.
Avigail Abarbanel is a former Israeli and a former Staff Sergeant in the Israeli military. She is a psychotherapist/counsellor in private practice in Canberra Australia and an activist for Palestinian rights.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article3548.shtml
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Arguing about Jews and Israel is a foolish excercise. Israel was not created by Jews, or the United Nations, or Zionists. It was created by Allah (swt).
As revealed by Allah (swt) through his Final Prophet Muhamed (pbuh)and displayed for all to see in the Holy Qur'an, Israel belongs to the Jews:
THE HOLY QUR'AN SAYS:
"To Moses We [Allah] gave nine clear signs. Ask the Israelites how he [Moses] first appeared amongst them. Pharoah said to him: 'Moses, I can see that you are bewitched.' 'You know full well,' he [Moses] replied, 'that none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth has revealed these visible signs. Pharoah, you are doomed.'"
"Pharoah sought to scare them [the Israelites] out of the land [of Israel]: but We [Allah] drowned him [Pharoah] together with all who were with him. Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: 'Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel]."
"We [Allah] have revealed the Qur'an with the truth, and with the truth it has come down. We have sent you [Muhammed] forth only to proclaim good news and to give warning."
[Qur'an, "Night Journey," chapter 17:100-10
It is ironic that it is Muslims both Arab and non-Arab who defy and deny the Will of Allah (swt)
For it was HIM who created Israel Masha'allah.
The Arab Muslim's quest for land and domination is contrary to His Will.
As revealed by Allah (swt) through his Final Prophet Muhamed (pbuh)and displayed for all to see in the Holy Qur'an, Israel belongs to the Jews:
THE HOLY QUR'AN SAYS:
"To Moses We [Allah] gave nine clear signs. Ask the Israelites how he [Moses] first appeared amongst them. Pharoah said to him: 'Moses, I can see that you are bewitched.' 'You know full well,' he [Moses] replied, 'that none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth has revealed these visible signs. Pharoah, you are doomed.'"
"Pharoah sought to scare them [the Israelites] out of the land [of Israel]: but We [Allah] drowned him [Pharoah] together with all who were with him. Then We [Allah] said to the Israelites: 'Dwell in this land [the Land of Israel]. When the promise of the hereafter [End of Days] comes to be fulfilled, We [Allah] shall assemble you [the Israelites] all together [in the Land of Israel]."
"We [Allah] have revealed the Qur'an with the truth, and with the truth it has come down. We have sent you [Muhammed] forth only to proclaim good news and to give warning."
[Qur'an, "Night Journey," chapter 17:100-10
It is ironic that it is Muslims both Arab and non-Arab who defy and deny the Will of Allah (swt)
For it was HIM who created Israel Masha'allah.
The Arab Muslim's quest for land and domination is contrary to His Will.
That's funny. So according to that "eletronic INTIFADA" contributor, the only way Israelis can have peace is if Israelis give Israel up as a Jewish state.
That's pretty funny. So if Israel kills itself, Israel can have peace.
Gee, no thanks.
Israel can have peace if the idiots outside of Israel ever stop attacking Israel. That's how Israel can have peace.
That's pretty funny. So if Israel kills itself, Israel can have peace.
Gee, no thanks.
Israel can have peace if the idiots outside of Israel ever stop attacking Israel. That's how Israel can have peace.
Updated: Tue 25 Jan 2005 | 07:43 GMT
Abbas calls Israel "Zionist enemy"
Tue Jan 4, 2005 09:49 AM GMT
Printer Friendly | Email Article | RSS
GAZA (Reuters) - Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas has called Israel "the Zionist enemy" in a campaign speech at a militant stronghold, unprecedented language for the relative moderate who is expected to succeed Yasser Arafat.
The words were certain to stir concerns in Israel, where images of Abbas embracing fighters during the campaign for a January 9 elections have led some to question hopes for reviving peace talks after Arafat's death.
Abbas was speaking on Tuesday after Israeli troops killed seven Palestinians at a strawberry farm in Gaza following a mortar attack by militants there that wounded Jewish settlers.
"We are praying for the souls of our martyrs who fell today to the shells of the Zionist enemy," he told a campaign rally in Khan Younis, a stronghold of militants waging a four-year-old uprising.
Arafat, accused by Israel and the United States of obstructing peace, had not used such language in public for many years -- more akin to the statements of Islamic militants who are committed to destroying Israel.
Abbas has gone out of his way to woo militants during his campaign. He needs to win them over if he is to have any hope of securing a truce that could allow any resumption of negotiations with Israel.
Abbas opposes armed struggle and says he wants peace with Israel, but he has emphasised that he sees militants as heroes of the struggle for a state whose security must be assured.
Disappointing some Israeli commentators, he has also stuck very firmly to Arafat's old commitments to a Palestinian state on all of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem -- captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war.
© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=648144
That article is not original to Electronic Intifada. At the bottom it states:
Avigail Abarbanel is a former Israeli and a former Staff Sergeant in the Israeli military. She is a psychotherapist/counsellor in private practice in Canberra Australia and an activist for Palestinian rights. This article was first published on the Peacepalestine blog http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/ .
Avigail Abarbanel is a former Israeli and a former Staff Sergeant in the Israeli military. She is a psychotherapist/counsellor in private practice in Canberra Australia and an activist for Palestinian rights. This article was first published on the Peacepalestine blog http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/ .
The writer suggests that for peace to come, Israel has to destroy itself.
The writer is an idiot.
The writer is an idiot.
Funny how all the "Peace for Palestine" people don't suggest that peace will come if people stop attacking Israel. They suggest that peace will come if people destroy Israel.
So if Muslims swarm into Israel, take it over, and kill all the jews, then there will be peace. This is today's LEFT?
So if Muslims swarm into Israel, take it over, and kill all the jews, then there will be peace. This is today's LEFT?
Jordan, syria, lebanon do not offer palestinians citizenship.
There are palestinian "REFUGEES" from like 50 years ago that live in jordan, syria and lebanon, yet NOT as citizens, but as "refugees."
Israel accepted jewish refugees as citizens.
Ever wonder why arab countries who CRY BULLSHIT CROCODILE TEARS for the palis refuse to grant them citizenship?
If your friend is homeless, and you are an oil tycoon with a 500 room mantion, do you keep your friend living in a tent in the backyard or do you invite him inside?
If your friend is really your friend, you invite him inside (offer citizenship).
If your friend isn't really your friend, and you're just a jew-hating moron, you keep your friend living in a tent, don't offer citizenship, and encourage him to blow himself up as long as he takes some jews with him.
And such is the middle east, 50+ muslim countries, many ofw hich are STINKING RICH thanks to oil, yet the only money they ever seem to donate to fellow muslims is money that goes to suicide bombers
There are palestinian "REFUGEES" from like 50 years ago that live in jordan, syria and lebanon, yet NOT as citizens, but as "refugees."
Israel accepted jewish refugees as citizens.
Ever wonder why arab countries who CRY BULLSHIT CROCODILE TEARS for the palis refuse to grant them citizenship?
If your friend is homeless, and you are an oil tycoon with a 500 room mantion, do you keep your friend living in a tent in the backyard or do you invite him inside?
If your friend is really your friend, you invite him inside (offer citizenship).
If your friend isn't really your friend, and you're just a jew-hating moron, you keep your friend living in a tent, don't offer citizenship, and encourage him to blow himself up as long as he takes some jews with him.
And such is the middle east, 50+ muslim countries, many ofw hich are STINKING RICH thanks to oil, yet the only money they ever seem to donate to fellow muslims is money that goes to suicide bombers
(a) Cleanse the Palestinians off the land and (b) take a piece of Palestine here and (repeat a) take a piece of Palestine there and (repeat a) take a piece of Palestine over there and (repeat a) take more and more pieces of Palestine and keep repeating what's true: "Israel wants piece"!
"I watched Israeli intellectuals on TV engage in genuine discussion trying to analyse and understand why things are so bad in Israel. They raised every possible reason for the situation other than the most obvious one - Israel's history. It was excruciating to watch but also familiar. I have never seen a society so steeped in denial as Israeli society."
Sounds like American TV pundits asking, steeped in denial about the horrendous foreign policy history of the U.S. in the Arab/Mulsim world, "Why, oh why, do they hate us?"
Sounds like American TV pundits asking, steeped in denial about the horrendous foreign policy history of the U.S. in the Arab/Mulsim world, "Why, oh why, do they hate us?"
That's a familiar tune about Israeli society as a whole, but oh so wrong. Many segments of Israeli society are more aware of and more admitting to past Israeli injustices toward Arabs than you'd know.
last week, when they announced the seizure of Palestinian lands in East Jerusalem, as reported in Haaretz and the Washington Post, pursuant to the "Absentee Property Law of 1950"
apparently, peace for Israel is some sort of equivalent of the Homestead Act, with the primary difference being that the lands distributed under the Act were taken from Native Americans, while the Israelis took the land from the Palestinians
a curious thing for a government to do that purports to want to end the conflict
--Richard
apparently, peace for Israel is some sort of equivalent of the Homestead Act, with the primary difference being that the lands distributed under the Act were taken from Native Americans, while the Israelis took the land from the Palestinians
a curious thing for a government to do that purports to want to end the conflict
--Richard
Presently there's only a temporary, apparently somewhat wobbly truce.
Additionally, RWF seems to have glossed over two important pertinent points I illuminated on the thread he launched featuring the Ha'aretz articule.
1. Palestinians whose land was confiscated under that 1950 law may apply for Israeli residency, which would entitle them to turn to the Custodian for guaranteed compensation.
2. Some of the confiscated property may actually belong to Jews who were forced out of East Jerusalem in 1948 during the Arab ethnic cleansing of that part of the city and the disputed territories.
Additionally, RWF seems to have glossed over two important pertinent points I illuminated on the thread he launched featuring the Ha'aretz articule.
1. Palestinians whose land was confiscated under that 1950 law may apply for Israeli residency, which would entitle them to turn to the Custodian for guaranteed compensation.
2. Some of the confiscated property may actually belong to Jews who were forced out of East Jerusalem in 1948 during the Arab ethnic cleansing of that part of the city and the disputed territories.
RWF seems to have glossed over two important pertinent points
well EXCUSE THE HELL OUT OF ME FOR NOT SPOON FEEDING THE POLITICAL SITUATION
well EXCUSE THE HELL OUT OF ME FOR NOT SPOON FEEDING THE POLITICAL SITUATION
January 12, 2005 No.845
Progressive Arab Intellectual: 'The New Palestinian Leadership Must Not Make Populist Decisions, but Must be Courageous and Think of the Country's Best Interests'
Dr. Shaker Al-Nabulsi, a progressive Jordanian intellectual living in the U.S., recently published an article in the Qatari daily Al-Raya titled "'Mahmoud Abbas' - Not 'Abu Mazen,'" in which he claimed that the death of Yasser Arafat – who he describes as "a bone in the throat of the Palestinian cause" – constituted a breakthrough for the Palestinian cause, and that Mahmoud Abbas, unlike Arafat, should refrain from making populist decisions, should rely upon the constitutional institutions, and should incorporate intellectuals and businessmen in the building of the Palestinian state. The following are excerpts from his article: [1]
"The Arab Media Must Stop Using the Nickname 'Abu'"
"First of all, I ask the Arab media to stop repeating the nickname 'Abu Mazen.' This nickname is [one] of the leftovers from the revolution stage and its 'Abu's, which ended with the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, [and gave way to] the stage of the building of the Palestinian state, [a stage] that required brains and realism, and not fists and 'Abu's.
"Today Mahmoud Abbas is not a revolutionary or the leader of a gang war. He is a political leader and a statesman. He has not come to lead a revolution for the eradication of Israel, but to build a Palestinian state and to reach an understanding with Israel on this issue.
"Following the 'Aqaba and Sharm Al-Sheikh summits in 2003, [Abbas] made a courageous statement that the Palestinian problem is a political problem, requiring a political solution. This is the only realistic statement made in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, which no [other] Arab leader – not even [Egyptian President] Abd Al-Nasser – dared to make. The price [of this statement] was the sacrifice of Abbas's political future for some time, when Arafat pulled the red carpet out from under [his feet]…"
Why Was Arafat 'A Bone in the Throat' of the Palestinians?
"There were many reasons for this, primarily the following:
"* Arafat's personality remained at [the stage when he was] the leader of a gang war, and did not move to the stage of becoming the political leader of a nation with a complex, intricate, and long history.
"* Arafat was sick with mythomania, the condition of compulsive lying, one of the symptoms of hysteria, [a symptom] that causes people to lie unconsciously, just like breathing.
"* Arafat was one of the Third World leaders who used to surprise the decision-makers in the region and the world with unexpected [actions], such as the establishment of the Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which increased the militarization of the Intifada and drove the peaceful solutions to the Palestinian problem further away…
"* Israel, the West, and the U.S. did not believe Arafat's words, statements, or decisions. These were not institutional, but individual, temperamental decisions, which surrendered to the will of the Palestinian masses. Arafat constantly demanded, and never gave a thing. As a leader, he was a tactician, not a strategist.
"* Arafat was a populist, irrational leader, like any Third World leader who succumbed to the will of the public that created and crowned him, and [who] did not [work to fulfill] the needs of the public, present or future. His main concern was to please the public, which succumbed to his impulses, suffering from his bleeding, narcissistic, religious, national wounds.
"* Arafat and a group of Palestinian poets, headed by Mahmoud Darwish, his cultural advisor and speechwriter for over twenty years, Samih Al-Qassem, Haroun Hashem Rashid, 'Izz Al-Din Al-Manasrah, and others, converted the Palestinian problem since 1948 from a purely political problem to an imaginary lyrical problem that made them poetic superstars. That is what Arafat did when he refused all the political settlements that were offered him, which he viewed through the binoculars of the poet Darwish, and not through those of the realistic politician…
"If [Arafat] had been like Nelson Mandela – as he would have liked – he would have signed the peace agreement at Camp David in 2000. But he did not, because he was Arafat, not Mandela.
"* Indeed, Arafat is the one who put the Palestinian problem on the world map, but on the other hand, he did not help this problem in the domestic [Palestinian] arena. He did not build the institutions of the Palestinian Authority, and did not formulate the Palestinian laws. He let the country become [full of] corruption and anarchy, which ensured the stability of his regime while being a disaster for the Palestinians…
"* Finally, Arafat was a schizophrenic leader. He waved the olive leaf in the U.N. and among international circles, all the while brandishing the rifle in Amman, Beirut, Gaza and Ramallah. The international community could not place him within the peace camp or within the camp of war. This aimless wandering – in relation both to this matter and to other matters – led the Palestinian problem in various, complex, and intricate directions, all as a result of the succumbing of the Palestinian problem to the personal political temper of the leader, instead of to constitutional institutions."
Since Arafat Died the Doors Have Opened
"There is no doubt that Yasser Arafat's death opened most of the doors that had been closed to the Palestinian state. Within a month of Arafat's death, there has been progress, the likes of which the Palestinian Authority has not undergone from 1994 to this day!
"After Arafat's death, Israel has become more flexible, and Israeli public opinion has become slightly more flexible [too]. Their ears have opened, even slightly, to the call for peace. This is despite the attempts of armed Palestinian religious fundamentalism, with all its factions, to close these ears by means of suicide operations … and by means of declarations of 'bravado' issued by the leaders of these factions over the Arab satellite channels. They are playing with fire without knowing the extent of its danger, in light of the great continuous changes that have taken place in the world…
"After Arafat's death, the Arab-Palestinian reconciliation took place, restoring Arab-Palestinian relations, which were destroyed by Arafat's 'tales of bravado,' and by his irresponsible and unbalanced political positions. Moreover, the doors to Damascus, Kuwait, Beirut, Riyadh, Doha, Amman, and other Arab capitals have been opened to the new leaders of the Palestinian state.
"After Arafat's death, the Europeans and the Americans were relieved. They began to come in their masses to the offices of the PA in order to support the new regime and to participate in the establishment of the democratic Palestinian state by paving the way for elections, by removing all obstacles [to elections] and by supporting the new political trend of the Palestinian leaders...
"We see that Arafat's death has opened a [new] window for the Palestinians. What the Palestinian people, the Arabs, the Europeans, and the Americans did not manage to do, was done by the heavens, which intervened at the right time and the right place and removed this bone wedged in the throats of the Palestinians, which obstructed Palestinian breathing and almost suffocated the Palestinian cause to death…"
Abbas's Path to the Palestinian State
"* Abbas must put an end to the unrealistic illusions that Arafat promised the bleeding, revolutionary public, and must confront them with the bitter truths. One of these truths is that the return of four million Palestinian refugees to Israel is an utterly impossible [demand], which spells out the destruction of the State of Israel. If there is a right of return for the refugees, the only place that can absorb them is the land of the Palestinian state.
"* Palestinian decision-making should not be carried out by the leader, but by the constitutional institutions, the elected legislative authority, and the advisors in educational and research institutes.
"* Political decision-making [must be carried out] on the basis of the interests of the Palestinian people, and not on the basis of its desires and hopes. The populist decisions adopted by the Arab political leaders were the cause of the Arabs' disasters and their regression to their current situation. The Palestinian leadership must be courageous and not think about itself and its fate while making a political decision, but [must] bear in mind the interests of the homeland, the nation, and the future of the generations [to come].
"* A collective Palestinian decision must be taken to stop the militarization of the Intifada and the anarchy in the carrying of guns. The militias and military gangs must be turned into political parties, [and they] must be incorporated into a political Palestinian entity and be allowed to express their opinion in political, not military, ways.
"* All the intellectuals and businessmen should participate in the political building of the Palestinian state. Intellectuals should participate [in the building of the state] by means of [political] awareness, a call for political rationalism, and by fighting against suicide operations. Businessmen should participate [in the building of the state] by means of support of Palestine's economy and by building the institutions of a civil society. These should replace the social institutions which were established by the armed religious factions and through which [they] have managed to rake in the support of a large sector of Palestinian society."
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD84505
Progressive Arab Intellectual: 'The New Palestinian Leadership Must Not Make Populist Decisions, but Must be Courageous and Think of the Country's Best Interests'
Dr. Shaker Al-Nabulsi, a progressive Jordanian intellectual living in the U.S., recently published an article in the Qatari daily Al-Raya titled "'Mahmoud Abbas' - Not 'Abu Mazen,'" in which he claimed that the death of Yasser Arafat – who he describes as "a bone in the throat of the Palestinian cause" – constituted a breakthrough for the Palestinian cause, and that Mahmoud Abbas, unlike Arafat, should refrain from making populist decisions, should rely upon the constitutional institutions, and should incorporate intellectuals and businessmen in the building of the Palestinian state. The following are excerpts from his article: [1]
"The Arab Media Must Stop Using the Nickname 'Abu'"
"First of all, I ask the Arab media to stop repeating the nickname 'Abu Mazen.' This nickname is [one] of the leftovers from the revolution stage and its 'Abu's, which ended with the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, [and gave way to] the stage of the building of the Palestinian state, [a stage] that required brains and realism, and not fists and 'Abu's.
"Today Mahmoud Abbas is not a revolutionary or the leader of a gang war. He is a political leader and a statesman. He has not come to lead a revolution for the eradication of Israel, but to build a Palestinian state and to reach an understanding with Israel on this issue.
"Following the 'Aqaba and Sharm Al-Sheikh summits in 2003, [Abbas] made a courageous statement that the Palestinian problem is a political problem, requiring a political solution. This is the only realistic statement made in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, which no [other] Arab leader – not even [Egyptian President] Abd Al-Nasser – dared to make. The price [of this statement] was the sacrifice of Abbas's political future for some time, when Arafat pulled the red carpet out from under [his feet]…"
Why Was Arafat 'A Bone in the Throat' of the Palestinians?
"There were many reasons for this, primarily the following:
"* Arafat's personality remained at [the stage when he was] the leader of a gang war, and did not move to the stage of becoming the political leader of a nation with a complex, intricate, and long history.
"* Arafat was sick with mythomania, the condition of compulsive lying, one of the symptoms of hysteria, [a symptom] that causes people to lie unconsciously, just like breathing.
"* Arafat was one of the Third World leaders who used to surprise the decision-makers in the region and the world with unexpected [actions], such as the establishment of the Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which increased the militarization of the Intifada and drove the peaceful solutions to the Palestinian problem further away…
"* Israel, the West, and the U.S. did not believe Arafat's words, statements, or decisions. These were not institutional, but individual, temperamental decisions, which surrendered to the will of the Palestinian masses. Arafat constantly demanded, and never gave a thing. As a leader, he was a tactician, not a strategist.
"* Arafat was a populist, irrational leader, like any Third World leader who succumbed to the will of the public that created and crowned him, and [who] did not [work to fulfill] the needs of the public, present or future. His main concern was to please the public, which succumbed to his impulses, suffering from his bleeding, narcissistic, religious, national wounds.
"* Arafat and a group of Palestinian poets, headed by Mahmoud Darwish, his cultural advisor and speechwriter for over twenty years, Samih Al-Qassem, Haroun Hashem Rashid, 'Izz Al-Din Al-Manasrah, and others, converted the Palestinian problem since 1948 from a purely political problem to an imaginary lyrical problem that made them poetic superstars. That is what Arafat did when he refused all the political settlements that were offered him, which he viewed through the binoculars of the poet Darwish, and not through those of the realistic politician…
"If [Arafat] had been like Nelson Mandela – as he would have liked – he would have signed the peace agreement at Camp David in 2000. But he did not, because he was Arafat, not Mandela.
"* Indeed, Arafat is the one who put the Palestinian problem on the world map, but on the other hand, he did not help this problem in the domestic [Palestinian] arena. He did not build the institutions of the Palestinian Authority, and did not formulate the Palestinian laws. He let the country become [full of] corruption and anarchy, which ensured the stability of his regime while being a disaster for the Palestinians…
"* Finally, Arafat was a schizophrenic leader. He waved the olive leaf in the U.N. and among international circles, all the while brandishing the rifle in Amman, Beirut, Gaza and Ramallah. The international community could not place him within the peace camp or within the camp of war. This aimless wandering – in relation both to this matter and to other matters – led the Palestinian problem in various, complex, and intricate directions, all as a result of the succumbing of the Palestinian problem to the personal political temper of the leader, instead of to constitutional institutions."
Since Arafat Died the Doors Have Opened
"There is no doubt that Yasser Arafat's death opened most of the doors that had been closed to the Palestinian state. Within a month of Arafat's death, there has been progress, the likes of which the Palestinian Authority has not undergone from 1994 to this day!
"After Arafat's death, Israel has become more flexible, and Israeli public opinion has become slightly more flexible [too]. Their ears have opened, even slightly, to the call for peace. This is despite the attempts of armed Palestinian religious fundamentalism, with all its factions, to close these ears by means of suicide operations … and by means of declarations of 'bravado' issued by the leaders of these factions over the Arab satellite channels. They are playing with fire without knowing the extent of its danger, in light of the great continuous changes that have taken place in the world…
"After Arafat's death, the Arab-Palestinian reconciliation took place, restoring Arab-Palestinian relations, which were destroyed by Arafat's 'tales of bravado,' and by his irresponsible and unbalanced political positions. Moreover, the doors to Damascus, Kuwait, Beirut, Riyadh, Doha, Amman, and other Arab capitals have been opened to the new leaders of the Palestinian state.
"After Arafat's death, the Europeans and the Americans were relieved. They began to come in their masses to the offices of the PA in order to support the new regime and to participate in the establishment of the democratic Palestinian state by paving the way for elections, by removing all obstacles [to elections] and by supporting the new political trend of the Palestinian leaders...
"We see that Arafat's death has opened a [new] window for the Palestinians. What the Palestinian people, the Arabs, the Europeans, and the Americans did not manage to do, was done by the heavens, which intervened at the right time and the right place and removed this bone wedged in the throats of the Palestinians, which obstructed Palestinian breathing and almost suffocated the Palestinian cause to death…"
Abbas's Path to the Palestinian State
"* Abbas must put an end to the unrealistic illusions that Arafat promised the bleeding, revolutionary public, and must confront them with the bitter truths. One of these truths is that the return of four million Palestinian refugees to Israel is an utterly impossible [demand], which spells out the destruction of the State of Israel. If there is a right of return for the refugees, the only place that can absorb them is the land of the Palestinian state.
"* Palestinian decision-making should not be carried out by the leader, but by the constitutional institutions, the elected legislative authority, and the advisors in educational and research institutes.
"* Political decision-making [must be carried out] on the basis of the interests of the Palestinian people, and not on the basis of its desires and hopes. The populist decisions adopted by the Arab political leaders were the cause of the Arabs' disasters and their regression to their current situation. The Palestinian leadership must be courageous and not think about itself and its fate while making a political decision, but [must] bear in mind the interests of the homeland, the nation, and the future of the generations [to come].
"* A collective Palestinian decision must be taken to stop the militarization of the Intifada and the anarchy in the carrying of guns. The militias and military gangs must be turned into political parties, [and they] must be incorporated into a political Palestinian entity and be allowed to express their opinion in political, not military, ways.
"* All the intellectuals and businessmen should participate in the political building of the Palestinian state. Intellectuals should participate [in the building of the state] by means of [political] awareness, a call for political rationalism, and by fighting against suicide operations. Businessmen should participate [in the building of the state] by means of support of Palestine's economy and by building the institutions of a civil society. These should replace the social institutions which were established by the armed religious factions and through which [they] have managed to rake in the support of a large sector of Palestinian society."
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD84505
Critical Thinker Tuesday, Jan. 25, 2005 at 5:45 AM:
"Many segments of Israeli society are more aware of and more admitting to past Israeli injustices toward Arabs than you'd know."
Let's hear you specifically acknowledge, name, those injustices. Maybe you can start with the claim of 'a land without a people' and go on from there. We've already heard you be in plenty of denial.
(First of all, you won't even call them Palestinians, which is what they want to be called. Or do you still call Asians "orientals" and African Americans "negroes"?)
"Many segments of Israeli society are more aware of and more admitting to past Israeli injustices toward Arabs than you'd know."
Let's hear you specifically acknowledge, name, those injustices. Maybe you can start with the claim of 'a land without a people' and go on from there. We've already heard you be in plenty of denial.
(First of all, you won't even call them Palestinians, which is what they want to be called. Or do you still call Asians "orientals" and African Americans "negroes"?)
The title I chose for this post is the colloquial Hebrew equivalent of "hey dreamer, where have been all this time?". I've been referring to the Palestinians as such for nearly a year now on Indymedia whenever I'm not discussing pre-1977 events.
>>>"'funny', we've never heard you zionists name any of those injustices."<<<
Have you been watching TV talk shows in Israel over the last odd decade?
CT: Many segments of Israeli society are more aware of and more admitting to past Israeli injustices toward Arabs than you'd know.
>>>"Let's hear you specifically acknowledge, name, those injustices. Maybe you can start with the claim of 'a land without a people' and go on from there. We've already heard you be in plenty of denial.
This "a land without a people" line reflected factual truth as I've taken pains to state repeatedly on this site and others. You and your cohorts are the ones in denial about this historical fact, namely that many people, primarily Arabs, populated the Land of Israel but there was no Palestinian people.
Many Israelis do acknowledge that about 115 innocent Arabs were murdered in Deir Yassin.
Many Israelis do acknowledge that the Arabs of Lyda, Ramle and other locations were forced out.
Many Israelis do acknowledge that the Israeli Arabs have been subject to unfair discrimination in various spheres of Israeli life.
I'm not willing to bet you'll ever acknowledge that the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the disputed territories in 1948 was an Arab injustice, or that the Jordanians unjustly barred Jews from access to their holy sites in Judea-Samaria, or that the wholesale Jordanian desecration of the Mount of Olives Jewish cemetery and the destruction of 56 synagogues in E. Jerusalem were despicable crimes, or that the stealing of Jewish property from Jews who had been ethnically cleansed from that part of the city was a crime.
But do you have the requisite fortitude to acknowledge? Or are you too proud?
>>>"'funny', we've never heard you zionists name any of those injustices."<<<
Have you been watching TV talk shows in Israel over the last odd decade?
CT: Many segments of Israeli society are more aware of and more admitting to past Israeli injustices toward Arabs than you'd know.
>>>"Let's hear you specifically acknowledge, name, those injustices. Maybe you can start with the claim of 'a land without a people' and go on from there. We've already heard you be in plenty of denial.
This "a land without a people" line reflected factual truth as I've taken pains to state repeatedly on this site and others. You and your cohorts are the ones in denial about this historical fact, namely that many people, primarily Arabs, populated the Land of Israel but there was no Palestinian people.
Many Israelis do acknowledge that about 115 innocent Arabs were murdered in Deir Yassin.
Many Israelis do acknowledge that the Arabs of Lyda, Ramle and other locations were forced out.
Many Israelis do acknowledge that the Israeli Arabs have been subject to unfair discrimination in various spheres of Israeli life.
I'm not willing to bet you'll ever acknowledge that the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the disputed territories in 1948 was an Arab injustice, or that the Jordanians unjustly barred Jews from access to their holy sites in Judea-Samaria, or that the wholesale Jordanian desecration of the Mount of Olives Jewish cemetery and the destruction of 56 synagogues in E. Jerusalem were despicable crimes, or that the stealing of Jewish property from Jews who had been ethnically cleansed from that part of the city was a crime.
But do you have the requisite fortitude to acknowledge? Or are you too proud?
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$40.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network