That Good Night - Israel

Corrections

Sun, 05 Dec 2004 13:03:27 -0800

"Loosely" based on this alJazeera article and this story from this site:

Hamas: Statements Were In Error

WEST BANK - Hamas issued a correction and an apology, Sunday, for confusion generated by recent public statements.
"Hamas apologizes for any confusion and false-hope generated by our recent statements. It is possible to interpret these statements as meaning that Hamas supports non-violent activity when in fact it does not," said a senior Hamas official speaking before a suicide-bomber brainwashing clinic.
Hope was raised in the past few days that Hamas might declare a cease-fire and recognize Israel as a country with a right to exist.
"We reiterate our goal of liberating the whole of Palestine from the Zionist enemy and casting them into the sea."

[/satire] (but not by much, really)

Cursed With An Opportunity?

Fri, 03 Dec 2004 19:54:42 -0800

War is a mental illness; an addiction. It becomes routine, perpetuated by cynicism grown rampant - contempt prior to investigation. Whether you believe in the "cycle of violence" or whether you think that's another "terrorist-loving liberal" buzzword, war involves cyclical thinking, like so many obsessive mental disorders. The true cycle of violence takes place not in the "real world" where lives are traded, but in the thoughts of those who perpetuate the violence. Once you've killed one of the "enemy," how can you not feel that the rest are after you? How can you ever feel safe again?

(via The American Errorist)

From Ha'aretz:

"Hamas has announced that it accepts a Palestinian independent state within the 1967 borders with a long-term truce," Sheikh Hassan Yousef, the top Hamas leader in the West Bank, told The Associated Press, referring to lands Israel captured in the 1967 Mideast war.

[...]

"For us a truce means that two warring parties live side by side in peace and security for a certain period and this period is eligible for renewal," Yousef said. "That means Hamas accepts that the other party will live in security and peace."

Now I can see two main paths that Israel can go with this.

Quantification of Suffering

Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:01:26 -0700

Tonight was the first night that I chose to watch the horrifying images on the news of the elementary school in Russia that was taken over by terrorists. I had avoided watching them over the past few days. I didn't want to see. But now that I have seen them, I've been thinking about a principle. That principle is about suffering and basically what I've come to understand is that all who suffer do not suffer equally. I believe that suffering can be quantified.

Terrorism is so complicated and yet so simple. It is an act which is completely morally deplorable. At the same time, it is entirely predictable. It arises in similar circumstances everywhere and if you create the situations where terrorism seems to prosper, you can provoke it. As morally reprehensible as terrorism is, it is a natural human response to oppression. It's tears the soul apart to think about terrorism because we so justifiably hate what terrorists do, but if we have any humanity at all we must also sympathize with the circumstances that caused them to resort to terrorism in the first place.

Misplaced Optimism

Tue, 27 Jul 2004 09:36:49 -0700

In a recent article (Arafat to Turn Over Security Forces), I allowed myself to be cautiously optimistic about the chances for reform.

Getting the security forces out of Arafat's hands and into the hands of someone who would use them to...I don't know...increase Palestinian security, is a necessary step on the path to peace.

It appears that my optimism was misplaced. According to this article from Haaretz, Arafat will retain control of "most" of the security forces which means that very little will change. As a leader, he does his people a disservice.

Lesser of Two Evils

Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:22:15 -0700

I find myself, today, having to side with Ariel Sharon in the latest edition of selecting the lesser of two evils (for another example, I refer you to Bush vs. Kerry).

The more I think about it, the more I realize that many of the objections I have to Sharon's planned pullout from Gaza and parts of the West Bank as well as the "security barrier" (wall/fence) have to do largely with the fact that Sharon can't be trusted to carry them out lawfully.

I'm not willing to condemn either action out of hand. I can envision circumstances under which a leader could enact both of these plans in a way that improves the lives of not only Israelis, but the Palestinian populations that they currently occupy. Sharon is not a man who can do that in the same way that George W. Bush cannot be trusted to wage a "war on terrorism." They are both far too corrupt.

Arafat To Turn Over Security Forces

Thu, 22 Jul 2004 06:04:31 -0700

I have learned to be skeptical that the diverse, fragmented and embattled Palestinian leadership would ever be able to make progress on its own. I am still skeptical.

But according to an article in Haaretz this morning, Arafat will turn over the security forces to Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia and allow him to reshuffle the cabinet. These were Qureia's key demands to Arafat after his resignation was rejected.

I guess I'll go on with a little bit of hope for a while. Sometime that is absolutely essential for peace is for the Palestinian leadership to be able to prevent militant groups like Hamas from attacking Israeli civilians.

"If we can't restore public order and law ... this will bring the greatest damage to the Palestinian people and their cause," PA Minister Saeb Erekat said Wednesday. "It's the whole social fabric that is collapsing now."

I won't say that they must do this "first" because that's simply not true. There are many things that must happen at once on both sides. But somewhere between "here" and "peace," the bombers must be stopped, and I think the only way that can be done is internally. The power to do that is certainly lacking, but any attempt to do it from outside will do nothing but redouble the militants' efforts.

UN Resolution: Sharon, Tear Down Your Wall

Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:31:38 -0700

Much of the world community is loudly denouncing Israel for its plans to ignore the UN General Assembly resolution requiring the dismantlement of the West Bank security barrier (The Guardian). I am neither surprised nor particularly distraught by this development. Neither this resolution nor the ICJ ruling are binding in any way which makes them hard for Israel to take seriously -- they're opinions of the world community. Frankly, when was the last time that America did something because the UN said so? Certainly invading Iraq wasn't really what the UN had in mind, so why should we be so surprised that we're not the only country that ignores the UN?

To its credit though, the resolution deals mainly with where the wall is built not that it is being built. I think that if Sharon were to build the wall on the green line there wouldn't be nearly so much world opposition to it. But I'm not particularly interested in either the ICJ or UN General Assembly rulings. They were easily predictable and while they do have a point, nobody really expects to be able to impose anything on Israel. Trying to do so will only make them build the wall longer, taller and thicker. Any progress will have to come from within, and it is for that reason that I'm a lot more interested in the Israeli Supreme Court's ruling than either of these.

Haaretz: If It Were the Reverse

Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:05:32 -0700

A thoughtful article in yesterday's Haaretz Daily by Gideon Levy demonstrates the hypocrisy of victimhood in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Basically he asks, semi-rhetorically, how the Israeli populous would react if certain events (which he describes) had taken place "mirror-fashion" with sides reversed. His self-reflective voice is the voice that is sorely lacking in government these days -- seemingly worldwide.

If a European cabinet minister were to declare, "I don't want these long-nosed Jews to serve me in restaurants," all of Europe would be up in arms and this would be the minister's last comment as a minister. Three years ago, our former labor and social affairs minister, Shlomo Benizri, from Shas, stated: "I can't understand why slanty-eyed types should be the ones to serve me in restaurants." Nothing happened. We are allowed to be racists. And if a European government were to announce that Jews are not permitted to attend Christian schools? The Jewish world would rise up in protest. But when our Education Ministry announces that it will not permit Arabs to attend Jewish schools in Haifa, it's not considered racism. Only in Israel could this not be labeled racist. The heritage of Golda Meir - it was she who said that after what the Nazis did to us, we can do whatever we want - is now having a late and unfortunate revival.

When it comes to a government fighting any kind of "war", I think that in general people come down on one of two sides: those who believe in using the ends to justify the means and those who believe in using just means.

Two NYT Essays About Palestinians

Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:41:48 -0700

There is a thought-provoking essay in the New York Times yesterday by James Bennet, promised to be the first of two, which describes the "chaos" which has befallen the Palestinian people.

The second essay is in today's New York Times and talks mainly about Gaza.

At the moment, I don't have any commentary, but I wanted to put these links out there. The time spent reading them (5 pages each) was well worth it to me. I'll add some analysis later.

Something There Is That Doesn't Love A Wall - Israel's Wall

Tue, 20 Jul 2004 19:32:18 -0700

Something there is that doesn't love a wall,

That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it,

And spills the upper boulders in the sun;

And makes gaps even two can pass abreast. -Robert Frost, "Mending Wall"

The past few weeks have been full of developments regarding Israel's wall/fence between itself and the West Bank. First, Israel's Supreme Court ruled that portions of the barrier had to be rerouted to place a minimum of hardship on Palestinian people -- the result of a petition filed jointly by Israelis and Palestinians. Then, the non-binding ICJ issued a ruling condemning the wall. One of these decisions is helpful and constructive, the other is not.

This issue highlights the problems inherent in an international system of justice. The ICJ makes rulings with no means of enforcement. In this case specifically, the ICJ shows itself to be nothing but a political tool -- because for what other reason do you make a ruling with no threat of enforcement to back it up? The ultimate wisdom of the wall remains to be seen, but I think that Israel is right to ignore the ruling of a court heavily stacked against it.

Does Israel have a right to wall itself in?

Fascinating: Democratic State of Israel-Palestine

Sun, 04 Jul 2004 21:21:37 -0700

A recent story from Reuters UK describes a growing movement among Palestinians to abandon the struggle for a two-state solution and instead focus on a one-state solution to bring peace to Israelis and Palestinians.

It's a complete and total pipe-dream. I believe that it's the ultimate solution, but I don't see it happening for a long time. This is something that I've written about extensively in my Israel-Palestine series. While the prospect of anything like this happening anytime soon is extremely unlikely, there's a certain logic in the satisfying symmetry that would result:

Israel's Rule of Law

Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:31:52 -0700

There's not much in the American or Israeli governments that gives me hope. Their strikingly similar arrogance and unilateralism gives me grave concerns about the futures of both nations. Something Israel has going for it, however, is a judicial branch that believes strongly in the rule of law.

Israel's Supreme Court issued a ruling today that ordered the government to reroute the planned separation wall to avoid placing undue hardship on Palestinians in the West Bank (Reuters).

Gaza Rocket Attack Kills 2 in Sderot, Israel

Mon, 28 Jun 2004 11:49:43 -0700

This story has been buried in most of the U.S. media, but Haaretz has reported that a Qassam rocket fired from the Gaza strip has killed two people and critically wounded another in the Israeli town of Sderot.

This is significant because although militants in Gaza (Hamas has claimed responsibility for this attack) routinely fire rockets into Israel, none have ever caused injuries or deaths until the attack today.

This follows a period of relative safety, at least inside Israel -- no Israeli civilians have been killed in almost three months -- but is a reminder that things are not getting better.

Dangerous Erosion of Democracy

Tue, 22 Jun 2004 22:54:58 -0700

I've written a lot about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the past few weeks. There are a thousand reasons why it's worthy of interest, study and thought, but my reasons are very specific.

Looking at both Israeli and American politics, I see a real potential for the erosion of democracy and individual liberties. Indeed, it has already begun. For sure, there are many countries across the globe that are much worse. They are ruled by dictators and oppress their people. This is indeed horrible. I choose to focus on Israel and America because both countries are backward-sliding democracies. In a previous post today, I mentioned that a poll done in Israel showed that almost half of respondents thought that Israeli Arabs should be denied voting rights. In America, we don't have to look beyond the USA PATRIOT act to see individual liberties and constitutionally guaranteed freedoms being diminished.

A Frightening Poll in Haaretz

Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:35:23 -0700

From Haaretz via The American Errorist comes this report of an opinion poll done by Haifa University which outlines an alarmingly pervasive racism among the Israeli public:

The survey indicates that 63.7 percent of the Jewish respondents said the government should encourage Israeli Arabs to emigrate. Almost half of the Jewish respondents - 48.6 percent - said the treatment that Arabs in Israel receive from the government is too sympathetic.