See also Reader Comments | January 28, 2006 The Israeli-Arab Conflict for Brass Tack Dummies and Kudos to Potlucks for Peace By YayaCanada With poems by Qais Ghanem Why is the history of modern Palestine such a matter of debate? Why is it still regarded as a complex, indeed obscure, chapter in contemporary history that cannot be easily deciphered? Any abecedarian student of its past who comes to it with clean hands would immediately recognize that in fact its story is very simple. Ilan Pappe on Beyond Norman Finkelstein's Chutzpah The story of modern Palestine has always seemed quite simple to me, although I've been assured by people who claim to know more about it that it is indeed very complex, and that the brass tacks of it cannot be readily gotten down to. But in fact it is easier to fathom than the origin of the term "brass tacks". Anyone who knows the history of the colonization of North America already knows how the so-called Middle East Conflict came about. But they don't know that they know because they are peering at it through the myths. For one thing, the mantra of Palestine being a land with no people for a people with no land is just not logical. If the land was empty, who was doing all the resisting? Just as our North American natives eventually fought back against being increasingly crowded and dispossessed by larger and larger influxes of strangers who changed the face of the land and reduced the native's access to its resources, so eventually did the indigenous Palestinians react. And just as the "Injuns" came perversely to be characterized as little more than vicious savages and the newcomers as their innocent victims, so have the Palestinians been slandered for resisting the occupation with the few means available to them*, and especially for wishing in their hearts that the intruders would go someplace else instead. To be sure, just like the land now called Israel, North America at one point provided a home for people who suffered poverty and religious persecution in other places - many were friends and family of people who had been strangled, burned, disemboweled, pitchforked, hanged and mutilated by people who claimed to worship God in a way more acceptable to God. But, also like Israel, long before and long after the great persecution many others came because settlement in the new land was fostered and encouraged, and because they believed it was their God-given right, and that they could make better use of the land than the original inhabitants. In the end our North American natives grew sick and weary, and having lost the will to fight they accepted the little spaces left to them. Today, we of European ancestry who pat ourselves on the back for our advocacy on behalf of First Nations People, do so from humanitarian institutions built on stolen land. We pride ourselves on our generosity, but the awful truth is that we are massively indebted to our native peoples, and the Israelis owe a similar debt to the indigenous Palestinian people. Now, to complete the comparison, the Israelis need to kidnap Palestinian Arab kids and put them in good Jewish schools, where they can be sexually molested and severely beaten if they dare to speak Arabic. But I'm fairly optimistic that's not going to happen. In fact I'm even more certain after attending the events that took place in Ottawa on January 18 and 25: OttawaCitizen: 'Unthinkable' number of people turn out for Jewish-Arab dialogue - Potlucks for Peace screens film about solutions to Mideast conflict Josh Zambrowsky said what can be "dangerous" is a situation where dialogue between the two groups is seen by some as betrayal. An event such as this one might be seen by the Ottawa Citizen as a betrayal since it is often criticized for portraying Arabs as lowlife terrorists. But oh, what a relief it was for me to be in a room full of equal numbers of Jews, Arabs/Palestinians and "Others" (myself in that last category) who not only talked openly about their fears and differing opinions but also their areas of agreement. My experience has generally been that discussion of the disastrous Israeli/Arab situation is taboo in polite company, and certainly incendiary. Qais Ghanem, quoted in the above Citizen article, represented Potlucks for Peace in introducing the speakers and panelists at both events. Qais moonlights as a poet - "a third rate poet" he said, to which the audience replied, "No-o-o-o, no". Below are the two poems of his that he read on the evening of January 25th. He welcomes any and all comment "including negative ones". One of those poems was in honour of former NDP leader and recently retired MP for Ottawa-Centre, Ed Broadbent, who in his comments as moderator of the January 25 panel discussion seemed convinced that the Middle East situation was the most complex of all situations. That's probably because he listened to other politicians instead of to us ordinary brass tack dummies. Other well known persons were in attendance on both evenings, but the Egyptian ambassador and an official from the Israeli embassy displayed an interesting Arab/Israeli accord in that they both expressed disappointment. They said their governments were working hard to find solutions, and that they themselves had come to the event to find some "hope" but had found none in the sentiments being expressed, which they felt harped on the negative history and did nothing to solve the current situation. Panelist Josh Zambrowsky emphatically responded that it was the responsibility of the respective governments to give the people hope! He said that at least those in that room were able to get along in spite of their painful history, "and that's a good start." To which the audience returned enthusiastic applause. Panelist Monzer Zimmo also received loud support when he said in no uncertain terms that one thing the Israelis have got to do is to stop saying they are "giving up land" for the Palestinians. "It is not your land to give," he said. Right of Return is a huge sticking point as both the film and panelist Bahija Réghaï pointed out. Israelis fear that allowing dispossessed Palestinians to return home will destroy the Jewish character of the state. Zimmo, an advocate of the one state solution, said "Just think if the Egyptian government were to say they insist on their country being purely Muslim!" To which an Arab Jew retorted that Egypt had turfed him out for that very reason. "That was a very long time ago", countered the Egyptian ambassador, "and you can now be assured that you can return to Egypt anytime you like." In fact, Jews who left any country as refugees, for whatever reason, are welcome to return because the right of return is guaranteed to all of the world's refugees by international law. But Israel resists compliance with such laws even though, as the Potlucks for Peace film made clear, it is estimated that only 10% of Palestinian refugees would return to live in the homes of family members who had managed to stay put during the mass exodus. "My passport is stamped No Return!" said the Arab Jew. Members of the audience - Jews, Arabs and Others - called out, "Then get yourself a new passport!" It's not rocket science. It's the perpetuation of baseless myths on both sides, as well as stubborn human nature that needs to be willingly overcome. *YYC: Disclaimer: This article is in no way intended to endorse suicide bombing, or violence of any kind; it is an attempt to show that all Palestinians, indeed all Arabs, have been tarred with the same brush. Related: The Grid of History: Cowboys and Indians Although it is meant to be understood as a bad thing, in fact, the cowboy is not a negative metaphor for many U.S. citizens, particularly those who are descendants of the old settler class, as are the majority of the ruling class and officers of the military. AllFreeEssays: Charade in Gaza and the West Bank How is it that Gods chosen got themselves into a position where we subjugate and oppress an entire (Palestinian) people in the first place? Is that what God “chose” for us to do? Is this what Rashi meant when he said “He created it and he gave it to them, and by His wish He took it from them and gave it to us”? This is not peace. This is ‘violence’. Village Voice: Blame Brooklyn "Every time the extremists speak, I hear a very strong Brooklyn accent." Comments Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 14:05:42 From: Samah Sabawi Thanks Corinne for your article. the right of return is indeed sticky and has more dimensions than just a decision to return or not to return. I carry both the Canadian and the Australian citizenships. I may not return to live in Palestine, but I want the choice. More than that, I want to be officially "Palestinian". I'd like a formal document that aknowledges what I have known I am since I came into this world - Palestinian. I was very upset that I couldn't participate in the Palestinian elections even though I was born in Gaza, my dad was born in Gaza, my grandfather etc. My sons who were born in Canada were able to get the Australian citizenship without having set foot in Australia...ever! Yet, I cannot pass on to them their ancestoral nationality. My right of return is in essence my right to be recognized for who I am - Palestinian. Date:Sun, 29 Jan 2006 00:32:05 -0500 From: Bahija Réghaï Kudos to Yayacanada. Nice touch. Ward Churchill would be proud of you! Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 18:38:50 From: Gina What a lovely thoughtful piece you wrote. Qais Ghanem's poem was also quite good. I've been doing a lot of thinking lately about the state of the world and I am so sure that there has to be a much better way that the one being followed today. How can people believe that it is better to "genocide" a country into uniformity with their idiotic schemes? I am quite sure that this is not what being Christian or pagan or even righteous means. How did we get to a place where other people became a problem solved as diffidently as stray animals? I am not sure that this is where I want to live emotionally or physically. yayacanada Poems by Qais Ghanem - Recited at
Potlucks for Peace Presentation
Ottawa, 25 Jan 2006
http://www.zaman.org/?bl=international&alt=&trh=20040721&hn=10674 [article excerpt] 07.21.2004 Wednesday - ISTANBUL 00:03 Israel in Defense: 'Cultural Dispute' By Foreign News Services Published: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 zaman.com Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who put the relations with Turkey and New Zealand on shaky ground, has been declared a persona non grata in France. Israeli government spokesman Avi Pazner yesterday evaluated the tension between France and Israel as a 'cultural conflict'. A former Israeli ambassador to France, Pazner said, "Sharon's call to Jews not only in France, but also all over the world, is one of the fundamental principles of the Israeli State. The French are looking for an underlying reason for the call." Former Minister of the Interior Avraham Poraz pointed out that France exaggerated the incident and added: "As you know Israel is a Zionist state. We always advocate that all Jews should return to Israel. This is not a new opinion." The statements of Sharon irked not only the French State, but also the Jews living in France. French Jew Migdal Alfasi said, "Sharon is free to say whatever he wants, but this is no reason for me to leave France." Alfasi said he might some day settle in Israel; however, it would be because he wants to be close to his religion, not because of incidents against Jews. Noam Enayazadeh, another French Jew, said that Sharon spoke as if Jews were being killed everyday in the streets of France. He added that although they encounter the odd incident every once in a while, they are content with their life. yayacanada |