Op-Ed
Israel group president's perspective on the visit of the Palestinian ambassador
Email: 
Share: 
My name is David Kiferbaum, and I am President of the Cornell Israel Public Affairs Committee. CIPAC is Cornell’s voice for students who care about the U.S.-Israel relationship. I would like to thank The Sun’s Opinion section for giving me the opportunity to talk about last week’s visit from Afif Safieh, the Palestinian ambassador to the United States. Members of both CIPAC and Cornell Hillel attended in great numbers, not to protest his visit, but to listen and question in the spirit of dialogue. Because I cannot speak on behalf of all Jews, Israelis or even every member of my organization, I intend to speak as just one of many Jewish Americans with family in Israel, and hence a strong interest in peace and the security of those who live in the region.
I found myself in agreement with many of Safieh’s remarks this past Tuesday in Statler Auditorium. His colorful use of language and metaphors was genuinely enjoyable, and though I certainly disagreed with some of his statements, I do believe that he is earnest in his desire for peace. His attitudes towards non-violent resistance and a two-state solution are highly commendable, and make him an excellent ambassador.
Unfortunately, however, they do not make him a good representative of the majority of Palestinians. Beyond representing the small (3-6 percent) minority of Christian Palestinians, as a member of the Fatah party and an advocate for non-violence, Mr. Safieh is even less representative of the Palestinian public as a whole. Fatah, which under P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas supports the two-state solution, received only 42 percent of the vote in the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council elections. Hamas, on the other hand, which won the majority of seats on the PLC, remains committed to violence and conflict and refuses to recognize the State of Israel. They, as well as the terrorist organization Islamic Jihad, are responsible for the barrage of missiles that have recently hit Israel — more than 400 have landed in Israel since the beginning of 2008.
These missile attacks, to which Israel responded last weekend, tragically resulted in civilian deaths. While I obviously cannot speak on behalf of the Israeli government, the loss of innocent life is never commendable and the scale of the operations personally unsettled me. I will not participate in what Safieh called “competitive martyrology,” despite his repeated argument that the Palestinians are the “Jews of Israel.” I recognize the widespread suffering of the Palestinian people. But unlike Palestinian terrorists, these IDF operations were not aimed at maximum carnage of innocent civilians, but rather the militant terrorists in Gaza.
Safieh acknowledged the need for Hamas to moderate its positions in order to move forward with negotiations that represent a real majority of Palestinians. However, it is unrealistic to expect this of Hamas, who themselves were responsible for the 2007 civil war among Palestinians in Gaza that killed more than 300 and injured thousands. Palestinians today are a divided people, with two separate ruling parties in Gaza and the West Bank.
While Safieh recognized the corruption and failures of Fatah’s leadership of the P.A., he seemed unwilling to truly confront this schism among Palestinians. Though I agree that the United States and other third parties have an important role to play in future peace negotiations, Safieh underemphasized the Palestinian failure to sit at the table as a unified body committed to co-existence. All the third parties in the world can get involved (as they often do via the UN), but as long as Palestinians themselves cannot form a united political consensus, it is difficult to determine how Israel can reasonably find a hand to shake on the other side.
In the meanwhile, I personally hope that robust efforts will be made to continue dialogue, no matter how difficult and unproductive they may be. There is no violent solution to this conflict, but we must respect Israel’s right as a sovereign state to defend herself from hostile attack. CIPAC would like to applaud President Skorton for unequivocally rejecting the notion of divestment from or an academic boycott of Israel, which he expressed during his answer to a question from the audience. To paraphrase President Skorton’s words, this conflict is bilateral and far more complex than the situations in Darfur or South Africa.
On May 7, Israel will be celebrating its 60th Independence Day, or Yom Ha’atzmaut. For Palestinians, this will be 60 years since the Nakhba, or Catastrophe, as Safieh pointed out in his remarks. However, we know that if not for the widespread Palestinian rejection of Israel’s right to exist, we could also be celebrating Palestine’s 60th year of independence, after over 400 years under the British, Ottomans, and briefly, the Egyptians. This is what the founding fathers of Israel accepted in 1947, welcoming the two-state solution offered by the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine. It was the representatives of the Arab League and Palestinian Arabs that rejected the plan for a state, deepening the cycle of violence that continues to turn today. This pattern has continued, most recently in 2000, as they have rejected every opportunity for statehood since it was first offered.
Safieh may argue that Palestinians lack a partner in peace, but from its inception, it is Israel who has lacked a true partner in the two-state solution. Israelis, Americans, Jews and non-Jews alike recognize the need for a free and independent State of Palestine, and both the United States and Israel have demonstrated their commitment to its founding. But Palestinians — and not just Fatah or Hamas — need to come to a consensus on the two-state solution and recognize Israel’s right to exist. If they don’t, they will continue to tragically suffer as a stateless people not because of Jews or Israel, but because of their own elected leaders’ lack of political will to pursue the politics of peace and co-existence.
David Kiferbaum is a senior in the College of Arts and Sciences and president of the Cornell Israel Public Affairs Committee. He can be contacted at david.kiferbaum@gmail.com. Guest Room appears periodically.
Response misses key point...
I think this response fails to address, as so many of these arguments do, the fact that the Israeli government insists upon continued settlement of the West Bank. This was one of Safieh's key points at the discussion, the reality that Israeli policy regarding settlement in the West Bank discredits and marginalizes the more moderate reconciliatory factions within the Palestinian community, like Fatah, while "legitimizing" violent opposition groups like Hamas. While the gunfire stops, the building does not. Considering Hamas' utter incompetence in dealings with the international community, a strategy that seeks to legitimize, to the Palestinian people, a group that is virtually impotent diplomatically might be advantageous to Israeli interests. Not ignoring the number of children killed by Israeli forces in the recent Israeli "response" in Gaza, incidents like the yeshiva shooting would make one think Hamas is on the Israeli payroll. It's hard to imagine a better way to squander good will than killing kids...but the brilliance of non-violent resistance seems to have been lost on Hamas anyway.
"Not ignoring the number of
"Not ignoring the number of children killed by Israeli forces in the recent Israeli "response" in Gaza, ..."
To say that the premeditated murder of teenagers is morally equivalent to the deaths caused by collateral damage in response to terrorist attacks is relativism at its finest. The only reason that children were killed (if they were at all; Hamas initially claimed that an infant was killed by the IDF; only later did we learn that the child was killed by a Hamas rocket that didn't go far enough to kill any Jews) is that Hamas deliberately attacks from civilian areas so as to try to restrain the IDF from fighting back. If Israel does fight back, then we get people like you condemning Israel's so-called disproportionate response.
As for the "moderate reconciliatory factions" within the Palestinian community, the official newspaper of Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority ran an article about the terrorist who murdered eight yeshiva students last week, describing him as a "holy martyr."
http://pmw.org.il/Bulletins_mar2008.html#b090308
First of all, I don't
First of all, I don't remember ever equating the Yeshiva shootings with the deaths of non-combatants (let's not get into this debate) in the Israeli response, and I'm certainly not going to be lectured to on relativism by someone who describes the latter as collateral damage.
Secondly, you too fail to address the continued settlement of the West Bank as an opposition to peace. Your focus is Hamas. Why should any Palestinian seek peaceful pursuit of a two-state solution if Israelis insist upon settling in the second state? I'm also curious as to how you expect Hamas to engage Israel in symmetric warfare.
As for your last bit, like it or not, Fatah is the moderate reconciliatory faction within the Palestinian community. Putting aside the veracity of that article (and in doing so, providing you with more courtesy than I expect you would me if I had posted a link to such an obviously slanted, questionably sourced site), at the end of the day, there cannot be peace without the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people. I just do not believe that the average Palestinian is so viciously intent upon the eradication of Israel that they would sacrifice the safety and security of both their lives and the lives of their loved ones given a real commitment to a two state solution by Israel. Sorry.
"I'm certainly not going to
"I'm certainly not going to be lectured to on relativism by someone who describes the latter as collateral damage."
Civilian deaths caused by Israel responding to terrorist attacks originating from civilian areas are not comparable to the premeditated murder of innocent students.
"Secondly, you too fail to address the continued settlement of the West Bank as an opposition to peace. Your focus is Hamas. Why should any Palestinian seek peaceful pursuit of a two-state solution if Israelis insist upon settling in the second state?
The fact is that settlements were never the roadblock to peace. The PLO was founded in 1964 before there were ANY Israeli settlements in the so-called second state. Jews actually lived in the Old City, Judea, Samaria, and Gaza before the War of Independent but were summarily expelled from their homes. Has the removal of Israeli settlements in Gaza brought peace any closer? Absolutely not.
"I'm also curious as to how you expect Hamas to engage Israel in symmetric warfare."
Just because Hamas would be completely crushed in conventional warfare does not give it the excuse to endlessly target civilians. Rather than engage in morally reprehensible violent methods, perhaps Hamas should consider rejecting violence as a means of achieving its goals (although since its stated goal is the destruction of Israel, that probably won't work out that well for them).
"As for your last bit, like it or not, Fatah is the moderate reconciliatory faction within the Palestinian community."
This is a complete fiction. Arafat was an expert at towing the moderate line in English and then immediately disavowing what he said in Arabic. Abbas too has adopted this tactic:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1204127196532&pag...
"Putting aside the veracity of that article (and in doing so, providing you with more courtesy than I expect you would me if I had posted a link to such an obviously slanted, questionably sourced site)"
If you would like to point out a source that questions the truthfulness of Palestinian Media Watch's translation into question, I would be glad to see it. Simply calling the source slanted and questionably source without any other evidence is a weak argument.
"at the end of the day, there cannot be peace without the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people."
This is true. However, Palestinian culture is enamored with death and hatred of Jews and it is doubtful that they will ever want peace. A society that uses children's program to indoctrinate its youth into hating Jews and wanting to be suicide bombers is not one that will want peace or negotiate in good faith.
"Civilian deaths caused by
"Civilian deaths caused by Israel responding to terrorist attacks originating from civilian areas are not comparable to the premeditated murder of innocent students."
You're still missing the point, but that's another issue.
"The fact is that settlements were never the roadblock to peace. The PLO was founded in 1964 before there were ANY Israeli settlements in the so-called second state. Jews actually lived in the Old City, Judea, Samaria, and Gaza before the War of Independent but were summarily expelled from their homes. Has the removal of Israeli settlements in Gaza brought peace any closer? Absolutely not."
Yes, and the unstated issue here is, of course, that the PLO is an ideologically stagnant organization whose charter calls for the elimination of Israel. Now, despite it not formally redrafting of its charter, drafts of the Palestinian constitution recognize pre-67 borders in regards to the two-state solution. It is a mistake to act as if the ideology of much of the Palestinian leadership did not change or sober from 64 to 93/now.
Furthermore, the point that withdrawal from Gaza did not bring peace closer is not much of a point at all. Even as the Israelis withdrew from Gaza, they settled in the West Bank.
Lastly, I still refuse to believe that the average Palestinian is so removed from the human instincts of self-preservation and preservation of offspring that they would advocate extremism given the availability of reasonable, reliable compromise. As I said before, "I just do not believe that the average Palestinian is so viciously intent upon the eradication of Israel that they would sacrifice the safety and security of both their lives and the lives of their loved ones given a real commitment to a two state solution by Israel."
The Palestinian ideology has
The Palestinian ideology has not really changed from 1964 until now; their leadership just realized that it would be easier to achieve their goal of destroying Israel first by getting control of Gaza, Judea, and Samaria, and then using that foothold to eliminate the rest of the country. This is why you see maps on Palestinian Authority television that show the entire land mass of Israel as Palestine. While Hamas is more open in their goal of the destruction of Israel, Fatah has adopted a seemingly moderate stance while it espouses the same Jew hatred.
With the withdrawal of Israel from Gaza, Palestinians had a chance to build a functioning society. They were handed technologically advanced greenhouses left by the Jews expelled from Gaza and purchased by Bill Gates and others to offer them the ability to develop an economy. These greenhouses were immediately looted and destroyed and are now used as weapons smuggling tunnels, so that Hamas can use the aid money it receives to purchase more weapons to kill Israelis. It is also worth noting that most of the Jews who were expelled from Gaza in 2005 still do not have permanent homes.
Your own opinion as to what you believe the average Palestinian believes is in stark contrast to the facts on the ground. Here is a video of Palestinians in Gaza celebrating in the wake of the Jerusalem yeshiva massacre last week: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfN80mttTM4
There is also the well-document incitement of Jew hatred in the Palestinian media, from children's television shows where cartoon mouse and bee characters teach kids to aspire to be suicide bombers, to the official PA newspaper lauding the yeshiva murderer as a holy martyr. Unfortunately, whichever faction of the Palestinian population that actually wants to end all of this bloodshed and hatred is in no position to do anything about it and stopping Israel from going after those that seek its destruction will not help these people come to power.
moral equivalency in a time of mass-starvation
hi steve: i'm just curious to know what your basis for saying: "Palestinian culture is enamored with death and hatred of Jews"? that's kind of a broad-sweeping and pretty racist comment coming from someone who probably doesn't speak a word of arabic... :)
i can match you one israeli comment for every one palestinian comment - heck two for one!! - for any sketchy statements made on either side (didn't the israeli deputy defense minister threaten the palestinians with a 'shoa' - a catastrophe/holocaust - just last week?). palestinians didn't have a big problem with indigenous jewish people who lived continuously in palestine during the ottoman period. they were part of the same social fabric and many enjoyed a more privileged status in the ottoman system than most of the palestinian felahin (peasants). this is part of standard history texts outside the fantasy world of right-wing commentators and discredited orientalist historiography...
the palestinians only started thinking about israelis when the zionist movement started to construct an ethnically exclusivist state that now controls 100% of the palestinians historic homeland and imposes a brutal apartheid regime that controls every aspect of palestinian life. this includes the 'grand aparhteid' - you can do some research to find out what the term means - practiced in israel 'proper' (which still hasn't declared its boundaries), and the 'petty apartheid' policies practiced in the west bank (and to some extent in israel proper as well: marriage laws, property ownership laws,etc)...
so in a context where israel is now starving 1.5-million gazans, and in which 107 sick people have died because of the israeli blockade, not to mention the nearly 1000 palestinians killed by israel over the last two years alone, you're going to tell me that israel is justified in its actions for 'missile fire' that has claimed 13 lives over past 8 years? ... do you not see how this concept of 'security' is completely disproportionate to anything resembling 'a measured response'?
when will you understand that people who belive in human rights will continue to condemn israeli actions - as they do many other human rights violating regimes (including those of colombia, usa, pakistan, rwanda, australia, thailand, burma, sudan, etc) - not because of some incipient 'anti-semitism' but because of a basic commitment to oppose militarized chauvinism in all its forms. if you're really concerned about fighting anti-semitism, why not begin with your good friends the neocon christian zionists, whose only reason for supporting israel is that they think it will accelerate the second coming of christ (at which point all bets are off!).. not a pretty group of folks those christian zionists, and they have in their posession enough nukes to obliterate any country in the middle east - 'MooSlem' or 'Jeywyish' - to adopt the correct midwestern pronounciation of these veritable abrahamic traditions ;) - (or all of them at once)...
"so in a context where
"so in a context where israel is now starving 1.5-million gazans, and in which 107 sick people have died because of the israeli blockade, not to mention the nearly 1000 palestinians killed by israel over the last two years alone,"
Last time I checked, Gaza was also bordered by Egypt, which, shockingly, is populated with Arabs just like Gaza. Why don't the Gazans go ask Egypt for help, given that they are their kinsmen? Maybe because the Egyptians don't want anything to do with the Palestinians. We saw recently that it took a Hamas-rigged explosion to open up the border between Gaza and Egypt.
Israel is not "starving 1.5-miliion gazans." The Palestinians have received more aid money per person than any other group on the planet. Israel already supplies Gaza with most of its electricity and humanitarian supplies. Given that Israel has completely given up control of the territory, it is under no obligation to do any of this. I find it ridiculous that you expect Israel to continue to supply Gaza with anything after the government of Gaza is actively engaging in open warfare with Israel.
Here we have a story about a pregnant Gazan woman taken to Israel so she could give birth:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,540689,00.html
"you're going to tell me that israel is justified in its actions for 'missile fire' that has claimed 13 lives over past 8 years?
It was certainly not the intention of Hamas, Islamic Jihad etc, to only cause 13 deaths when they fired those THOUSANDS OF ROCKETS. They want to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible. It is only because they lack better weapons that they have not succeeded in murdering more Israelis yet. After the Egyptian border was blown open in January by Hamas, suddenly the terrorists were firing longer-range Soviet Grad missiles. Maybe you will be satisfied when a few more Jews are killed by this rocket fire (no scare quotes needed).
"... do you not see how this concept of 'security' is completely disproportionate to anything resembling 'a measured response'?"
What would be a measured response for you? If Israel fired thousands of rockets indiscriminately at Gaza for three years? Would that make the moral calculus equal? No country would tolerate being bombarded daily with rockets without fighting back. It is only because Hamas chooses to embed itself amongst civilians that civilians in Gaza are killed. Some are even killed when Hamas's rockets don't go quite far enough to make it out of Gaza.
a measured response?
hi steve:
i appreciate your passion for the issue. have you ever thought that all the violence would halt if israel respected international law, withdrew from all occupied territory, and allowed palestinians to return to their homes, thus ending one of the greatest injustices of the past sixty years (5-million palestinian refugees are still waiting to return to their homes!!!)...
dismantling the "custodian of absentee property" institution that exists in israel - which holds palestinian properties confiscated in 1948 and uses the lands of over 430 destroyed palestinian villages to develop the israeli economy - and opening up citizenship laws to both jewish people and palestinians would create a democratic society for all citizens. this is something the hamas leadership has repeatedly said they are open to since they came to power in 2006, as have all civic, liberal, democratic and left oriented parties in palestine as well (its part of a national consensus).
if you actually read the statements of the main hamas political leadership you will see that there is no ill will towards jewish people, a feeling shared by most palestinians. what palestinians can't stand is the imposition of a racist and ethnically exclusivist state that denies them their most fundamental rights. this is what palestinians are opposed to and this is what they 'hate' - in the same way black south africans hated the apartheid regime (and guess who apartheid south africa's biggest ally was during the cold war? yes... israel --- which is why south africans are among the staunchest defenders of the boycott campaign targeting israeli state institutions complicit in apartheid)....
and before you start talking about all the 'rights' that the 1.2-million palestinian minority that actually lives in israel enjoy, you might consider the actual oppinions of this portion of the palestinian people by consulting the websites of groups like Ittijah and Balad. fact is that palestinian 'citizens' of the state of israel still face legislated descrimination in the realms of property ownership laws, marriage rights, citizenship/residency rights, and differential and grossly disproportionate / inadequate funding in the realms of education, health care, municipal services, etc.
roughly 50% of israelis don't want arab neighbors (in fact one of the main parties in government right now openly advocates ethnic cleansing palestinian citizns), there are a plethora of 'walls' built within israel itself to divide the 'white' part of many cities from the 'black' part, racial profiling is endemic, and the government continues to pursue 'judaization' policies in areas with majority palestinian populations (considering their own citizenry a 'demographic threat'). palestinians cannot gain entry into most kibbutzim/moshavim as community members - though they're allowed onto these as labourers (working the fields, cleaning dishes, doing construction, etc) - and they're barred from many other services/perks offered only to jewish citizens of the state.
remember, we're talking about apartheid in israel itself (it seems like zionist organizations have completely given up on trying to justify the much more visible/physical apartheid practiced in the occupied west bank). nobody is begrudging the right of israel to exist, the only problem is the racist/exclusivist nature of the state - which is built on a foundation of ethnic cleansing and displacement of the indigenous population. unfortunately for israel, they only managed to colonize/seize palestine in the post-WWII period when colonialism became very unpopular (especially after the decolonization that occured in the 1950s).
israeli policy-makers know that the vote that created israel - taken at a time when most african and asian states were still under colonial rule and not members of the UN - might have gone really differently. this is not because the third world is anti-semitic, but because people can recognize colonialism/racism from a mile away. fortunately there's plenty of examplary jewish voices speaking out against zionism, colonialism and apartheid. for those interested i'd suggest checking out groups like the Israeli Coalition Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), B'tselem and Tayuush.
the world is moving towards support for real peace with justice in the region. for some reason only the israelis and americans stand in the way of real peace, burdened with paranoid fantasies and ignoring the real, horrific daily suffering imposed on palestinians on a daily basis (4.5 million people that live under direct israel control, and the 5 million or so that are locked out of their homes with no hope to return)...
hope everybody is having a good day :)
peace!!! :)
Hamas win not reflective of desire for destruction of Israel
The 6% or more Christian Palestinians demographically live the same kind of life as their Muslim brothers. Don't make the mistake of thinking Christians get along less with Muslims than Jews in the Middle East. Christians are killed and maimed by the Israelis just like the Muslims are...Hamas did not win the vote because most Palestinians favor the destruction of Israel anymore than Ronald Reagan was elected President in 1980 because most Americans were against abortion. Hamas won because Palestinians were sick of the ineffectualness and static cling Fatah had on the PLC. Poll after poll shows that the vast majority of Palestinians want to live side by side Israel in a two state solution.
Hamas has been willing to talk with Israel. Israel has repeatedly refused to talk with Hamas. The Israelis have stolen land. The Palestinians will give up 78% of their original land in order for peace. Israel only wants more land.