Op-Ed
Israel at 60: Never too old to make a change
Email: 
Share: 
It’s hard to imagine any other country’s birthday eliciting the imported camels, guest D.J.s, and other large-scale celebrations that will adorn Cornell and many other college campuses this year, as the State of Israel turns 60 years old. As co-President of United for Peace and Justice in Palestine — as well as a Jew with strong attachments to Israel — I am both excited and ambivalent about this kind of celebration. Part of the glory of this 60th birthday is our recognition that Israel, despite the existential dilemmas it faced in its youth, is here to stay. But I also want this to be a time of self-reflection. Israel today still faces a lot of the problems that plague young countries, and although many of them are decidedly internal, the most glaring one is the continuing problem of settlements in the West Bank and the way we, as Americans, support them.
Since the late 1960s, the Israeli government has been shifting segments of its civilian population to Palestinian areas occupied in wartime in a clear affront to international laws. The settlers are of two distinct varieties. Some are fundamentalists, who believe that all of biblical Israel should be part of the modern state. Others simply want the economic opportunities possible in moving out of the cramped urban spaces of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.
If there is one catchphrase that gets thrown around all of the lectures at Cornell regarding Israel and Palestine, it is the two-state solution — suggesting a Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the West Bank — and touted by most as the ideal solution to the territorial dispute. It is seen as the ideal way to keep a Jewish state and allow the disenfranchised Palestinian people a state of their own. Yet Israeli settlers, given economic incentives to move into the West Bank by Israeli governments, today control roughly 42 percent of the land. So where then is the room for two-states?
This is the aspect of the dialogue severely lacking at Cornell. In defending and celebrating Israel, we ignore the main obstacle of the two-state solution: the Israeli government’s active colonization of Palestinian land in the West Bank, an area from which — unlike Gaza — no rockets have come in recent memory.
This is why I see no contradiction between my role as co-president of United for Peace in Palestine and my support of Israel. Some of those who consider themselves pro-Israel and pro-Palestine are interested in getting the last jab about who as a larger claim to victimhood. I argue that there are some things most of us can agree upon, even if our opinions do not all line up. Our discussion of the conflict will only begin to revolve around peacemaking — as opposed to finger pointing — when we are no longer overly celebratory of essentialized identities and opinions, and really dig in to specific issues.
Settlements are one of these issues. In addition to the occupation in general, they are one of the largest barriers to the two-state solution, which will guarantee an Israeli state for another 60 years, and this is not lost on Israeli politicians. Ariel Sharon has been very clear about his hopes that the settlements will make a lasting solution to the conflict with the Palestinians impossible without mass population transfer (what most would call ethnic cleansing). The point here is that the settlements were created by one faction of Israeli society, and many in Israel, including moderates and liberals, are strongly opposed to their construction.
Does this matter in America? As citizens of the country that supplies Israel with the greatest amount of aid funding every year, we can encourage our government to add stipulations on how that aid gets spent. This entails countering the incredible influence of the Israel Lobby, represented most notably by AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and their supporters on our campus. In their unconditional support for Israel’s policies, these groups are implicated in the goals of the Israeli right-wing of settlement expansion and thus, perpetual conflict with the Palestinian people.
America’s tacit support of the settlements via AIPAC and similar groups is actually detrimental to Israel because it jeopardizes the two-state solution. This view, advocated by the Union of Progressive Zionists and the 2002 Road Map for Peace, is often seen as an affront to Israel’s existence. In truth, I think that this is the only way to guarantee it. 60 more years will only be possible if Israel — like any nation — recognizes its flaws and attempts to mend them. The only other roads are toward one state, or something like apartheid South Africa. Happy Birthday, Israel. You’re never too old to make a change.
Maurice Chammah is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences. He can be contacted at mac249@cornell.edu. Send your Guest Room submissions of 750-850 words to opinion@cornellsun.com
"This is the aspect of the
"This is the aspect of the dialogue severely lacking at Cornell. In defending and celebrating Israel, we ignore the main obstacle of the two-state solution: the Israeli government’s active colonization of Palestinian land in the West Bank, an area from which — unlike Gaza — no rockets have come in recent memory."
The only reason that no rockets have been launched from Judea and Samaria is because the IDF is actively seeking out and destroying terrorist cells in the area. If Israel withdrew from Judea and Samaria like it did from Gaza, you can be 100% sure that the rockets would soon be launched from these territories. This cannot be allowed to happen, because from positions in Judea and Samaria, Palestinian terrorists would be able to launch rockets at Israel's major metropolitan centers and its airport.
There are no more "settlers" in Gaza, yet the rockets and violence continue. Last week, Palestinian terrorists attacked an Israel civilian fuel depot and killed two Israeli civilians, who were working at the depot to transfer fuel to Gaza.
The Palestinians have shown they are incapable of governing themselves in Gaza. The so-called moderate Fatah is corrupt and has no power. Hamas is a terrorist group with its stated goal of driving all the Jews into the sea. It is foolish of Israel to even negotiate the final status of Judea and Samaria, when the Palestinians have not fulfilled even ONE obligation under the Oslo accords. Every Israeli concession to the Palestinians has led to more violence against Israel. The roadblocks and security fence did not even exist before the Palestinians launched wave after wave of terrorist attacks starting in 2000. To put all the blame on Israel "settlements" shows a complete ignorance of the facts on the ground.
Three points for peace
"every Israeli concession" has included Israel's promise to stop settlement construction, yet the settlements continue.
This is the most obvious barrier to peace but the other two include the 2) Palestinian refugees' right to return and 3)building a true democracy where not just Jewish but Arab Israelis are treated as equal citizens of their state.
Happy Birthday Israel.
When will you grow up?
"'every Israeli concession'
"'every Israeli concession' has included Israel's promise to stop settlement construction, yet the settlements continue.
Principles of the Oslo Accords: The Israeli government recognized the PLO as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people while the PLO recognized the right of the state of Israel to exist and renounced terrorism, violence and its desire for the destruction of Israel.
Given that the PLO/PA has never fulfilled its obligations under Oslo, Israel is under no obligation to continue to make concessions. Note that Israel made no promises about settlements at Oslo. Yet it still unilaterally withdrew from Gaza. Did the violence stop? No; in fact it is even worse now than when Israel controlled Gaza.
Why should Israel make any concession when Palestinians continually target her civilians with violence? Israel has made concession after concession. Name one concession the Palestinians have made.
"This is the most obvious barrier to peace but the other two include the 2) Palestinian refugees' right to return and 3)building a true democracy where not just Jewish but Arab Israelis are treated as equal citizens of their state."
No sane Israeli government will agree to let million of Palestinian "refugees" return to Israel 60 years after their grandparents left and destroy the Jewish character of the state. Given that the Arab world has failed to even acknowledge that it evicted almost 100% of its Jewish population, there is no reason for Israel to even discuss this issue.
Israeli Arabs have full voting rights, and serve in the Knesset and other government ministries. They do not even have to perform mandatory military service like Israeli Jews do.
It's not that Israeli Arabs
It's not that Israeli Arabs "DO NOT even HAVE to perform mandatory military service' it's that they CAN'T! Your wording makes it sound like it's one of the benefits of being Arab in Israel. In our country's history, Blacks and Indians were restricted from military service b/c they werent granted equal status, not b/c they did "not have to".
Israel has the Law of Return for any Jewish person in the world to immigrate to Israel. Why shouldnt people whose grandparents were born inside Israel's borders be allowed to return?
Israel is still controlling Gaza. Israel has withheld Gaza's tax revenue, turned off electricity and in effect water treatment facilities shut down.
Yesterday, Israel bombed a Gaza refugee camp killing eleven, 5 were children. Why is it not considered barbaric to kill these civilians?
"It's not that Israeli Arabs
"It's not that Israeli Arabs "DO NOT even HAVE to perform mandatory military service' it's that they CAN'T! Your wording makes it sound like it's one of the benefits of being Arab in Israel. In our country's history, Blacks and Indians were restricted from military service b/c they werent granted equal status, not b/c they did "not have to"."
This is false. Arabs in Israeli can serve voluntarily in the IDF if they want to; most choose not to. Recently the government proposed an alternate national service program for Israeli Arabs, so they could get similar benefits that Israeli Jews get out of serving in the IDF, but it was soundly rejected by the Israeli Arab leaders (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/124054). Druze and Bedouins do serve in the IDF.
"Israel has the Law of Return for any Jewish person in the world to immigrate to Israel. Why shouldnt people whose grandparents were born inside Israel's borders be allowed to return?"
Extending the definition of refugee to people two generations removed from living in Israel is ridiculous. The Palestinian Arabs who originally left did so because there was a war going on. Their leaders urged them to leave so that the five invading armies could make short work of the fledging Jewish state. Israel of course did not lose the War of Independence, and it was not about to let its enemies back in when they wouldn't even negotiate peace with or recognize Israel (the War of Independence ended with armistice lines; there was no formal peace agreement). There have been transfers of ethnic populations following wars: Germans in the Sudetenland following WWII (500,000 ethnic Germans expelled), millions of Hindus and Muslims in India and Pakistan, not to mention that almost the entire Jewish population of the Arab world was expelled following Israel's independence. There is nothing special about the Palestinian Arab situation that merits that their descendants be allowed to return, while the other groups are not.
"Israel is still controlling Gaza. Israel has withheld Gaza's tax revenue, turned off electricity and in effect water treatment facilities shut down."
Israel withholds Gaza's tax revenue to pay for the gas and electricity that it voluntarily supplies to the territory (not to mention other humanitarian aid). Israel is under no obligation to provide any of these services, yet does so at great risk to its civilians (Hamas attacked the Israeli fuel depot near the Gaza border that is used to transfer fuel to Gaza and killed two Israeli civilians last week). Meanwhile Gaza also shares a border with Egypt, which Egypt has closed. No one is howling that Egypt do anything to help people in Gaza.
"Yesterday, Israel bombed a Gaza refugee camp killing eleven, 5 were children. Why is it not considered barbaric to kill these civilians?"
The main difference between Palestinian attacks against Israel and Israel attacks against Palestinian terrorists is that Israelis only target terrorists, who happen to be hiding amongst civilians. The Palestinians do this purposefully, so that when Palestinian civilians are killed inadvertently when Israel goes after the terrorists, the Palestinians can whine to the world about Israel's barbarity. There would very few Palestinian civilians deaths if Hamas, Islamic Jihad etc did not operate out of civilian areas. Any deaths of their fellow civilians is on these terrorist groups. Palestinian terrorists purposely try to kill Israeli civilans, whether it be with rockets (thousands launched indiscriminately at Sderot and Ashkelon from Gaza), suicide bombers (a Sbarro's is definitely NOT a military target), or massacring students at a yeshiva. If you think the actions of both sides are morally equivalent, then there is really no more point in debating.
Thank you, Steve. You hit it
Thank you, Steve. You hit it right on the head. Maurice Chammah has his head in the clouds, far removed from the reality on the ground.
Your use of the names Judea
Your use of the names Judea and Samaria suggests where you stand on this issue. In addition, calling the Palestinians "incapable" doesn't suggest a way forward at all.
Judea and Samaria are the
Judea and Samaria are the historical names of the area. The West Bank name was first coined by Jordan after it annexed the territory following the War of Independence. Your use of the name West Bank suggests where you stand on this issue, in that you deny that the Jews have any historical connection to the land.
Your suggestion of a way forward is for Israel to make even more concessions which will result in more violence against it. The Palestinians ARE incapable of governing themselves at the present time. Their two choices for government are a murderous terrorist group beholden to Iran or a corrupt, powerless group of terrorists who have been stealing money from them for years. Israel's supposed peace partner, Mahmoud Abbas, tried to give the PLO's highest award to two female terrorists, one of whom helped carry out the suicide bombing of a Jerusalem Sbarro's that killed 15 people, but rescinded it after international backlash. The fact that Abbas would even think of giving these two pieces of scum the Palestinians' highest honor shows what kind of people you and others would force Israel to deal with. (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208246580507&pagename=JPost%...)
Meanwhile Hamas is stockpiling the gasoline that Israel transfers to Gaza to use for terrorist attacks, while the Gazan population complains to the rest of the world that Israel is causing a humanitarian crisis (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208246578917&pagename=JPost%...).
The truth is that there is no chance for a lasting peace within the next year or probably 10 years. Until the Palestinians stop inducing hatred for Jews in their children, until they learn how to govern themselves, and until they stop trying to kill Israeli civilians, there will be no peace.