Opinion
A Passover Message Re: Resistance
April 13, 2009 - 11:00pm“If only the Palestinians had better leadership.” I often hear this point from well-intentioned, but in this case at least misguided, pro-Israeli friends and colleagues. They continue to bemoan, “If only they had a Ghandi or an MLK.”
And one can surely make a logical case about previous and current Palestinian (and other Arab) leadership missing the mark. But there are a few more interesting points here. First of all, a Ghandi or an MLK prototype a priori requires the background of either an oppressive colonizing regime or a brutally racist one. Either scenario is not quite ideal, and is fascinating to me that folks, in trying to highlight flawed Palestinian resistance, inadvertently draw this moral parallel to today’s Israel.
Yes — if only. But does this “if only” negate the facts of what has happened, of the conditions ordinary people find themselves in every day? As I wrote in the first of these “A Passover Message” series two years ago, “the idea of helping your neighbor is strongly built into the major monotheistic religions. Standing still as your neighbor is wiped out by a heavenly force, or even by his or her own actions, would never be condoned by Judaism or Islam if not for extenuating circumstances.”
I still hold these notions that certain people are not born better or worse than others, and that nobody is born with the intention of killing anyone else. A few months ago, fellow columnist Munier Salem ’10 challenged readers to respond to his column regarding the December war against Gaza by beginning a letter with the sentence: “I think 300-plus child deaths were warranted because ______.” Likewise, I too challenge anyone to respond to a different prompt: How would you, personally, react to living in situations similar to those in Gaza? You could start your letter with the statement, “If I were a Palestinian there right now, I would ______.”
But this is not a fair challenge — because most likely, reader, you are here in the USA, sitting in Libe Café or at a comparably comfortable locale, reading this and not living it. So I adapt the words of somebody who actually lived it — American non-violent resistor Rachel Corrie, who lived in Rafah in 2003. I use Corrie as an example, partially because her name as an American does not come with the automatic stigmatization and assumed bias of being Palestinian.
Corrie wrote an e-mail to her mother during this time, explaining, “I thought a lot about what you said on the phone, about Palestinian violence not helping anything.” And Corrie continues on with the conclusions she’s reached based solely on what she has seen:
“If any of us had our lives and welfare completely strangled, lived with children in a shrinking place where we knew, because of previous experience, that soldiers and tanks and bulldozers could come for us at any moment … do you think we might try to use somewhat violent means to protect whatever fragments remained? ... I really think, in a similar situation, most people would defend themselves as best they could.”
A typical trajectory to me seems to be this one, that destruction and fear breed fanatic ideologies breed violence. This course is one that needs to be challenged, yes. But it takes an extraordinary person to individually overcome that trajectory, and an extraordinary leader to help others overcome it as well — the exception, not the rule.
But there have indeed been nonviolent protests and extraordinary people, and it is quite telling to examine Israel’s reaction to these. Rachel Corrie was one of them, and she died in March 2003. She was, at the time of her death, standing in front of her friend Sama Nasrallah’s home wearing a bright orange suit as per International Solidarity Movement guidelines. She was run over by an IDF bulldozer — though, many people will be tempted to point out if I don’t, it is debatable whether the driver saw her or not. You can gauge the testimonies and photos to come to a conclusion for yourself, because at this point it is word against word. But the IDF’s documented reaction itself says more than these fruitless arguments can prove. Israel’s official statement? “A group of protesters were acting very irresponsibly, putting everyone in danger — the Palestinians, themselves and our forces — by intentionally placing themselves in a combat zone.” Corrie has even been labeled a terrorist supporter by some for literally standing up for the same exact principles that the state of Israel was allegedly founded on — solidarity, safety and security for a kindred.
Lest we think this extraordinary diffusion of responsibility is an isolated incident, how about documentarian James Miller, who, while filming a documentary called Death in Gaza, was shot by the IDF? Israel’s response — “The Israeli military expresses sorrow at a civilian death, but it must be stressed that a cameraman who knowingly enters a combat zone, especially at night, endangers himself.”
In other words, the IDF can declare any neighborhood with real lives — children, adults, homes, gardens, not so different from mine and yours — a combat zone and if I step in there, it’s my fault if I’m killed. If nonviolent resistors can’t peacefully protest in any area that Israel, with its carte blanche (and fatal military might) declares a combat zone, then what can we do? What can we actually do, when civilians are blamed for protecting their houses from bulldozers? If only such a situation were once again able to yield a transcendent leader like Gandhi or MLK …
I was almost stumped about IDF-approved means of resistance, but I figured out something this Passover to which Israel can’t possibly object. I think I read it in a brochure somewhere, and it involves lots of seemingly-gruesome (but effective!) stuff like frogs and blood and vermin … ah, yes! The Ten Plagues! The Ten Plagues — all leading up to the slaying and drowning of a whole class of ancient Egyptians! Perhaps these are the only IDF-approved means of resistance, since they are taken from Jewish folklore.
The logistics of how to make hail fall on command and where to get all the wild beasts from … we can figure it out later. But surely nobody could object to strategies that the Hebrews themselves resorted to, in order to gain their own freedom? Right?
Once Again a LI Princess Tries to Go Controversial for Attention
So what about the innocent Israelis that the rockets were targeting? Should Israel stand by and let their people be attacked day after day. Well they did for months and finally had enough of it.
I know that people who have nothing sometimes need to resort to violence to make a point and a stand for themselves and their group. For a long time the Palestinians were not organized and they didn't have a voice. Israel and the world did ignore them. And unfortunately for most palestinians - a minority of radicals are ruining it for them all. Now that the world has turned to the issue, the fundamentalists are in the spotlight and are using unnecessary force to provoke the Israelis. Either way the radical leaders win - either we allow them to send missles and rockets into Israel on a daily basis and seem weak and unable to stop them (meanwhile also allowing them to build up military reserves and weapons that are ebing smuggled in) OR we defend ourselves and strike back and then becoem the bad guy - even having Jews like yourself Ariela turn on Israel.
But during the war - who chose to hide militants in homes and locations filled with children? Who refused to negotiate and end the war? Israel's terms to cease fire were very simple - stop firing rockets and stop trying to smuggle in increased weapons - rockets that could go further than before.
I will admit that Israel was stbborn at times with negotiations over the years. But look where the Jews have come from and how Israel was born. When the state of Israel was to be made - Israel agreed to take all of thr useless desert land and give all of the richer land to the arab state. They would have shared Jerusalem. But giving the inferior position to the Jews was not good enough as the bordering countries called for the extermination of the Jewish people. Israel won it's land after being attacked from all sides in the war of independence. So many innocent Jews died under the attack - thus perhaps now you can see why it is hard for many Jews to give away land so quickly - land that their ancestors died for.
But the Jews have reached that point - they want an Arab state and they have offered Palestinians 99% of what they want - hardly a compromise compared to what Israel wants - but time and time again, they have rejected Israel's offer. I'm sure many palestinians would love to take the offer, but it is their unfortunate leadership - having a terrorist organization lead their people - that makes them suffer. Further - it is Hamas who is impoverishing the area, not Israel. They are the problem.
Now these closing statements might make me sound radical but they are thoughts I acsertain from time to time - but it seems to me that the real goal here isn't a palestinian state at all. They are just being used by enemy arab countries like Iran to destroy the Jewish people. None of their actions represent the best interest of the palestinian people. They are just trying to buy enough time with these issues to make bigger and better weapons to wipe out the Jewish state. And as you mentioned in your passover story - the Jews have been a group of people who have been oppressed for centuries - as slaves in Egypt and under the Nazi regime. So now that we have some freedom - should we just start firing missles at Germany? Of course not - but we will also be fighting to keep our freedom and to keep our people safe. We won't wait for there to be a mass execution of the Jews to have the world turn around and say "oh - I guess Israel was right about the threats they were facing and their need to defend themselves". Because then it will be too late.
George Washington on Israel
George Washington on Israel
“A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification.” ~George Washington, ~page 269 of The 5000 Year Leap.
“The nation which indulges toward another habitual hatred or habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interests." ~ George Washington
"Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." ~ Thomas Jefferson
Really?
I didn't know Israel was around when George Washington was alive. Your Washington quotes are anachronistic. We live in a world today that is smaller than it ever was before, and close cooperation between countries is needed to combat problems that didn't exist when Washington was around (eg. the environment, the global recession, global terrorism, etc.).
On a different note, it's interesting that you single out Israel as the only country the US should cut its alliances with. How about South Korea? How about Britain? No, you're only interested in demonizing the one Jewish state.
Excellent article. I've
Excellent article. I've heard many people justify Israel's oppressive actions towards Palestinians by saying that when people live in fear, they are legitimately pushed to extreme actions. These same people refuse to recognize that a similar situation exists for Palestinians- except it's not fear of a potential attack but, rather, the knowledge that they will, either multiple times in their life or multiple times in their day, encounter the brutalities of occupation. This double-standard is puzzling, and I applaud the author for recognizing the Palestinian side. I'm also happy that someone has mentioned Rachel Corrie, as her story is so often forgotten in the U.S.- as are the stories of so many other peaceful protesters whose lives are ended by the IDF, or who have been seriously injured, like Tristan Anderson.
Response
"First of all, a Ghandi or an MLK prototype a priori requires the background of either an oppressive colonizing regime or a brutally racist one."
That's a false dilemma that you set up. It doesn't "require" either. You could say it requires a common hardship that is faced by a common people. In this case, the common hardship is mostly borne from the atrocious Palestinian leadership of yesterday and today. Whether it was rejecting peace in 1937 or 1947 (by rejecting two different partition plans) or by rejecting peace in 1967 or in 2000; or whether it was by encouraging and organizing terrorist attacks (Arafat in past years, and today Hamas in Gaza), Palestinian leaders have always led their people down the wrong path. If Palestinian leaders were more focused on creating an independent state, rather than on destroying the one next to them, there would today be a Palestinian state.
“If I were a Palestinian there right now, I would..."
If I were a Palestinian there right now, I would overthrow Hamas, clamor for a strong, democratic government to rule over Gaza and the West Bank, and urge my leaders to crack down on Palestinian terrorism so that the international community will recognize us as viable peace partner and force Israel to end the occupation in the West Bank and make peace with us.
You only give a part of the Rachel Corrie story, a highly-distorted part at that. Corrie placed herself in danger by deciding to go into a closed military zone and interfering with IDF operational activities - namely the bulldozing of a house with a tunnel underneath it. That tunnel that was used to smuggle weapons into Gaza. The driver, apparently, never saw or heard Corrie (if s/he did, it wouldn't have been very difficult to remove a non-violent protester from the scene and continue the operation). In other words, there is no reason for the driver to have killed Corrie if s/he knew Corrie was standing there, leading one to believe that the entire incident was an accident - an accident that could have been avoided had Corrie decided not to enter a closed military zone to protect terrorists.
As a side note to the James Miller story, is it interesting to note that the IDF soldier involved was Captain Hib al-Heib - an Arab. Yes, Arabs serve in Israel's army. It would seem to disprove your prior assertion of an "oppressive colonizing regime or a brutally racist one."
"But surely nobody could object to strategies that the Hebrews themselves resorted to, in order to gain their own freedom? Right?"
The Hebrews were slaves in Egypt. Palestinians are not slaves to anyone. Also, the Hebrews first went to Pharaoh and asked to be freed (remember Moses claiming "let my people go!"). In other words, the ten plagues only came after an attempt to negotiate peacefully. The Palestinians, on the other hand, never tried to negotiate peacefully (except for one group of Palestinians, Fatah, in the past few years) and resorted directly to violence and terrorism. The moment Israel declared itself a state, the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors declared a war of annihilation on the nascent Jewish state - a war that has, unfortunately, been going on ever since.
What tunnels?
MYTH: Rachel Corrie was killed while preventing the Israeli Army from destroying arms smuggling tunnels used by terrorists.
FACT: Rachel was standing in front of the home of friends - pharmacist Samir Nasrallah, his brother Khaled Nasrallah, and their wives and children. The Israeli government has never accused Samir or Khaled Nasrallah or their wives or children of links to terrorism. The Israeli army has never claimed that the Nasrallah home hid a weapons smuggling tunnel...
http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/site/category/background-information/
for the rest of the story.
Great story. I'm going to put add link to it definitely. As for non-violent resistance, check out
http://www.bilin-village.org/english/
There have been constant weekly protests against the wall in Bi'lin. Somewhat over a year ago, Palestinian video jouralist Emad Bornat was in Ithaca on tour with Puerto-Rican activist Tito Kayak. (For archives from the tour, see http://puertoricotopalestine.org). After his return to the West Bank, Emad was hit with a rubber bullet while documenting the weekly protest. It was a serious injury but he recovered and resumed documenting the struggle against the wall. When he is not videotaping, Emad is farming to support his family. A few months ago, his tractor had a mechanical problem and he crashed into the "separation fence" and sustained serious injuries from which he again has recovered. Where people like Emad and thousands of others find the courage to continue the struggle amazes me.
Citing the oppression of
Citing the oppression of Hebrews from however many thousands of years ago neither helps your argument nor justifies the present-day violence. I am of Slavic descent; am I entitled to bomb the Poles in my hometown for not overthrowing Hitler in WWII?
I also note that you failed to respond to the prompt "These child deaths were warranted because ______." I think that speaks for itself. You and I both know that there were many other avenues Israel could have followed in pursuing Hamas; attacks on innocent civilians with sophisticated, highly destructive weapons in a densely populated area violated an unacceptable number of UN resolutions.
"If I were a Palestinian there right now, I would overthrow Hamas..." This is the vague, idealistic statement of a sheltered child of privilege, and I cannot even bring myself to respond to it.
I really hope you don't go to my school
because your reasing comprehension is *extremely* weak.
He never cited oppression of the Hebrews to justify present-day violence, he cited oppression of the Hebrews to justify the ten plagues. He never responded to the promt about child deaths because that was from another article and the author of this article never asks us to respond to it. Maybe you should try reading a little closer next time.
Israel never targeted innocent civilians, they went after Hamas and Hamas only. It's not Israel's fault if Hamas surrounds itself with civilians and uses them as human shields (which violates international law), or that Hamas fires thousands of rockets directly at civilians (also a violation of law).
And please tell me what it was that Israel should have done? Should it have done nothing in response to the 10,000 rocket attacks, like it did for all those years before? Clearly that strategy worked so well...
Also, there's nothing vauge or idealistic about what he said. Overthrow the government. Period. That's as un-vague as it gets. Idealistic? What planet on you living on? The government of Fiji was just overthrown a few days ago. A few more examples of successful coups - Musharraf in Pakistan in 1999, the Iranian Revolution, Mauritania a few years back, Serbia, Argentina, the Philippines, Gerogia, Bolivia and Ecuador (the past 6 were all in this decade), etc. The list goes on. Again, what planet are you living on?