Rejecting deterministic views of the 1917 Balfour Declaration as an expression of the inevitable work of history returning Jews to their ancient homeland, this article argues that Britain's fateful endorsement of the idea of a national home for Jews in Palestine was, in fact, the result of a combination of fortuity and contingency related primarily to World War I and the concerns and personalities of the British politicians involved. The article highlights the historic improbability of the Declaration and its implementation in the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, noting the regression it represented at a time when British imperial policy aspired to more flexible accommodations with colonial populations.
FOR MANY ZIONISTS in the early twentieth century, the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine through the British government’s Balfour Declaration of 1917 and its League of Nations Mandate of 1922 represented, momentously, the now-imminent return of a diasporic people, comparative aliens in gentile societies, to their ancient home in the Levant. The mystic Zionist, Abraham Isaac Kook, saw it all as an expression of divine purpose, a great restorative sweep of God-driven history. Such ideas were rooted, albeit with a political twist, in the ancient Jewish sense of a “sacred” history and a related metaphysic of material events. There was an even grander reclamation: a “return to history” (ha-shiva la-historia) itself. Until that point, lacking territoriality and incoherent as a nation, the Jews had been, in David Ben-Gurion’s words at the time of the Balfour Declaration, “extricated from world history.” Now, through the official agency of the British, they were poised for a dramatic reentry.
REGRESSION
To the disinterested historian, however, what commands attention is not some working through of ineluctable religious or secular historical forces but rather the sheer short-term contingency, much of it war related, of the enabling factors underlying both the Declaration and Britain’s Mandate over Palestine in which it was ultimately incorporated. If there was any great movement of events, it was more a regression than an advance, involving as it did the establishment of a European settler community in an already well-peopled and well-charted territory. Britain’s sponsorship of the Zionist project stood in contradiction to the “Wilsonian” spirit of the times, in which self-determination for formerly imperialized societies had been, notionally at least, a significant concern in post–World War I political dispositions.
The British were remarkably explicit in their denial of democratic rights to the Palestinian Arabs. The author of the Declaration, Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, insisted, in an oft-quoted remark, that the aspirations of Zionists were “of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land,” and that Arab claims to Palestine were “infinitely weaker than those of the Jews.” These views were consistent with the Declaration’s promise of protection for the “civil and religious,” but not “political,” rights of the so-called “non-Jewish” population of Palestine. Lord Alfred Milner, one of the drafters of the Declaration, suggested that history and tradition of “the most sacred character” made it “impossible . . . to leave it to the Arab majority . . . to decide what shall be the future of Palestine.” The prime minister, David Lloyd George, was more succinct: “You mustn’t give responsible government to Palestine.” Nor could the indigenous population do much by way of effective complaint: Sir Ronald Storrs, successively military governor of Jerusalem and civil governor of Jerusalem and Judea between 1917 and 1926, observed that the Palestinian Arabs, in making pleas for political justice, had “about as much chance as had the Dervishes before Kitchener’s machine guns at Omdurman.”
There was, of course, a widespread failure on the part of European colonial powers to deliver self-determination to their subordinate societies: It took a second world war to bring that about. But there was a distinct sense in British imperial policy that aspired to more flexible accommodations with colonial populations—notably in India, Ireland, and Egypt. Winston Churchill as colonial secretary had, despite his own vigorous Zionism, a clear sense of the inflammatory inconsistency involved, declaring in 1922 that the problem with the idea of a Jewish homeland was “that it conflicted with our regular policy of consulting the wishes of the people in mandate territories and giving them a representative institution as soon as they were fitted for it.” Another friend of Zionism, Sir Mark Sykes, insisted in 1918: “If Arab nationality be recognised in Syria and Mesopotamia as a matter of justice it will be equally necessary to devise some form of control or administration for Palestine” that recognizes “the various religious and racial nationalities in the country . . . according equal privileges to all such nationalities.”
The regression, however, was implemented, and proved to be of the greatest historical significance, with bloody consequences for the near-century ahead. The clear implication was that the Jewish national home in Palestine, inserted in newly conquered British territory, could survive only through radical moderation of its colonialist instincts and an historic compromise with the Arab majority; or, alternatively, by iron-fisted attempts to impose unmoderated Jewish political will. The second approach—the one that came to govern events—was well articulated by the “revisionist” Zionists, most notably by the Odessa-born Vladimir Jabotinsky. As Avi Shlaim indicates, Jabotinsky did not subscribe to the common, tendentious illusion that “backward” Arabs would welcome “modernizing” Jews into their midst. Conflict was bound to ensue, he maintained, and it was incumbent upon the arriving settlers to prepare psychologically and militarily for the battles to come. “Any native people,” Jabotinsky wrote in 1923, “views their country as their national home, of which they are complete masters. They will not voluntarily allow, not even a new master, but even a new partner. And so it is for the Arabs. . . . They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or a Sioux looked upon the prairie.” The analogies were not happy ones.
http://www.palestine-studies.org/journals.aspx?id=10925&jid=1&href=abstract
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
Showing posts with label Palestine 101. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Palestine 101. Show all posts
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Monday, March 21, 2011
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
AYMAN QWAIDER: HEROISM IN PALESTINIAN CULTURE
Among the Arab world, the Palestinian people have become icons and heroes in a particular way. Listening to some Palestinian national songs generates intense reminiscence of Gaza and the ongoing Israeli’s government violence in that territory. It also paints a portrait of the Palestinian struggle and how this contributes to the culture of resistance.
The Palestinian people brought up in an unstable environment dominated by all manner of violence for decades. Regularly different areas in the Gaza Strip are exposed to Israeli invasion resulting in the killing of people and demolishing of homes. Palestinian people always show struggle and patience against invasions. After invasion, people keep speaking about the consequences of the invasion for a long time and how resistance and non-violent resistance highly highlight the violence of these military operations. Obviously, this has ensured that resistance has become a culture within the Palestinian society.
In the Islamic world, there are two special occasions “Eid” where people celebrate and enjoy. From the very early part of my life, I noticed that gun game is unfortunately the main and favorite game for little children even during these moments of celebrations. I still remember how little kids named this game “let’s play Yahood & Arab” that means “let’s play Arab against Jewish”. This abnormal environment has a crucial role to play in drawing attention to the culture of resistance inside the Palestinian community.
A Culture Sprung from Occupation and Resistance
Palestine was placed under the British control after the First World War by the League of the United Nations. The Balfour Declaration[1] (1917) proclaimed Palestine as a national home for Jewish settlers (Allain, 2004: 80-84). The British mandate facilitated the Jewish occupation and settlement in Palestine. As a result of repeated colonisations, Palestine has a long history of being occupied. Accordingly, this has often compelled Palestinians to revolt against these despotic occupations. Palestinians, since the occupation of their land in 1948, have never stopped resisting.
Resistance under the British Mandate
The Palestinian resistance did not start with the establishment of the State of Israel but dates back to the British mandate period, starting in 1917. The British mandate and the establishment of Israel are both strongly integrated in the Palestinian history where the British mandate is considered the root of the conflict in Palestine.
The 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine came up as an example of uprising in protest against the British mandate and their role in bringing more Jewish immigrants to Palestine. In 1936, a general strike marked the start of the great Palestinian revolt.
The 1936 Palestinian general strike and the armed revolt that followed were momentous events for the Palestinians, the Region, and the British Empire. The six-month general strike, which ran from April until October and involved work stoppages and boycotts of the British- and Zionist–controlled parts of the economy was the longest anti -colonial strike of its kind until that point in history, and perhaps the longest ever (Khalidi, 2006:106).
From Nakba (Catastrophe) to Naksa (Tragedy)
The history of Palestine became a long chain of losses, feelings of being outdone, dispossessed. From the partition plan (1947) to the numerous massacres and mass expulsions, Palestinians suffer to the chore the lack of a real Hero able to transcend an overwhelming situation. To survive the Creation of Israel’s State in 1948 to the “Tragedy” of 1967, survival in itself becomes heroic, and this explains too, the importance of the Hero, the love of heroic acts in Palestinian culture.
The First Intifada: Mass Mobilization
The first Intifada began in December 1987 when a military Israeli truck killed Palestinian workers awaiting permission to cross into Israel to work. It is important to realize that the intifada was a strong example of a mass mobilization uprising but not a politically-based discussion (Holt, 1996:28).
Due to the aggression of the Israeli military over the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, Palestinians revolted against this subjugation. Evidently, it had become a crucial part of the Palestinian daily life as it mobilized all population, including women, children and the elderly to participate. The first Intifada took the form of civil resistance where all population was participating to protest against the Israeli occupation (Ben-Ami, 2006:188). It also took the form of boycotts of the occupation’s institutions and goods. Further, the Palestinian people at that time disobeyed the occupation and regularly organized general strikes around all villages. At the same time, there were the stone demonstrations where young people threw stones against the aggressive Israeli armed occupation troops (Beinin and Hajjar). In contrast, the Israeli army always responded with violence against unarmed vulnerable Palestinians. It was obvious that the Palestinian youths battled the Israeli tanks and soldiers with their bodies without any means of violence (Rosen, 2005:116). Palestinian youth considered that the days of fighting with the Israeli soldiers were regarded as the glorious days of the Palestinian resistance.
Manal who was thirteen years old when the Intifada broke out and she was shot at her chest at the age of fifteen. I miss those days a lot. They were the most beautiful days of my life. True, everyone was scared of the soldiers and their guns but we had dignity and it was our dignity that made us so defiant (Rosen, 2005:118).
It is interestingly attractive when I read a story that happened in refugee camp “Al Bureij Camp”, where I received my primary education, which shows how the Palestinian women importantly participated during the first Intifada. For example, a woman spoke of routine raids by the Israeli soldiers. “The soldiers come,” she says:
Enter some houses without knocking and take the men and the boys away. We try to be quicker than the army and as soon as we hear the warning whistles from the guarding shabab (young men) at the edge of the camp, we women go out into the roofs and give signs to the shabab in our area that they have to run away. We signal to them from which direction the soldiers are coming. This is one of the roles of women during the uprising (Augustine, 1993:124).
The culture of resistance in the first intifada happened to be relatively non-violent. Further, it was dominated by the population through their disobedience of the Israeli occupation regarding their everyday life affairs. It’s an interesting case of “mass-heroism”.
The Second Intifada
The second Intifada is remarkably considered to be a religious uprising. It erupted as a reaction to the accumulation of the daily Israel oppression and violence. The visit of Ariel Sharon[2] to the Dome of the Rock[3] ”Al Aqsa Mosque” in Jerusalem in late September 2000 was the start of the Intifada. Therefore, Palestinians give this Intifada the name of “Intifada AL Aqsa” so as to keep it linked with most religious places in Palestine. This visit was provocative for the Palestinian Muslim people as Sharon violated their holiest mosque. Israelis consequently fired upon the Palestinian worshipers and demonstrators sparking the second Intifada.
The resistance during the Intifada as it is characterized with the increase of Israeli violence toward Palestinians was more brutal than the first Intifada. According B’Tselem organization, in the first intifada around 100 Israelis were killed, about two-fifths of those security forces, and 1000 Palestinians were killed, the majority were civilians. The second Intifada was much more aggressive and bloody as around 5050 were killed, tens of thousands injured, and approximately 5113 houses were demolished (Palestinian Center for Human Rights: 2010).
It is believed that occupied people have to right to resist and International Law guarantees this right. In this respect, the Palestinian people have all possible right to resist either violently or non-violently. The violent resistance in Palestine always emerged as a reaction of the daily Israeli oppression on the Palestinians which is characterized by brutality.
Obviously, the second Intifada also took the form of non-violent resistance. This kind of resistance has powerfully sustained and empowered the second Intifada through exploring non-violence to control the Israeli power. For instance, there is a one weekly demonstration taking place in two of the Palestinian villages in the occupied West Bank (Ba’leen and Ni’lin). In these demonstrations, there is a popular participation including Palestinians, Israeli peace activists and foreigners who struggle none violently. This includes the desire to halt Israeli’s illegal confiscation of land for its notorious separation wall which Palestinians refer to as “Apartheid wall”. This wall paralyzes the Palestinian daily life as it cuts them off from their villages and their neighbors (Dowty, 2005:172). The International Court of Justice describes the construction of the Separation Wall as illegal and gravely infringes on Palestinian rights. Additionally, the court considered the wall constitutes violation of the International Law (International Court of Justice, 2004).
Such non-violent conquests as demonstrated by the two intifadas produce different forms of heroism: At individual level and at the collective level. At the collective level, it is remarkable to observe that the Palestinian people, who in the face of comparative weakness and disadvantage, have demonstrated courage and the will power to fight non-violently for what legitimately belongs to them: their land. Such-non violent resistance also indicates the sacrifices of Palestinians which aims at producing a better good for its people. Such collective heroism is also demonstrated by the international awareness which the Palestinian people are able to create regarding the occupation of their land and their self determination.
At the individual level, Palestinians as a people have learnt to live non-violently. Suffice it to mention that as recently as February, 2010 one student, Ayman Qwaider, gallantly demonstrated heroism by exploring exhaustive non violent campaigns to achieve his right and noble objective of studying outside his country (McIntyre:2010).
Throughout the quick overview of the two Palestinian Intifadas, we would easily realize these Intifadas have created a real Palestinian heroism. Regarding the culture of resistance, the Palestinian heroism would be defined as the ability of Palestinians to dedicate their lives to struggling and resisting the occupation their land. Moving to discuss the hero in the Palestinian constitution would actually illustrate the Palestinian perspective about the occupation as both heroes have been influenced by the occupation.
[1]On 2 November 1917, British Foreign Secretary Author Balfour, in a letter to a leading British Zionist Lord Rothschild wrote: “His Majesty’s Government views with the favour the establishment in Palestine of a national Home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object. It is being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jewish any other country.
[2] Sharon is an Israeli general and politician, who served as Israel’s 11th Prime Minister. He is currently in a permanent vegetative state after suffering a stroke on 4 January 2006.
[3]Al-Aqsa Mosque is the second oldest mosque in Islam after the Ka’ba inMecca, and is third in holiness and importance after the mosques in Meccaand Medina. It is great stature in Muslim and Palestinians’ heart.
I am Ayman Talal Quader. I’m a Palestinian born and raised in Gaza. I’m 23 years old. I have a bachelor degree in English Language and Education. I have worked in several different fields’ pre and post of my university studies for almost 4 years. I have worked as volunteer in civil societies where I practiced tasks to help people and educate children. i always try to bring the suffering of Palestinian to the whole world.I Do Love Gaza and its people, its land, its the breezes. i believe that justice and freedom should prevail one day.
http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2011/01/ayman-qwaider-heroism-in-palestinian-culture/
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
The Palestinian people brought up in an unstable environment dominated by all manner of violence for decades. Regularly different areas in the Gaza Strip are exposed to Israeli invasion resulting in the killing of people and demolishing of homes. Palestinian people always show struggle and patience against invasions. After invasion, people keep speaking about the consequences of the invasion for a long time and how resistance and non-violent resistance highly highlight the violence of these military operations. Obviously, this has ensured that resistance has become a culture within the Palestinian society.
In the Islamic world, there are two special occasions “Eid” where people celebrate and enjoy. From the very early part of my life, I noticed that gun game is unfortunately the main and favorite game for little children even during these moments of celebrations. I still remember how little kids named this game “let’s play Yahood & Arab” that means “let’s play Arab against Jewish”. This abnormal environment has a crucial role to play in drawing attention to the culture of resistance inside the Palestinian community.
A Culture Sprung from Occupation and Resistance
Palestine was placed under the British control after the First World War by the League of the United Nations. The Balfour Declaration[1] (1917) proclaimed Palestine as a national home for Jewish settlers (Allain, 2004: 80-84). The British mandate facilitated the Jewish occupation and settlement in Palestine. As a result of repeated colonisations, Palestine has a long history of being occupied. Accordingly, this has often compelled Palestinians to revolt against these despotic occupations. Palestinians, since the occupation of their land in 1948, have never stopped resisting.
Resistance under the British Mandate
The Palestinian resistance did not start with the establishment of the State of Israel but dates back to the British mandate period, starting in 1917. The British mandate and the establishment of Israel are both strongly integrated in the Palestinian history where the British mandate is considered the root of the conflict in Palestine.
The 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine came up as an example of uprising in protest against the British mandate and their role in bringing more Jewish immigrants to Palestine. In 1936, a general strike marked the start of the great Palestinian revolt.
The 1936 Palestinian general strike and the armed revolt that followed were momentous events for the Palestinians, the Region, and the British Empire. The six-month general strike, which ran from April until October and involved work stoppages and boycotts of the British- and Zionist–controlled parts of the economy was the longest anti -colonial strike of its kind until that point in history, and perhaps the longest ever (Khalidi, 2006:106).
From Nakba (Catastrophe) to Naksa (Tragedy)
The history of Palestine became a long chain of losses, feelings of being outdone, dispossessed. From the partition plan (1947) to the numerous massacres and mass expulsions, Palestinians suffer to the chore the lack of a real Hero able to transcend an overwhelming situation. To survive the Creation of Israel’s State in 1948 to the “Tragedy” of 1967, survival in itself becomes heroic, and this explains too, the importance of the Hero, the love of heroic acts in Palestinian culture.
The First Intifada: Mass Mobilization
The first Intifada began in December 1987 when a military Israeli truck killed Palestinian workers awaiting permission to cross into Israel to work. It is important to realize that the intifada was a strong example of a mass mobilization uprising but not a politically-based discussion (Holt, 1996:28).
Due to the aggression of the Israeli military over the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, Palestinians revolted against this subjugation. Evidently, it had become a crucial part of the Palestinian daily life as it mobilized all population, including women, children and the elderly to participate. The first Intifada took the form of civil resistance where all population was participating to protest against the Israeli occupation (Ben-Ami, 2006:188). It also took the form of boycotts of the occupation’s institutions and goods. Further, the Palestinian people at that time disobeyed the occupation and regularly organized general strikes around all villages. At the same time, there were the stone demonstrations where young people threw stones against the aggressive Israeli armed occupation troops (Beinin and Hajjar). In contrast, the Israeli army always responded with violence against unarmed vulnerable Palestinians. It was obvious that the Palestinian youths battled the Israeli tanks and soldiers with their bodies without any means of violence (Rosen, 2005:116). Palestinian youth considered that the days of fighting with the Israeli soldiers were regarded as the glorious days of the Palestinian resistance.
Manal who was thirteen years old when the Intifada broke out and she was shot at her chest at the age of fifteen. I miss those days a lot. They were the most beautiful days of my life. True, everyone was scared of the soldiers and their guns but we had dignity and it was our dignity that made us so defiant (Rosen, 2005:118).
It is interestingly attractive when I read a story that happened in refugee camp “Al Bureij Camp”, where I received my primary education, which shows how the Palestinian women importantly participated during the first Intifada. For example, a woman spoke of routine raids by the Israeli soldiers. “The soldiers come,” she says:
Enter some houses without knocking and take the men and the boys away. We try to be quicker than the army and as soon as we hear the warning whistles from the guarding shabab (young men) at the edge of the camp, we women go out into the roofs and give signs to the shabab in our area that they have to run away. We signal to them from which direction the soldiers are coming. This is one of the roles of women during the uprising (Augustine, 1993:124).
The culture of resistance in the first intifada happened to be relatively non-violent. Further, it was dominated by the population through their disobedience of the Israeli occupation regarding their everyday life affairs. It’s an interesting case of “mass-heroism”.
The Second Intifada
The second Intifada is remarkably considered to be a religious uprising. It erupted as a reaction to the accumulation of the daily Israel oppression and violence. The visit of Ariel Sharon[2] to the Dome of the Rock[3] ”Al Aqsa Mosque” in Jerusalem in late September 2000 was the start of the Intifada. Therefore, Palestinians give this Intifada the name of “Intifada AL Aqsa” so as to keep it linked with most religious places in Palestine. This visit was provocative for the Palestinian Muslim people as Sharon violated their holiest mosque. Israelis consequently fired upon the Palestinian worshipers and demonstrators sparking the second Intifada.
The resistance during the Intifada as it is characterized with the increase of Israeli violence toward Palestinians was more brutal than the first Intifada. According B’Tselem organization, in the first intifada around 100 Israelis were killed, about two-fifths of those security forces, and 1000 Palestinians were killed, the majority were civilians. The second Intifada was much more aggressive and bloody as around 5050 were killed, tens of thousands injured, and approximately 5113 houses were demolished (Palestinian Center for Human Rights: 2010).
It is believed that occupied people have to right to resist and International Law guarantees this right. In this respect, the Palestinian people have all possible right to resist either violently or non-violently. The violent resistance in Palestine always emerged as a reaction of the daily Israeli oppression on the Palestinians which is characterized by brutality.
Obviously, the second Intifada also took the form of non-violent resistance. This kind of resistance has powerfully sustained and empowered the second Intifada through exploring non-violence to control the Israeli power. For instance, there is a one weekly demonstration taking place in two of the Palestinian villages in the occupied West Bank (Ba’leen and Ni’lin). In these demonstrations, there is a popular participation including Palestinians, Israeli peace activists and foreigners who struggle none violently. This includes the desire to halt Israeli’s illegal confiscation of land for its notorious separation wall which Palestinians refer to as “Apartheid wall”. This wall paralyzes the Palestinian daily life as it cuts them off from their villages and their neighbors (Dowty, 2005:172). The International Court of Justice describes the construction of the Separation Wall as illegal and gravely infringes on Palestinian rights. Additionally, the court considered the wall constitutes violation of the International Law (International Court of Justice, 2004).
Such non-violent conquests as demonstrated by the two intifadas produce different forms of heroism: At individual level and at the collective level. At the collective level, it is remarkable to observe that the Palestinian people, who in the face of comparative weakness and disadvantage, have demonstrated courage and the will power to fight non-violently for what legitimately belongs to them: their land. Such-non violent resistance also indicates the sacrifices of Palestinians which aims at producing a better good for its people. Such collective heroism is also demonstrated by the international awareness which the Palestinian people are able to create regarding the occupation of their land and their self determination.
At the individual level, Palestinians as a people have learnt to live non-violently. Suffice it to mention that as recently as February, 2010 one student, Ayman Qwaider, gallantly demonstrated heroism by exploring exhaustive non violent campaigns to achieve his right and noble objective of studying outside his country (McIntyre:2010).
Throughout the quick overview of the two Palestinian Intifadas, we would easily realize these Intifadas have created a real Palestinian heroism. Regarding the culture of resistance, the Palestinian heroism would be defined as the ability of Palestinians to dedicate their lives to struggling and resisting the occupation their land. Moving to discuss the hero in the Palestinian constitution would actually illustrate the Palestinian perspective about the occupation as both heroes have been influenced by the occupation.
[1]On 2 November 1917, British Foreign Secretary Author Balfour, in a letter to a leading British Zionist Lord Rothschild wrote: “His Majesty’s Government views with the favour the establishment in Palestine of a national Home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object. It is being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jewish any other country.
[2] Sharon is an Israeli general and politician, who served as Israel’s 11th Prime Minister. He is currently in a permanent vegetative state after suffering a stroke on 4 January 2006.
[3]Al-Aqsa Mosque is the second oldest mosque in Islam after the Ka’ba inMecca, and is third in holiness and importance after the mosques in Meccaand Medina. It is great stature in Muslim and Palestinians’ heart.
I am Ayman Talal Quader. I’m a Palestinian born and raised in Gaza. I’m 23 years old. I have a bachelor degree in English Language and Education. I have worked in several different fields’ pre and post of my university studies for almost 4 years. I have worked as volunteer in civil societies where I practiced tasks to help people and educate children. i always try to bring the suffering of Palestinian to the whole world.I Do Love Gaza and its people, its land, its the breezes. i believe that justice and freedom should prevail one day.
http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2011/01/ayman-qwaider-heroism-in-palestinian-culture/
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
Monday, May 31, 2010
UN chief 'shocked' by Gaza aid flotilla raid
KAMPALA — UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said Monday he was "shocked" by a deadly Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla and demanded a full investigation.
"I am shocked by reports of killings and injuries of people on boats carrying supplies for Gaza," the UN chief said at a press conference following the opening in Uganda of a key conference on the International Criminal Court.
"I condemn this violence," Ban added, as an Israeli television channel reported that as many as 19 pro-Palestinian activists may have been killed in the Israeli military raid.
"It is vital that there is a full investigation to determine exactly how this bloodshed took place," Ban said.
"I believe Israel must urgently provide a full explanation," he added, moments after delivering a speech hailing the "new age of accountability" heralded by the creation of the ICC in 2002.
The Hague-based tribunal, of which Israel is not a member, is the world's first permanent court mandated to bring perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide to justice.
The UN chief said that a detailed account of the incident was needed before the international community could coordinate its response.
http://islamicscholars.newsvine.com/_news/2010/05/31/4442389-afp-un-chief-shocked-by-gaza-aid-flotilla-raid?threadId=969074&commentId=14504515#c14504515
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
"I am shocked by reports of killings and injuries of people on boats carrying supplies for Gaza," the UN chief said at a press conference following the opening in Uganda of a key conference on the International Criminal Court.
"I condemn this violence," Ban added, as an Israeli television channel reported that as many as 19 pro-Palestinian activists may have been killed in the Israeli military raid.
"It is vital that there is a full investigation to determine exactly how this bloodshed took place," Ban said.
"I believe Israel must urgently provide a full explanation," he added, moments after delivering a speech hailing the "new age of accountability" heralded by the creation of the ICC in 2002.
The Hague-based tribunal, of which Israel is not a member, is the world's first permanent court mandated to bring perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide to justice.
The UN chief said that a detailed account of the incident was needed before the international community could coordinate its response.
http://islamicscholars.newsvine.com/_news/2010/05/31/4442389-afp-un-chief-shocked-by-gaza-aid-flotilla-raid?threadId=969074&commentId=14504515#c14504515
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Your Tax Dollars at Work: Israel to deport...well...just about the entire West Bank, apparently
In the most recent round of Kafka-esque absurdity from the U.S.-funded Israeli military, new military orders would allow the occupying army to deport anyone in the West Bank without an army-granted permit--which could include just about anyone
According to an editorial in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, "The order's vague language will allow army officers to exploit it arbitrarily to carry out mass expulsions, in accordance with military orders which were issued under unclear circumstances....This would be a grave and dangerous move, unprecedented during the Israeli occupation."
And The Guardian reports on efforts by Israeli human rights groups to combat this order:
"Israel's leading human rights groups are trying to stop two new Israeli military orders which will make any resident of the occupied West Bank who does not have an Israeli-issued permit liable for deportation or jail.
The new Order Regarding Prevention of Infiltration and Order Regarding Security Provisions, which comes into force on Tuesday have "severe ramifications," the rights groups say. Palestinians, and any foreigners living in the West Bank, could be labelled infiltrators and deported within 72 hours or jailed for seven years if they are found without the correct permit. It does not define what Israel considers a valid permit.
"The orders … are worded so broadly such as theoretically allowing the military to empty the West Bank of almost all its Palestinian inhabitants," said the 10 rights groups, which include Ha-Moked, B'Tselem, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, and Rabbis for Human Rights. Until now the vast majority of Palestinians in the West Bank have not been required to hold a permit just to be present in their homes, the groups say."
Meanwhile, deported American journalist Jared Malsin writes at Huffington Post that the recent Anat Kam/Uri Blau cover-up scandal, which involves an expose of Israeli assassination orders that violated even the country's own laws (much less international law regarding extrajudicial assassination), is the latest front in Israel's "crisis of legitimacy."
Crisis of legitimacy, indeed. Racist permit systems. Arbitrary deportation. Extrajudicial assassinations. There is nothing legitimate about any of it.
Find out how much money you and your community are spending to support this sort of absurdity, and what you can do to stop it, at AidtoIsrael.org
http://endtheoccupationblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/your-tax-dollars-at-work-israel-to.html
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
Talking Palestine to power
Today, there is no excuse for not knowing the truth about Palestine, especially what is happening in Gaza. Even taking into account the disinformation spread in mainstream media, there are enough glimpses one gets of a ravaged Gaza and a brutalized people that should compel us to ask questions. There are enough websites and blogs easily available for anyone to learn more, even if it requires sifting through and evaluating the available information. Certainly, the alarm bells should be ringing when our political leaders declare undying fealty to Israel or cavalierly wear it as a badge of honor, despite the documented reports of Israel's war crimes by human rights groups and official enquiries.
But the world lacks courage from government leaders, acquiescent mainstream media, nongovernmental organizations dependent on government support, academics looking for tenure and populations too long fed on a diet of Zionist myths. People are terrified of being labelled anti-Semitic, a mendacious charge against anyone criticizing Israel. Palestinians too, afraid of being further shunned and disadvantaged in countries that give them refuge, so often remain silent. Not only do people fear repercussions, but speaking the truth or even just hearing it has a way of taking people out of their comfort zones. They fear their troubled consciences may require them to act and so they bury their heads deeper into the sand where they hope even the sounds of silence might be extinguished.
This then is the challenge for advocates the world over. How does one talk Palestine to power if one cannot even talk Palestine to the people who are in fear of the powerful?
In the face of media saturation with Zionist viewpoints and the new "Brand Israel" campaigns, many wanting to advocate for Palestine might feel defeated, but time and again we see that the power of one can be enormously effective.
The great scholar and public intellectual Edward Said showed more than anyone else that individuals can make a difference in the public defense of Palestine. He particularly saw the intellectual's voice as having "resonance."
But one does not need to be an intellectual. Said's words can just as aptly apply to any one of us. He said avoidance was "reprehensible" and in his 1994 book Representations of the Intellectual, described it as "that characteristic turning away from a difficult and principled position which you know to be the right one, but which you decide not to take. You do not want to appear too political; you are afraid of seeming too controversial; you need the approval of a boss or an authority figure; you want to keep a reputation for being balanced, objective, moderate; your hope is ... to remain within the responsible mainstream ... ."
In 1993 when almost everyone else thought the handshakes at the White House steps would seal the negotiated Oslo accords and at long last give the Palestinians their freedom and bring peace to the region, Edward Said saw that these accords would merely provide the cover for Israel to pursue its colonial expansionism and consolidate its occupation of Palestine. However, he knew to criticize Oslo meant in effect taking a position against "hope" and "peace." His decision to do so flew in the face of the Palestinian revolutionary leadership that had bartered for statehood.
Although Said was denounced for his views, he was not prepared to buy into the deception that he knew would leave the Palestinians with neither hope nor peace. And just as he predicted, each fruitless year of peacemaking finally exposed the horrible reality of Oslo as Palestinians found themselves the victims of Israel's matrix of control, a term first used to describe the situation by Israeli professor Jeff Halper in 1999. And this domination of one people over another without any intention of addressing the injustices against the Palestinians ethnically cleansed from their homeland, has undeniably reduced Israel to an apartheid state.
The Palestinians have nothing left worth calling a state and they are facing an existential threat on all fronts. Yet, some intellectuals are still talking about a two-state solution in lock step with politicians, a mantra that is repeated uncritically, even mendaciously, in the mainstream media.
This pandering to an idea for decades has been undermined by the furious sounds of drills and hammers reverberating in illegal settlements throughout the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the catastrophic societal ruptures engineered in Gaza. Now those sounds are muffled by the rhetoric of "economic peace," "institution-building," "democracy," "internal security" and "statehood." They are words that must be challenged at every opportunity, for they are not mere words, but dangerous concepts when isolated from truth on the ground.
It is no use talking about "economic peace" when industrial estates built for Palestinian workers are intended to provide Israel with slave labor and cheap goods. It is useless to support "institution-building" when Israel continues to undermine and obstruct those programs already struggling to service Palestinian society. It is a lie to speak of "democracy" when fair elections in 2006 had Israel and the "international community" denying Hamas the right to govern. It is a charade to accept "internal security" when arming and training Palestinians to police their own people covers for Israel's and America's divide-and-conquer scheme. It is hollow to speak of "statehood" when Israel keeps stealing land and building illegal settlements that deprive the Palestinians of their homes and livelihoods while herding them into isolated and walled-in ghettoes.
Edward Said was proven right. Now, it is our turn to speak the truth and act fearlessly, regardless of the censure we are likely to encounter. The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer is believed to have said that truth passes through three stages: "first, it is ridiculed; second, it is violently opposed; third, it is accepted as being self-evident." Today, we are at the third stage: the 11 million Palestinians living under occupation, apartheid and as stateless refugees are the living truth. That is Israel's Achilles' heel.
The Palestinians are no longer the humble shepherds and farmers that Zionist forces terrorized into fleeing to make way for the Jewish State of Israel. A new generation wants justice and it is demanding it eloquently, nonviolently and strategically. Their message: no normal relations with Israel while it oppresses Palestinians, denies their rights and violates international law. And boycott, divestment and sanctions have to be legitimate tools for challenging a state that claims exceptionalism no matter how extreme and criminal its actions.
The temptation of course is always to opt for the path of least resistance. Therefore, we must appeal to the individual, not even to sacrifice for others, but to recognize that no matter where we live in this global village, we are all vulnerable if we do not stand up for universal human rights and uphold the principles and application of international law.
Despite his own Zionist affiliations and loyalty to Israel, Justice Richard Goldstone saw the danger of tailoring his UN-backed report on war crimes in Gaza to exonerate Israel. He had the decency and courage to put the rule of law and humanity ahead of the savage condemnation he knew would come from talking truth to power.
The same can be said of Richard Falk, the Jewish professor emeritus from Princeton University and UN special rapporteur in the occupied Palestinian territories, who was denied entry into Israel because he described Israel's siege on Gaza as a "Holocaust in the making" ("Israel deports American academic," Guardian, 15 December 2008). Israel's treatment was insulting enough, but now shamefully, the Palestinian Authority has asked the Human Rights Council to "postpone" his report on Gaza and, as Nadia Hijab reported, is asking him to resign ("PA's betrayal of human rights defenders the unkindest cut," Nadia Hijab, 14 March 2010).
These are honorable men, but we too can stand on principle in smaller ways, whether that is refusing to buy Israeli goods at our local store, boycotting an Israeli-government sponsored event or exposing and protesting the collusion between governments and corporations with Israel. That is what it means to become part of a worldwide civil movement that will do what our leaders will not: pressure Israel to dismantle the matrix of control on Palestine and make reparations for the decades of injustices it has perpetrated against its people.
It is indeed possible for all of us to "squeeze out of reality some of its potentialities," the reality that University of Melbourne Professor Ghassan Hage has said is found in those utopic moments that come from challenging our own thoughts, fears and biases. In that space lies the untapped power we seek, to speak the truth without fear or favor. In that space lies the potential for political change. In that space, there will always be hope for Palestine.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11197.shtml
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
But the world lacks courage from government leaders, acquiescent mainstream media, nongovernmental organizations dependent on government support, academics looking for tenure and populations too long fed on a diet of Zionist myths. People are terrified of being labelled anti-Semitic, a mendacious charge against anyone criticizing Israel. Palestinians too, afraid of being further shunned and disadvantaged in countries that give them refuge, so often remain silent. Not only do people fear repercussions, but speaking the truth or even just hearing it has a way of taking people out of their comfort zones. They fear their troubled consciences may require them to act and so they bury their heads deeper into the sand where they hope even the sounds of silence might be extinguished.
This then is the challenge for advocates the world over. How does one talk Palestine to power if one cannot even talk Palestine to the people who are in fear of the powerful?
In the face of media saturation with Zionist viewpoints and the new "Brand Israel" campaigns, many wanting to advocate for Palestine might feel defeated, but time and again we see that the power of one can be enormously effective.
The great scholar and public intellectual Edward Said showed more than anyone else that individuals can make a difference in the public defense of Palestine. He particularly saw the intellectual's voice as having "resonance."
But one does not need to be an intellectual. Said's words can just as aptly apply to any one of us. He said avoidance was "reprehensible" and in his 1994 book Representations of the Intellectual, described it as "that characteristic turning away from a difficult and principled position which you know to be the right one, but which you decide not to take. You do not want to appear too political; you are afraid of seeming too controversial; you need the approval of a boss or an authority figure; you want to keep a reputation for being balanced, objective, moderate; your hope is ... to remain within the responsible mainstream ... ."
In 1993 when almost everyone else thought the handshakes at the White House steps would seal the negotiated Oslo accords and at long last give the Palestinians their freedom and bring peace to the region, Edward Said saw that these accords would merely provide the cover for Israel to pursue its colonial expansionism and consolidate its occupation of Palestine. However, he knew to criticize Oslo meant in effect taking a position against "hope" and "peace." His decision to do so flew in the face of the Palestinian revolutionary leadership that had bartered for statehood.
Although Said was denounced for his views, he was not prepared to buy into the deception that he knew would leave the Palestinians with neither hope nor peace. And just as he predicted, each fruitless year of peacemaking finally exposed the horrible reality of Oslo as Palestinians found themselves the victims of Israel's matrix of control, a term first used to describe the situation by Israeli professor Jeff Halper in 1999. And this domination of one people over another without any intention of addressing the injustices against the Palestinians ethnically cleansed from their homeland, has undeniably reduced Israel to an apartheid state.
The Palestinians have nothing left worth calling a state and they are facing an existential threat on all fronts. Yet, some intellectuals are still talking about a two-state solution in lock step with politicians, a mantra that is repeated uncritically, even mendaciously, in the mainstream media.
This pandering to an idea for decades has been undermined by the furious sounds of drills and hammers reverberating in illegal settlements throughout the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the catastrophic societal ruptures engineered in Gaza. Now those sounds are muffled by the rhetoric of "economic peace," "institution-building," "democracy," "internal security" and "statehood." They are words that must be challenged at every opportunity, for they are not mere words, but dangerous concepts when isolated from truth on the ground.
It is no use talking about "economic peace" when industrial estates built for Palestinian workers are intended to provide Israel with slave labor and cheap goods. It is useless to support "institution-building" when Israel continues to undermine and obstruct those programs already struggling to service Palestinian society. It is a lie to speak of "democracy" when fair elections in 2006 had Israel and the "international community" denying Hamas the right to govern. It is a charade to accept "internal security" when arming and training Palestinians to police their own people covers for Israel's and America's divide-and-conquer scheme. It is hollow to speak of "statehood" when Israel keeps stealing land and building illegal settlements that deprive the Palestinians of their homes and livelihoods while herding them into isolated and walled-in ghettoes.
Edward Said was proven right. Now, it is our turn to speak the truth and act fearlessly, regardless of the censure we are likely to encounter. The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer is believed to have said that truth passes through three stages: "first, it is ridiculed; second, it is violently opposed; third, it is accepted as being self-evident." Today, we are at the third stage: the 11 million Palestinians living under occupation, apartheid and as stateless refugees are the living truth. That is Israel's Achilles' heel.
The Palestinians are no longer the humble shepherds and farmers that Zionist forces terrorized into fleeing to make way for the Jewish State of Israel. A new generation wants justice and it is demanding it eloquently, nonviolently and strategically. Their message: no normal relations with Israel while it oppresses Palestinians, denies their rights and violates international law. And boycott, divestment and sanctions have to be legitimate tools for challenging a state that claims exceptionalism no matter how extreme and criminal its actions.
The temptation of course is always to opt for the path of least resistance. Therefore, we must appeal to the individual, not even to sacrifice for others, but to recognize that no matter where we live in this global village, we are all vulnerable if we do not stand up for universal human rights and uphold the principles and application of international law.
Despite his own Zionist affiliations and loyalty to Israel, Justice Richard Goldstone saw the danger of tailoring his UN-backed report on war crimes in Gaza to exonerate Israel. He had the decency and courage to put the rule of law and humanity ahead of the savage condemnation he knew would come from talking truth to power.
The same can be said of Richard Falk, the Jewish professor emeritus from Princeton University and UN special rapporteur in the occupied Palestinian territories, who was denied entry into Israel because he described Israel's siege on Gaza as a "Holocaust in the making" ("Israel deports American academic," Guardian, 15 December 2008). Israel's treatment was insulting enough, but now shamefully, the Palestinian Authority has asked the Human Rights Council to "postpone" his report on Gaza and, as Nadia Hijab reported, is asking him to resign ("PA's betrayal of human rights defenders the unkindest cut," Nadia Hijab, 14 March 2010).
These are honorable men, but we too can stand on principle in smaller ways, whether that is refusing to buy Israeli goods at our local store, boycotting an Israeli-government sponsored event or exposing and protesting the collusion between governments and corporations with Israel. That is what it means to become part of a worldwide civil movement that will do what our leaders will not: pressure Israel to dismantle the matrix of control on Palestine and make reparations for the decades of injustices it has perpetrated against its people.
It is indeed possible for all of us to "squeeze out of reality some of its potentialities," the reality that University of Melbourne Professor Ghassan Hage has said is found in those utopic moments that come from challenging our own thoughts, fears and biases. In that space lies the untapped power we seek, to speak the truth without fear or favor. In that space lies the potential for political change. In that space, there will always be hope for Palestine.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11197.shtml
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
Friday, April 24, 2009
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Palestine 101 hosted by former white house chief of staff John Sununu
Award-winning educational video on the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Hosted by Former White House Chief of Staff John Sununu.
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
Subscribe to Falestin Under Occupation by Email
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
