Figure 1.-- |
|
A British reader writes, "America's unconditional support for the attrocities carried out
by Israel is the root cause of anti-americanism around the world. If Isreal would leave the palestinians alone, the whole situation would improve. Yes, we know the Palestinians have fought back for 60 years, but World opinion is that Israel has invaded land which it does not own, is not entitled to occupy, and is illegally governing. The sooner Israel fully withdraws to it's legitimate 1966 borders, the sooner peace will arrive. Yes, we know that it has taken a long time for
most Palestinians to accept that Israel has a right to exist, but they have accepted it (some more than others). We also know that Israel has never paid a penny in compensation to the farmers and villagers whose land has been acquired, whether lawfully or not, to create the state of Israel. If Israel had bought the land, albeit compulsory purchase, their would be less bitterness. All Jewish hill-top settlements in West Bank have got to be removed, or governed by the Palestianians. All citizens of Israel must be treated equally, whether muslim, christian, or Jew. At the moment, not all citizens can vote, or have passports. If my next door neighbour decides tonight that he
needs a wider drive-way to get into his property, and moves our fence 3 yards, I will be annoyed. If he explains his problem and asks me first, I will be happier. If he pays me for the land I lose, I might agree. But if he justs helps himself, claiming that his ancestors 2000 years ago owned the entire plot, I will fight back."
"America's unconditional support for the attrocities carried out
by Israel is the root cause of anti-americanism around the world. If Isreal would leave the palestinians alone, the whole situation would improve. The reader raises two issues here, attrocities and anti-Americanism.
In constructing HBC, I receive a large mumber of eMails from around the world. This includes some eMails from the Muslim world. They commonly raise the issue of attrocities. But as our reader here does, they only want to discuss the attricities committed by the Isrealis and usually either ignore Aran/Palestinian attrocities as jusitified acts of self defense. The simple fact is that both sides have committed attricities. People who deny this are partisans and not scholars. One might argue who has committed the most attrocities, but to deny that both sides have committed attrocities is simply historically incorrect. Now I think our reader here may be thinking about the recent conflict in Lebanon in which large areas of Beirut as well as sites throughout southern Lebanon were destroyed. This is a legitimate criticism to make. But it is also true that Hesbolah began firing rockets into Israel and that they located these rocket firing facilities within civilian residential areas. It also needs to be pointed out that the Isrealis were attempting to target the rocket launching sites while Hesbolah targeted civilians. Of course Israel came out poorly in the media because of theirv modern weapons and greater damage inflicted. The press sees to have come up with a doctrine of comenserate force. I wonder how many Britons believe in this doctrine when their homes and families at stake. It is reasonable to think that the RAF should have stopped bombing Germany in World War II once they had reached the tonnage of bombs that the Luftwaffe dropped on Brirtain. I think it is true that American policy was to give Israel time to deal with Hesbolah, But here this was because Hebolah was firing rockets into Israel. To describe this as "support for attrocities" seems extremely unfair and unwaranted.
I doubt very seriously if the phenomenon of anti-Americanism around the world is due to our support for Israel. The phenomenon is much more complex and not particularly pertinent to the siscussion of thec Israel-Palestinian Conlict. I will say that the Western European countries that are most vocal in their condemnation of America, live in free democratic countries only because the Inited States in three different occassions came to Europe's aid to prevent the dominance of Imperial Germany, NAZI Germany, and Soviet Russia. I believe that it is historically demonstrable that no other country in the history of the world has brought freedom and democracy to so many other countries. Here I believe that much of this accomplishment was an allied effort with the British. Burt this is another discussion. I would agree with our reader that American support for Israel is a major cause of anti-Americanism in the Muslim world. But it is certainly not the only cause. Another element is the freedom and democracy unherent in American culture which is at odds with the Islamicist movement. Interestingly in my discussions with non-Western Muslim readers there is a widely held view that America is the most secularized Westen country. Of course this is not the case. America is much more religious than the much more secularized countries of Western Europe.
"Yes, we know the Palestinians have fought back for 60 years, but World opinion is that Israel has invaded land which it does not own, is not entitled to occupy, and is illegally governing." I think our reader is correct that world public opinion has shifted to the Palestinians. Of course that does not mean that the popular attitides are correct or not. Now as to the question of land ownership, invasion and occupation. These are of course very complicated questions with whole books addressing various aspects. There are some basic facts that have to ve consudered. Until the 1948 War, all the land in Jewish hands was legally purchased. Throughout the British Mandate (1918-48) there were attacks on Jewisg settlers living on Jewish-purchased land. At times there there was widespread Arab rioting and attacks. Jewish attacks were much more limited. As a result of this experience, it seems reasonable for Palestinian Jews to conclude that they would not be safe in a Palestinian state. Also it must be consideede that the first invasion was an invasion of the Israel by the surrounding Arab states in the borders established by the United Nations. The subsequent wars resulted by the refusal of the Palestinians and Arab states to accept Israel's right to exist.
"The sooner Israel fully withdraws to it's legitimate 1966 borders, the sooner peace will arrive." I do wish that it was true. Of course this is easy to say living in Britain. But I wonder if our reader would so glibly male statements like this id he lived in Israel. The Isreal Government did disengage from both Gaza and Lebanon and rather than land for peace they got rockets for land.
"Yes, we know that it has taken a long time for
most Palestinians to accept that Israel has a right to exist, but they have accepted it (some more than others)." I know that Palestinian spokesmen do often mouth platitudes about peace when speaking to Western journalists. Often those statements are different in the Arab press. But this is very difficult to assess in part because statements are one thing, what is in an individuals heart is another matter. After all Hitler gave numerous speeches in which he expressed his devotion to peace. Here one very useful sources of information is school textbooks. What are the Palestinians telling their children. We have begun to assess the topic of Palestinian education. As far as we can tell, Palestinian textbooks promoted resistance to Isreael, armed struggle, and the absolute rightouness of the Palestinian struggle. No where do we see peace and coexistance presented as a legitimate alternative.
"We also know that Israel has never paid a penny in compensation to the farmers and villagers whose land has been acquired, whether lawfully or not, to create the state of Israel. If Israel had bought the land, albeit compulsory purchase, their would be less bitterness." Well perhaps, but the Palestinian struggle is esentially a national movement. Personally I doubt id compensation would achieve much, although I certainly have no objection to it. But the way our reader has presented the issue again is very one sided. After the 1948 War, there were areas where Jews owned land that came under Arab control. How much compensation did the Jewish land owners get. In addition, Jews from throughout the Middle East after 1948 came as refugees to Israel. Many had their land and property confiscated or were forced to sell at very low prices. How much compensation have they received? Or perhaps more importantly why when the compenation issue is raised are only the Palistinian Arab refugeees considered?
"All Jewish hill-top settlements in West Bank have got to be removed, or governed by the Palestianians." Here I fully agree with our reader.
"All citizens of Israel must be treated equally, whether Muslim, Christian, or Jew. At the moment, not all citizens can vote, or have passports." Well I am not an expert on Isreal, but I do know that a substantial number of Isreali citizens are Palestinians. My understanding was that they did have full civil rights, except for they did not do military service. I do know that they vote in Israeli elections and have representatives in the Kinisent. I also note that on land and other issues that they have persued cases in Israeli courts and won some of those cases. There may be some limitations on civil rights, I would be interested in knowing the details. One important point here is not only to make assessments based on European standards, but also based on Middle Eastern standards. How are Jewish and Christian citizes treated in Arab states? We suspect that Isreali Palestinians have greater civil rights that not only Jewish and Christian citizens of Aran states, but the Muslim citizens of Arab states as well. Arab states for the most part do not have real elections or independent judiciaries and in which torture and abuse is a common practice. And often non-majority Muslim sects are targets of violence. It is an irony of history that there is greater freedom of religion for Muslims in Isreael, the United Ststes, and Western Europe than in the Middle East.
"If my next door neighbour decides tonight that he
needs a wider drive-way to get into his property, and moves our fence 3 yards, I will be annoyed. If he explains his problem and asks me first, I will be happier. If he pays me for the land I lose, I might agree. But if he justs helps himself, claiming that his ancestors 2000 years ago owned the entire plot, I will fight back." Actually the Isreali claim is more like 5000 years. Interestingly in my discussions with Middle Eastern readers, I find it is they that like to go back in history. The 7th century when Allag presented Mohammed with the Koran is a popular century and the 11th and 12 century is also popular with criticisms of the Crusades. An important point to make here is that Israel is not just populated with people of European ancestry. About half of Isrealis are of Middle Eastern ancestry--the Mizrahim. A major difference between Israel and the Arabs is that the Isrealis have integrated Jewish refugees into the society. The Arabs have been unwilling to integrate the Palestinians.
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to Main Israel-Palestine reader comments page]
[Return to Main Israel-Palestine page]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Satellite sites]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]