Priorities, hypocrisy, and critical thinking in pro-Palestinian activism

 There are a few points that I'd like to explore in this week's discussion response.
     1. The first is the criticism that Israel "pinkwashes", or flaunts and exaggerates its LGBTQ-friendly legislation and national attitude in order to garner the support and admiration of other nations and liberal citizens of the United States, especially.
     2. The second is the criticism that Israel is violating basic tenets of human rights (under international law).
     3. The third is the perplexing fact that, after the acknowledgement of the obvious fact that yes, Israel is guilty of human rights abuses, pro-Palestinian activists and others on the far left side of the political spectrum (which is where I myself stand) still fail to acknowledge or recognize the multitude of other human rights crises around the world that are exponentially worse than that of the residents of the West Bank & Gaza.

1. Yep. It does. It uses the face of its LGBT population as a diplomatic tool. It tries to make it seem as if Israel is 100% LGBT-friendly when it in fact is not. Israel, just like the United States, still denies LGBT couples the respect they deserve by barring them from marriage and the entire list of rights and privileges that come along with marriage. However, the claims made on promotional postcards or internet banners advertising Israel as an LGBT haven are that it is a beacon of hope for LGBT acceptance in the Middle East and that members of the LGBT community can live among society just as anyone else would and that there is a vibrant LGBT community thriving within Israel while just miles away in other Middle Eastern countries people do not dare to come out for fear of losing their jobs, licenses, families, friends, and even their lives. These claims are as true as they are in the United states and Israel has every right to be waving them around like oversized rainbow flags at the Jerusalem Pride Parade each year. People who fixate on Israel's pink washing are just distracting from the more urgent issues of homophobia in surrounding countries and in the Palestinian territories. Perhaps this is because they care more about the issues of Palestinians than they do about the issues of the LGBT community, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Everyone has their priorities, but it's important to gain perspective and not attack those who are making strides in your issue-area while others are centuries behind the times.

2. Yep. It absolutely is. Just to use one example, it's tight grip of the transport of goods and people across borders in Gaza and the West Bank is damaging and unacceptable, even in the face of the radically decreased instances of Palestinian terrorism. Israel doesn't treat the Palestinians the way they should be treated--beginning and end of story.

3. Is this because of the activist's devotion to the region? Are they purely and solely concerned with what goes on in Israel and the territories and do they not really care about things that happen elsewhere in the world? If so, then fantastic. It's great that these people are dedicated to this one area and their one cause and they know what they want and how they feel and why and they're living in ways that are meaningful to them by championing this one cause. However, I do not believe that this is the case for the majority of pro-Palestinian activists today, especially not the American activists. American pro-Palestinian activists don't seem to acknowledge that there is not a single democracy in existence that is free of discrimination and mistreatment of marginalized populations, and that there are regions in the world where imperial legacies or corrupt ruling parties have created exponentially more hideous examples of human rights abuses (the Congo, North Korea, Russia, etc). Have these activists just given up on the issue of US abuses of Native Americans that continue still today? Are these activists blind to the killing of black youth and the funneling of them into prisons that is perpetuated by egregious US laws and deeply engrained prejudice? I have never received a satisfying answer to these question--does anyone have any insight?

Mm, mm, mm, mm, Feminismmmm

"alQaws strives for the social change and liberation that result from directly challenging and breaking oppressive social structures. We therefore view the adoption of 'feminism' as a means to break existing power relations and challenge hegemony in society to be a must. Hence we reaffirm our rejection of all forms of oppression in its various manifestations, whether these be patriarchal, economic, nationalistic or ethnic, in order to ensure genuine inclusivity in our community and for other marginalized groups."

This excerpt from the alQaws website totally speaks to me. Every society on Earth has repressive elements within it. Specifically in this week's readings we can see examples of behavior or traditions in the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community that are restrictive of women and men alike. For example, women are socially prohibited from participating in politics and must wear extremely modest clothing, and men are socially pressured to spend their lives dedicated to the study of the Torah and the passing down of spirituality and religious piety/observance to later generations. I'm sure you're all aware of the heavy press that surrounds the oppressive activities and behaviors of certain sects or certain observance levels of Islam, such as the honor killings that were criticized in DAM's video and the practice of wearing Hijabs or modest clothing that many people criticize, most harshly in France with actual legislation banning certain types of religious clothing. 

This calls into question what feminism really means in terms of religious observance. I was raised in a very liberal, sex-positive, feminist environment. My family and I used to be religiously observant(of Judaism) and my mother, sister, and I would wear more modest clothing, often skirts, because it was customary. I didn't feel spiritually enlightened by the practice so it slowly became something I no longer did (the story is the same with going to synagogue and being religiously observant in many of the traditional ways). However, many of my Jewish friends feel a strong religious and spiritual connection to Judaism through the practice of modest dress, traditional prayers, and observance of "mitzvot"(commandments from the Torah) and holidays, etc. Similarly, many of my Muslim friends say that they enjoy wearing their hijabs and other sorts of traditional or modest dress because it is a way of connecting to their faith through tangible means. For some modest dress means focusing energy inwards and upwards, to the self and to the divine, not outward to appearances or attracting attention from others through superficial characteristics.

When discussing the issue of wearing makeup and still calling oneself a feminist (a question that my friends and I struggle with), a friend of mine once said that to her, "feminism means doing whatever makes you feel good". Immediately a million qualifications to that jumped out at me, like "what if that thing makes you feel good because it makes you feel more accepted by society and not necessarily by your true self?", "what if that thing somehow hurts other women or women's position in the world?", etc. 
Is feminism in a religious context doing whatever makes you feel connected to whatever god in which you believe? 
What are the limitations of this? 
Does something that makes you feel good have the potential to be oppressive or harmful to the way the world views and treats women?

Woah--Final Project.

In a rare moment of decisiveness, I have chosen a final project!

Having been through many, many programs, schools, and trips that aimed to educate me about Israel's history, the history of the surrounding lands, and about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in general, I feel that I have a solid sense of what's out there. I know the books favored by different types of Jewish educators, I know the techniques used to equip students like me with the tools necessary to think critically yet supportively about our Homeland (as we were taught to call it and as I still see it today), I know the stated goals of several different types of educational programs and the methods that are seen as most effective in achieving those goals. Participating in these programs and learning from these different types of teachers has also given me insight into ways that this sort of education could be greatly improved and could produce better educated people who are more able to empathize with people from different backgrounds and opinions about this conflict.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I believe in the cheesy cliche that "the children are our future". If we invest time educating Israeli and palestinian students of all ages (it's never too soon to learn about cooperation and peace), we'll be nurturing a new generation of empathetic, moderate, rational people who will be able to look past the fundamentalism, radicalism, or extremism of their parents' generation and come up with a peace plan that is fair to all and that will last.

So you're probably wondering where I'm going with this. I want to research effective ways of bridging cultural and religious gaps and create curriculum for Israeli and Palestinian youth so we can get this educational movement rolling! I've always been chastised for being a relentless optimist, so instead of growing older and "wiser" and more jaded, I'm just becoming more proactive about my high hopes.

This research will include looking at the question of normalization--how far can we take multicultural education without running the risk of dodging or dismissing the Occupation question? How can we challenge the Occupation while also acknowledging Israel's right to exist along with the right of the Palestinians to a state of their own?

Who knows what shape this will take; I might do an essay, I might make a few notebooks full of curriculum material (separate material for Israelis and Palestinians because each needs to be appealed to in different ways), I might to a mix of both.

The wall

I was quite young when the barrier was built. As a 10-year old (or so), I remember being torn…

Recent months had brought traumatizing news of the deaths of two of my cousins, one a smart, driven 17-year old and the other a father of 2, in separate terrorist attacks. Inbal was going home on a public bus on Friday afternoon to spend Shabbat with her family and Yanai was playing music with his band in a popular Tel Aviv nightclub. Both attacks were broadcast on American news outlets and were mourned by myself, my parents and sister, and our Israeli family over the phone. It was horrific.

Then I watched as the fence--the immensely tall, thick, concrete fence--was erected, and despite all that I kept hearing about how it would "keep the terrorists from attacking", I wondered about the other people behind the wall. I was missing something, I couldn't see the whole picture, and I wondered if anyone else felt the same way.

Subsequent months and years showed that, yes, terrorism had been drastically reduced, but so had the quality of life of those who lived in the shadow of the wall. It's so confusing, so deeply emotional that word--the "wall". The Wall (I'm referring to the Kotel, the Western Wall) is what I envision as the symbolic cornerstone of the religion with which I identify. It's where Jews go to have their prayers heard. It's the anchor of my people, a dependent and tangible testament to our survival and our unity and our refusal to submit to the forces that have sought to destroy us over the years. The wall (and now I'm referring to the separation barrier) is a symbolic cornerstone of war and a tangible testament to the fractured population and the violence that has decimated relations between two populations that used to live so peacefully not side by side, but integrated within each other.

The passing of time also showed the agenda of the wall. It was not entirely about saving lives from the scourge of terrorism, but it was about fragmenting the Palestinian population to a point where cohesion between those citizens/people would be nearly impossible.

1. Do you think that terrorism would increase if the wall were torn down?
2. What positives and negatives are there to destroying the wall or to leaving it standing?
3. I don't think that community understanding and Palestinian-Israeli grassroots peace movements have much say in this matter--do you think that high-level governmental negotiations are the only truly important factors in this instance?

Bibliography

Behind israel's curtain wall. (2008, Summer). Kurdish Life, , 17-19. Retrieved from
     http://search.proquest.com/docview/216335701?accountid=9783

EGYPT-HAMAS-ISRAEL: Gaza Wall. (April 01, 2008). Africa Research Bulletin: Political, Social and Cultural Series, 45, 3.)

E. Cohen, S. (2006). ISRAEL'S WEST BANK BARRIER: AN IMPEDIMENT TO PEACE?. Geographical Review, 96(4), 
     682-695.

Art

"Lofty notions of the peaceful power of hip-hop were met with the cold reality of life in a war zone." 

You could replace the words [hip-hop] in this quote from the article about Channels of Rage with anything, really. Give it a try: art, dance, music in general, storytelling, food, multicultural understanding. There have been countless attempts at bridging the gap between disparate groups, namely the Israelis and the Palestinians, and nothing so far has stuck (seeds of peace, peace oil, standup for peace, etc…). People have been left reeling over the decades, frustrated at their inability to line up the interests, beliefs, hopes, and values of Israelis and Palestinians.

One of my favorite artists is Idan Raichel, an Israeli Jew who started "The Idan Raichel" project in order to use music as a bridge across the borders that exist between cultures, religions, and races. The Idan Raichel Project's website reports that "since the release of their first international album on Cumbancha in the fall 2006 The Idan Raichel Project has become a global ambassador representing a hopeful world in which artistic collaboration breaks down barriers between people of different backgrounds and beliefs….To date over 95 different singers aged 16 to 91 years old from dozens of different countries and cultural backgrounds have participated in the Project’s recordings or performances."

However, this project has been criticized from distracting from/ignoring the problem of the Occupation.

I have participated in such projects mentioned above that hope to nurture friendship between Israelis and Palestinians (I worked with youth during two summers as a part of the Nesiya program and another independent high school program in Ramallah). We focused on discussion, games, storytelling, making art together, sharing each other's food and other cultural traditions. When these programs came to a close we felt very close with everyone who was involved, but I am not sure of the effect they had on each individual's opinions on the other group as a whole.

How does one work through and abandon years and years (generations, even) of learned prejudices against another group? It seems that experience--positive interaction over a long period of time--would be the only true way, because then people would really understand (not just superficially acknowledge) that people are people and that every person deserves equal respect and every privilege that comes along with that respect. 

This post displays, I'm sure, how completely lost and confused I am about this conflict. How can we solve this? 
Can we solve this? 
Is this a natural symptom of human difference?
What more can be done?

Who am I?????

First, I'd like to share this poem that I recently read and with which I immediately identified very strongly for several reasons. It's written in a romantic context but I feel that it applies to all areas of life.

different

Do not dilute this for me.  

Do not tell me, again, that I am special, that I am different.  

I am a variant, but I am not different.  

And for your intents and purposes,

I am the same.  

My heart breaks the same.  My ego bruises the same.  And my hopes shatter all the same.

Do not kiss my forehead or push my hair away.   Do not dilute the softness of my skin, the thickness of my hair.  Do not take the snakebite mark on my neck, do not take the scars from my knees.  

These are not yours to notice.  

You cannot love my voice, and you cannot admire the strength of my legs.  You are not entitled to the late-night adventure stories I dream, nor the early morning pep talks I whisper to comrades unseen.  

None of these are yours, and you cannot miss them.  

Stop complimenting my shoes, my earrings, my style.  Stop noticing me walking by, stop stopping to say hi.  Stop looking at me like you know me, stop pretending that it hurts to know you hurt me.

You are a puddle, a pothole, a scuff, a scrape.  You are fixed and forgotten with a wash and some tape.

I am not different to you.  But to someone, somewhere, I am.  And that’s not something I can let you dilute.

I am not fractured by you, because you are nothing new.  You are the same heart with the same start and the same predictable reason to depart.  And the fiction you weave is garbage.

Are you unsure?  Are you lost?  Have you met someone better, or just someone else?  

Is she different, is she special?  Does she know what you said to me?  

“I’ve never felt this way before, never imaged this was behind the door.  Never thought this would happen to me.”  

Then you must be slow, forgetful, what is it that you know?  Because I’ve met women like me, and they’ve met children like you, and this is really nothing new.

Do not water me down with words that mean nothing, because the little things you take from me mean something.  

These are not your freckles to kiss, or your whimsical laugh to miss.  These are my superior puzzle skills, and my harmonious trills.  That’s my calm and my speed, and that’s my ability to take the lead.  That’s my dislike of cottage cheese and my unreasonable fear of falling on my keys.  

You do not get to comment, to like, to share, to remember, to care, because these things belong to me and I’m much more special than you’ll ever be to me.

Do not dilute the things that make me, because someday I’ll be special to someone, and he’ll be special to me.

THE END

Here are a few of the objects in my home that show visitors who I am:

1. BOOKS.

I would not be who I am today if I had not grown up amongst piles and piles and piles of books. My parents' strong anti-television ways had a strong impression upon me, and I appreciate that they showed me how amazing it is to gain perspective and new experiences through books. I was raised as an observant Jew, and the one of the most important values that was instilled in me through my Jewish education was to never stop asking questions and exploring and delving deeper into things that interested me or meant something to me. This is one of my defining characteristics and something I'm very proud of and grateful for.

2. VEGETABLES VEGETABLES VEGETABLES.

I love food, you guys. I have very strong convictions about environmentalism, animal (human or otherwise) rights, globalization, and the responsibility that we all have to live as peacefully and as considerately and as thoughtfully as possible. Because of my beliefs, I am a vegan, so I spend all my days chowing down on delicious greens (and other things, of course, but mostly greens). 

4. ART

My parents are both artists, and so in addition to my love of reading they also gave me my love of artistic expression. This particular piece was done by the amazing folks at the Beehive Collective, and it's called "The True Cost of Coal". It illustrates the harmful effects of coal mining on all different types of life on earth, and on the earth itself. While this is a style of art that has a very literal meaning/purpose, I also appreciate more abstract or unclear types of art. I feel that it is extremely difficult for me to express myself in non-verbal ways(through music or dance or visual art of all sorts), but I'm constantly trying to push myself to explore these outlets for creativity.

Perceptions

I've chosen a few different articles for this week's blog post, and below I've included some important quotes from each of them that sum them up/ get to the heart of the issue that they discuss.

What type of language is used to describe Jerusalem and the event? What pictures or visuals accompany the text? What perspectives and biases are present? Can you draw a connection between your analysis of the articles and Dr. Nassar’s article or the material on contemporary art of Jerusalem? 

Failure of IDF and Shin Bet

This article speaks candidly about the harsh realities of the contradictions of the Occupation and the fact that, "young soldiers and officers identify with their basic mission of protecting Israelis in the territories, namely the settlers". It is a too-often occurrence that Palestinians in the territories are treated as guilty until proven innocent by the police or the IDF while Israeli settlers are usually treated innocent until proven guilty, and even then they are not harshly prosecuted, as is described in this sad sentence, "There is no similarity between the investigation of a Palestinian suspected of terrorism and the investigation of a Jewish suspect. The former is subject to sleep deprivation, psychological and sometimes physical pressure".  The article also notes that, "When extreme fringes among the settlers commit violence against Palestinians, few soldiers can internalize this and change their behavior." This article also recognizes in objective terms the deliberate land-grabbing that the settlements seek to continue: "The placement of settlements in the Shiloh valley was carried out after careful planning. They constitute a “finger” thrust eastwards, bringing the cluster of settlements surrounding Ariel closer to the Jordan valley".  

The perception of the IDF is something that is highly controversial, and this article cuts right to the center of why and how it is envisioned differently by different populations, namely pro-settlement and anti-settlement people.


The difference between violent Settler attackers & Palestinian terrorists is in name alone
"Here are some bleak statistics: From January 3, 2011 to September 15, 2013, the pogromchiks who went down from the outpost of Esh Kodesh perpetrated 28 attacks of various kinds. Fifteen of them involved beating and shooting, nine involved damage to olive trees, one case involved the killing of animals, one mosque was torched, one car was set ablaze, and one case involved threats"

This article is written in extremely critical language, but I approve. I agree that violence is violence, and that, ultimately, terrorism is terrorism (SHIT that was difficult to type-breathing now). People who deny the Occupation or deny the violent nature of many settlement dwellers just aren't being honest, and that will get us nowhere close to peace. Nassar would absolutely comment that the picture below, showing a Palestinian man aiding IDF soldiers in helping an injured settler to escape Palestinian attackers, improves the perception of the Palestinians and damages the image of the settler population. This photograph probably contributes to people's perception that the settlers are the perpetrators and instigators of violence and that the Palestinian population is more generous, peaceful, and innocent overall. 

Summary: "No difference between Settlers and Palestinian terrorists but in name alone."

Ein Hijleh non-violent protest village    &     More Ein Hijleh
"tensions in the West Bank will rise along with the risk of terrorist acts committed by Jews in addition to Hamas and the Islamic Jihad."

These two articles both praise the non-violent actions of the Palestinians who were involved in the initiation of the protest village of Ein Hijleh ("Salt of the Earth"). The image below (and many others) depicts these peaceful activists as people who want peace and quiet, despite being antagonized further by IDF soldiers who raided the village after dark to try to dismantle their efforts.

1. What are your perceptions based on these images?

2. What do you think is going to happen with the settlements and when?

3. Do you think that the world's perception of either side ultimately matters? Is the fate of each population up to the leaders who are making treaties and writing up legislation at the end of the day? Why or why not?

The Elephant in the Room….& my final project

     Growing up going to Jewish day school, attending synagogue, traveling to Israel to visit my family, and being an active part of the pro-Israel community in my city provided me with a great deal of knowledge and experience surrounding the conflict that I would not have otherwise had. It also saddled me with a handicap that was up to me to overcome. I'm talking about the blinders that are often put on Jewish youth in our formative years to focus all of our attention on the good parts of Israel without addressing or explaining the bad parts. I was educated extensively about all of the many reasons we Jews desired and needed a land to call our own, about the many battles fought and won valiantly and bravely in order to protect ourselves from those who wanted us eliminated. I always wondered about the side of the story that I was not as enthusiastically introduced to, and around 5 or 6 years ago I finally addressed the elephant that had been in all of the classrooms in which I'd grown up--the possibility that "my side's" record was not as spotless as I would have liked to believe.

      To further address the issue of Israel's roots and history, I would like to encourage all of you to read the book "My Promised Land" by Ari Shavit, but since I know you're all busy and won't get to it right away, definitely read this review from the New York Times. I CANNOT EMPHASIZE how important this book is, not only for Jews who identify as Zionists as I proudly do, but also for anyone else remotely interested in this conflict.


      This elephant is what we have been addressing in class so far, and I greatly appreciate the added perspective. Dr. Tamari and Betty Herschman's work has been crucial to the understanding of the conflict--they are both scholars who clarify and simplify this daunting topic. This is incredibly important work simply because of how many people this conflict affects and how central this conflict is in international politics.

     1.  After reading the review of Shavit's book, do you have any new thoughts regarding the material that we read in Armstrong's book and that we learned from Tamari and Herschmann?
     2.  Does this give you any new insights into the motivations(for existence or survival, for example) of the members of the Israeli or the Palestinian communities?
     3.  What do you think would be an effective way of educating young people in Jewish schools as well as students in Palestinian or Arab or Muslim schools to ensure mutual understanding, acceptance, respect, and friendship?


       The problems that I have with the way that Jewish educators often go about teaching students about Israel and Palestine are what I would like to focus on for my final project. I want to develop curriculum for Jewish and Arab/Palestinian/Muslim (I am grouping these three communities together here without equating them, recognizing their differences) children that will aim to create amicable relations between following generations ensuring that open dialogue surrounding peace negotiations can eventually happen--the children are our future! Cheesy but SO TRUE!

Another potential final project is to explore in more concrete ways than I ever have before how exactly one can go about ameliorating and eventually solving this conflict. This plan will include assessments of how effective government action has been and will be, and also how effective various types of "soft" diplomacy has been and will be. My passion for solving this conflict comes from my intense pride of my Jewish ancestry and the deep sadness that results from having this pride yet living in a time when Israel is so blatantly mistreating Palestinians.

Peace, y'all.

Peace or Victory?

    I would like to focus on the piece by Dr. Tamari that we read for this week in addition to the final chapters of Armstrong's remarkable book. The last sentence of Tamari's piece captured the sentiment felt by not only Shami but also by many still today, "he could not…overcome the shattered hope that there was room for reconciliation as the two communities were driven toward irresolvable national polarity". This sentence dovetails perfectly with Armstrong's observation that this "irresolvable national polarity" is what fuels the conflict and prevents peace from prevailing by causing each side to be more concerned with victory over the "other side" rather than peace. 

    This week's reading gave me a great deal to think about in terms of how to structure a realistic environment for peace to be possible. In the early days of the Jewish migrations to Israel, they established rival and competing economies and political structures to those already in place. After the Palestinian General Congress declared in 1920 that they would "throw back the Zionists with all our force",  in 1937 around 10,000 Palestinian and non-Palestinian Arabs, worried about the heavy influx of Jewish immigrants to Israel, staged a rebellion that was quashed by Israeli and British forces. This escalation of land purchasing and resentful violence cemented the hateful relationship between the two peoples that once lived peacefully together. 

     Both the Palestinians/Muslims and the Israelis/Jews want to SURVIVE. They want to exist. They want to have Jerusalem. They want peace, but they also both currently want victory. Al Quds, Yerushalayim, either way, both sides will have to acknowledge that the city is important to other people, too, and that those people are just as entitled to accessing it as they are. Pride, nationalism, fundamentalist religion, and arbitrary hatred are the obstacles that we must overcome before we can see peace, and this begins with cultural education.

1. How can we most effectively educate mass amounts of people about the validity of each peoples' narrative?

2. How can we ensure that the political leaders of the future have minds open enough to envision a country that acknowledges and values both nations?

3. What specific actions can be taken right now by the Israeli and the Palestinian governments to take steps toward peace?