Hillary Clinton’s tight-lipped glare says it all. The expected ceasefire in Gaza today did not materialize. Israel still bombing, Hamas still launching rockets.
I watch as the hardliners on both sides reinforce each other — delegitimizing not Israel, nor Hamas, but the Palestinian Authority.
Worse still, they knowingly do so at the cost of other people’s lives.
I watch in wordless misery.
London’s The Guardian newspaper calls it “an incendiary document written with courage and furious energy… an extraordinary, impassioned cyber-scream.” It’s the Gaza Youth’s Manifesto for Change, written just three weeks ago by a group of cyber-activist students in Gaza — three women and five men — as enraged by Hamas as they are by Israel.
It demands to be read, so here it is, in full:
Fuck Hamas. Fuck Israel. Fuck Fatah. Fuck UN. Fuck UNWRA. Fuck USA! We, the youth in Gaza, are so fed up with Israel, Hamas, the occupation, the violations of human rights and the indifference of the international community! We want to scream and break this wall of silence, injustice and indifference like the Israeli F16’s breaking the wall of sound; scream with all the power in our souls in order to release this immense frustration that consumes us because of this fucking situation we live in; we are like lice between two nails living a nightmare inside a nightmare, no room for hope, no space for freedom.
We are sick of being caught in this political struggle; sick of coal dark nights with airplanes circling above our homes; sick of innocent farmers getting shot in the buffer zone because they are taking care of their lands; sick of bearded guys walking around with their guns abusing their power, beating up or incarcerating young people demonstrating for what they believe in; sick of the wall of shame that separates us from the rest of our country and keeps us imprisoned in a stamp-sized piece of land; sick of being portrayed as terrorists, homemade fanatics with explosives in our pockets and evil in our eyes; sick of the indifference we meet from the international community, the so-called experts in expressing concerns and drafting resolutions but cowards in enforcing anything they agree on; we are sick and tired of living a shitty life, being kept in jail by Israel, beaten up by Hamas and completely ignored by the rest of the world.
There is a revolution growing inside of us, an immense dissatisfaction and frustration that will destroy us unless we find a way of canalizing this energy into something that can challenge the status quo and give us some kind of hope. The final drop that made our hearts tremble with frustration and hopelessness happened 30rd November, when Hamas’ officers came to Sharek Youth Forum, a leading youth organization (www.sharek.ps) with their guns, lies and aggressiveness, throwing everybody outside, incarcerating some and prohibiting Sharek from working. A few days later, demonstrators in front of Sharek were beaten and some incarcerated. We are really living a nightmare inside a nightmare.It is difficult to find words for the pressure we are under. We barely survived the Operation Cast Lead, where Israel very effectively bombed the shit out of us, destroying thousands of homes and even more lives and dreams. They did not get rid of Hamas, as they intended, but they sure scared us forever and distributed post traumatic stress syndrome to everybody, as there was nowhere to run.
We are youth with heavy hearts. We carry in ourselves a heaviness so immense that it makes it difficult to us to enjoy the sunset. How to enjoy it when dark clouds paint the horizon and bleak memories run past our eyes every time we close them? We smile in order to hide the pain. We laugh in order to forget the war. We hope in order not to commit suicide here and now. During the war we got the unmistakable feeling that Israel wanted to erase us from the face of the earth. During the last years Hamas has been doing all they can to control our thoughts, behaviour and aspirations. We are a generation of young people used to face missiles, carrying what seems to be a impossible mission of living a normal and healthy life, and only barely tolerated by a massive organization that has spread in our society as a malicious cancer disease, causing mayhem and effectively killing all living cells, thoughts and dreams on its way as well as paralyzing people with its terror regime. Not to mention the prison we live in, a prison sustained by a so-called democratic country.
History is repeating itself in its most cruel way and nobody seems to care. We are scared. Here in Gaza we are scared of being incarcerated, interrogated, hit, tortured, bombed, killed. We are afraid of living, because every single step we take has to be considered and well-thought, there are limitations everywhere, we cannot move as we want, say what we want, do what we want, sometimes we even cant think what we want because the occupation has occupied our brains and hearts so terrible that it hurts and it makes us want to shed endless tears of frustration and rage!
We do not want to hate, we do not want to feel all of this feelings, we do not want to be victims anymore. ENOUGH! Enough pain, enough tears, enough suffering, enough control, limitations, unjust justifications, terror, torture, excuses, bombings, sleepless nights, dead civilians, black memories, bleak future, heart aching present, disturbed politics, fanatic politicians, religious bullshit, enough incarceration! WE SAY STOP! This is not the future we want!
We want three things. We want to be free. We want to be able to live a normal life. We want peace. Is that too much to ask? We are a peace movement consistent of young people in Gaza and supporters elsewhere that will not rest until the truth about Gaza is known by everybody in this whole world and in such a degree that no more silent consent or loud indifference will be accepted.
This is the Gazan youth’s manifesto for change!
We will start by destroying the occupation that surrounds ourselves, we will break free from this mental incarceration and regain our dignity and self respect. We will carry our heads high even though we will face resistance. We will work day and night in order to change these miserable conditions we are living under. We will build dreams where we meet walls.
We only hope that you – yes, you reading this statement right now! – can support us. In order to find out how, please write on our Facebook wall (Gaza Youth Breaks Out — GYBO) or contact us directly: freegazayouth@hotmail.com
We want to be free, we want to live, we want peace.
FREE GAZA YOUTH!
lavrans says: You know what this makes me think of? It’ll take a moment to lay the foundation;
I have moved a lot- I’m the antithesis of the Palestinian youth who has never been free to go anywhere. But at the same time, a lot of that moving wasn’t by my own volition, but by the will of others (parents) who were moving. Still- what this did was scatter my moments throughout a large area of the Western United States.
By moments I mean those incidents that change you, that mark a point in time when you changed. That could be my first crush, my first kiss, the first time I saw someone shot, the first time I got beaten. I often think of those moments as ghosts.
The ghost of that moment lurks by the place where it happened. I can’t pass the corner where I lost my virginity without remembering it. I can’t pass the corner where I found a friend after she was raped without remembering it. All those corners are little bits of the past that will always haunt me.
Which gets me to the Gaza youth, who have all the same corners I have. The Gaza youth with all the same incidents I’ve lived through, plus many more that I really can only guess at from my safe distance of freedom. And all of their incidents are pasted onto a “postage stamp” smaller than some of the counties I’ve lived in.
I don’t know if I could live easily in a place where every corner has at least one ghost to haunt me.
Yes, this is part of why I ran the manifesto here on the AT. It’s written with a vivid freshness that goes beyond the usual news reports to give a real feel of what it’s like to live in Gaza right now, so that it resonates with an American who has never been confined this way. As you say, the sense of place, of belonging, is full of ‘corners where…’ — where this happened, that happened. It is full of significance, of moments and places that are like signposts, defining our sense of who we are. The fact that you can recognize yourself in the experience of these students, so different from yours and so incomparably harder, is I think a tribute to the power of their cry — and to your capacity for empathy.
Dr. Anwar Shah says: Freedom is not cheap. Palestinian youth are at a disadvantage through no fault of their own but a sad series historical events. World community should take a more active role to help alleviate this misery of Gaza youth.
lavrans says: Freedom certainly isn’t cheap, but it’s easily squandered.
So- how does one go about getting the world community to take a more active role? Letters to our Senators here? Letters to Israel and Hamas (what’s their address, anyhow)?
It seems like reading and commenting on blogs & forums might do a little, but also feels like preaching to the choir.
Maybe I could go to Gaza and start building a house? I could do that… (well, I’d like to, if I had the money and connections) but would it mean anything for some American atheist to help build a house? Might be a nice symbol though. Probably already happening? Would they even let me in?…
Brad says: A few thoughts come to my mind. First, while no comfort to this particular group. I think about the suffering and lack of freedoms in many places around the world. I think back to the Holocaust, the genocide in Darfur, Somalia, Thailand and many other places around the world.
I’m also reminded of something I read around 15 years ago in a document entitled the Prosperity of Humankind, in which it talks about “leaders” making decisions for all of us with little to no input from those most affected. Not only does is happen in Israel and Palestine, but many would argue it also happens here in the US.
We need to recognize that we are all one mankind. “The earth is one country and mankind its citizens.” The decisions we make should be for the benefit of all, not just one country. While those of you who are agnostic or atheist might see this life as all that there is, at the same time most of us hate to see the suffering of others. We need to recognize that what harms one, harms us all. If we compare mankind to teh human body, each of us is part of that body of mankind. We do, I believe, have a responsibility to all the inhabitants of the planet.
We are all going to have different ideas of how to accomplish those ideals, but the trick is not to be so arrogant as to believe that any one of us (or group or us) has the Truth. We need to consult and seek out the best ideas. Select an idea and then all support the idea, even if we disagree with it. Let the idea succeed or fail on its own. If the opposition immediately seeks to undermine a decision, therre is very little chance it can succeed.
As to what to do for the Gaza Youth, other than getting directly involved, whcih some have the ability and means to do, for many of us, it is continuing to pressure our representatives to take stands based on character, not based on whether we can hold onto our positions of power.
We have, IMHO, a lamentably defective system that exists in our country at this time. We must seek to eliminate partisan politics and seek a system that is focused on what is best for all peoples of the world. If we help the rest of the world to help themselves, and if we stop fighting over land, which is ultimately our graves, and recognize that we are all brothers and sisters regardless of race, creed, nationality, etc. Only then can we achieve peace throughout the world. We won’t eliminate problems, but we can work together to solve them as they arise. Up until now, it seems it takes a catastrophe to for us to come together.
“The well-being of mankind,” Bahá’u’lláh wrote more than a century ago, “its peace and
security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established.”
Shishir Pandey says: Ah Bahá’u’lláh, and he created yet another religion..didn’t we have too many of them already?
Jews-Christians-Muslims-Hindus and all theistic religions are the same, they are actually rather limited attempts to explain reality as the people living then saw it but people are stupid enough to follow them even today. Of all these religions Islam has the most advantages primarily because it is young and hence more nimble.
We are now in a better position and so must evolve our own new religion, preferably one in which there is no god, son of god, or prophet a religion of curiosity, of science, of scientific method and inquiry.
At least we can conduct experiments and see for ourselves what is accurate description of reality.
The problem lies in the concept of a nation or nation state if you do away with boundaries than all that remains are humans, going a tad further if you take
away the stupid religions all that separates people are their physical traits, which of course we can’t change but slowly most people accept and adapt to it.
You are complaining about humanity yet you lament the state in your country, are you able to see beyond the narrow concept of a country or nation.
Go ahead write on their Facebook wall, but that is just a load of bs, social networking will get them out of there, well they can always try. This is just propaganda, yes they are being bombed and they are persecuted but yet they can set up a Facebook page and ask for support..are they asking for funds yet if not that may follow or people may just volunteer the money.
Yes go ahead you can call me callous, cruel, godless or just plain stupid.
Kiran Vasudeva says: It IS true that the problem we have in Gaza, Kosovo, Bosnia etc are but manifestations of how we see each other as different. The perception of difference,by itself, would not be as much a problem but for the tendency of one to extrapolate it into something that is seen as a threat to their religion, nation and self. Things that make us stand out will always exist. While it is quite unpractical to expect an Utopian world where everyone is equal, the present conflicts do demand a more lasting solution. The only solution that comes close to achieving this “Education in tolerance”. This might not happen in one lifetime. But we surely should encourage our children to see all points of view of everything they encounter. To take educated decisions – always. To understand that since no one else can think and feel exactly like their selves, it should be acceptable and natural that “these others” arrive at different perspectives to the same situation – be it ideological, theological or existential. My vote goes not for Gaza, Palestine or Israel, but for Humanity. ONLY HUMANITY.
Chemical _turk says: After reading this I am hopeful about the middle east for the first time. I takes the generation of living in this situation to add clearity and simplicity to solve this Gordian knot.
paul skillman says: The tragity that is still taking place in humanity today seems like somehow we can solve these situations with all the knowledge & human suffering our species has gone through down through the ages. What a species God or Fate has created.
If the Jews had not suffered so much under Hitler there would not be this recoil in the Middle East.
Somehow the Palestinians are the victums of what Hitler did to the Jews.
Unfortunately I see no soluations.
Why must Humanity keep suffering?
Concerned says: That is not entirely correct. While many Jews came to Palestine after WW2, Jews started immigrating to Palestine well before WWII to escape the Russian pogroms and anti-Semitism in the Arabic world.
What’s it like to become a pawn of foreign policy? The three American hikers being held in Tehran’s Evin prison have now had a full year to ponder this nightmare.
Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd, and Josh Fattal could be you. Okay, a tad more adventurous, perhaps. They were hiking toward a famed waterfall in Iraqi Kurdistan, near the border with Iran, when they either inadvertently crossed the unmarked border or, as reported in The Nation, were grabbed and taken across by Iranian soldiers spotting likely targets, and accused of being spies.
In fact what the three stumbled into was not just Iran itself, but the absurd stand-off that is US-Iran ‘relations.’ There was never any issue of Iran really thinking they were spies. As the Free The Hikers website notes, the three have “a documented record as advocates of social and environmental justice. They admire and respect different cultures and religions, and share a love of travel that has taken them to many countries. That is why they went to Kurdistan, not because they wanted to enter Iran.”
Their crime was not that they went hiking near the border with Iran; it was that they went hiking there just as the US began taking an increasingly hard line toward Iran — one that inevitably involved victimizing the three hikers once they were taken captive.
At least they have now been formally charged — with illegal border crossing, a penalty demanding a cash fine under Iranian law, not over a year in prison. In that year, their families have been allowed to see them precisely once; they have had no access to their Iranian lawyer; and — particularly cruel and unusual punishment — Sarah Shourd has been kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day. All three are essentially being held hostage to America’s increasingly hardline policy toward Iran, which now includes more severe economic sanctions.
This coming weekend, there’ll be ‘Free the Hikers’ events — rallies and hikes — all over the United States. But who will the rallyers be appealing to? Ahmadinejad and Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, of course, since releasing the hikers is theirs to do. But this nightmare took two countries to create, and will take two countries to end.
Ransoming prisoners has been a feature of Middle East politics for as long as historical records exist. Right now, the Israeli government is giving in to public pressure and finally negotiating through third parties with its sworn enemy Hamas in Gaza to release Israeli soldier Gilead Shalit from years of captivity. (Last I heard, they were willing to release 100 prisoners for Shalit, but were stalled over the hundred and first: Marwan Barghouti, the one man who stands a chance of being an effective Palestinian leader who could lead his people toward a two-state solution). I suspect — and certainly hope — that similar negotiations are going on behind the scenes between the United States and Iran. But I also suspect that a successful resolution to the hikers’ nightmare is being held up by just one or two ‘high-value’ Iranian prisoners whom the United States refuses to release.
‘High value’ indeed. The United States has done plenty of prisoner exchanges before. Are the White House and State Department saying that Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd, and Josh Fattal aren’t worth it?
It’s unclear that Iran ever wanted this whole situation any more than did the United States (The Nation reported that the officer in charge of the unit that took the hikers prisoner may since have been tried and executed.) But now Iran needs to save face. Of course it should release Shane, Sarah, and Josh no matter what, but between ‘should’ and ‘will’ is the realm not of justice, but of foreign policy. If Iran needs to find a face-saving way to free the hikers, that’s fine by me. The United States should flex its mind instead of its muscle and do its damnedest to provide one.
Bravo, thanks for standing up for justice. I hope people who read this will take action, sign the petition, visit the websites, write to Ahmadinejad, their senators and representatives, post it on their facebooks and write about it to others. Thank you! for more information, visit http://www.freeourfriends.eu or http://www.freethehikers.org or http://www.blog.freethehikers.org or http://www.asafeworldforwomen.org.
Is it rational to believe that peace is possible in the Middle East? Sometimes it seems not. A good friend in New York, a long-time Middle East peace activist, confided that the Israeli use of deadly force against the Gaza-bound flotilla had brought her close to despair. Yet historian Tony Judt in an op-ed today sees some form of peace as inevitable:
As American officials privately acknowledge, sooner or later Israel (or someone) will have to talk to Hamas. From French Algeria through South Africa to the Provisional I.R.A., the story repeats itself: the dominant power denies the legitimacy of the “terrorists,” thereby strengthening their hand; then it secretly negotiates with them; finally, it concedes power, independence or a place at the table. Israel will negotiate with Hamas: the only question is why not now.
I respect Judt’s historical certainty — he’s right, of course — but do I believe it? I should, since I know how blindly mistaken despair can be.
I was close to despair when Menahem Begin was elected prime minister of Israel in 1976, yet just a few months later came the phone call from a well-informed friend telling me to turn on the radio for the next newscast, since Egyptian president Anwar Sadat was about to announce that he was coming to Jerusalem to visit Yad Vashem and talk to all 120 Members of Knesset. I thought he was joking . Sadat? The arch-enemy? No way. And then I turned on the radio.
I remember staring at the plane as it landed in November 1977, as the door opened and then, for a long while, remained blank: an empty black space against the white of the airplane body. An unwanted part of my mind whispered that Egyptian commandos were about to burst out and gun down all of Israel’s leadership gathered on the tarmac at the bottom of the stairs. Or that worse still, nobody at all would appear — that the opening would remain blank and empty, and it was all a cruel hoax.
I remember the heavy sinking feeling of September 1978 when after so much hope, it sounded as though the Camp David summit convened by Jimmy Carter between Begin and Sadat was going nowhere. There was a blackout on news of the negotiations, and as they dragged on, commentator after commentator confidently declared that they were doomed. Yet the Camp David accords were signed, and the following year, a full peace treaty.
So I need to remind myself that if even I can’t muster Tony Judt’s certainty, hope is not irrational. In fact it may be the only rational response to the seemingly ever-worsening mess in the Middle East.
My model is Pascal’s wager, an early form of game theory applied to the existence of God, and on my mind right now because I recently rented Eric Rohmer’s classic 1969 movie My Night at Maud’s, which includes the kind of Pascalian discussion that could only take place in a nouvelle vague French movie (worth a look, if only to instantly burnish your artsy credentials, let alone your philosophical pretensions).
Since the essence of the divine is “infinitely incomprehensible,” Pascal argued in his Pensées, reason can neither prove nor disprove the existence of God. Basically, it comes down to a coin toss: on the one side, reason, and on the other, the possibility (given that he was in Catholic France) of eternal afterlife happiness.
(This doesn’t quite work for me, of course, since eternal life seems to me at best a nightmare and at worst a curse — as it was for the creators of the legends of the Wandering Jew and of Dracula and of Frankenstein — but I’ll bear with Pascal for now.)
To believe in the existence of God, he argued, demands no cost (sic) but results in high possible gain (the infinite happiness bit). That is, the reward for belief is infinite if it turns out to be justified, and there is no penalty if it does not. It makes no difference how slim the possibility of that reward might be. “If you gain, you gain all,” he concluded, “and if you lose, you lose nothing.” Thus the only rational option, per Pascal, is to be irrational, and believe.
Why focus on this when the whole idea of betting on the existence of God seems to me an exercise in absurdity? Because while I may not be a big fan of Pascal when it comes to God or not-God, the principle behind his thinking strikes me as extraordinarily apt when the subject is Middle East peace. So let me try it out here — a kind of minimalist Pascalian argument, as distorted by myself, for hope:
If you give up hope and assume that peace in the Middle East is impossible, you essentially render it impossible. That is, you stop envisioning peace or anything remotely approaching it. You accept the status quo, which is in fact not a status quo, but an ever-downward spiral. This appears to be the assumption of the current Israeli government, and the use of deadly force in the assault on the Gaza flotilla is yet another result of such an assumption. It is the penalty for not believing in the possibility of peace.
If you follow Pascal’s logic, this is irrational. Deny all possibility of peace, and you doom yourself to unending conflict. To assume that peace is possible, no matter how slim the chance appears to be, is thus the only rational option. (And yes, this applies as much to Hamas as to Israel.) The fact that you cannot see how to make peace does not mean that it’s impossible. It may merely mean that you can’t see.
In those months leading up to Sadat’s announcement of his visit to Jerusalem, when everything seemed so dark and no rational observer would have predicted anything remotely resembling peace, quiet negotiations were going on far from the public eye. Does that mean such negotiations are going on now? I seriously doubt it, though I obviously don’t know. Nevertheless, for my own sanity, let alone for the future sanity of the Middle East and everyone in it, I have no option but to believe not only that negotiations could be going on, but that they should be — to believe, that is, in improbability instead of impossibility. Or hope instead of despair.
Next post: what peace really looks like.
That was like a beautiful graceful ballet Lesley. It is vaguely familiar to me, I have used a version of it in moments of deep despair, mine is called act as if you really want to live. Using Pascal you made it possible for some of us not to fall down that hole of seeing our present situation as the natural outcome of a sequence of historical decisions and events that have taken us to this unbearable moment in time where peace does not appear possible. I mean even Aaron Miller, after 20 years of negotiating, doesn’t see peace prospects. .
Thank you, especially from you, Lilly. Your perseverance against the odds is part of what keeps me going.
Seventy miles off the coast of Gaza, “at least 10” more lives now need to be remembered on this USA Memorial Day.
I am all but speechless.
Military commandos dropped from helicopters onto a Free Gaza civilian ship in international waters and, per an Israeli government spokesman, were astonished when some people on deck stood their ground and attacked them with knives and iron bars. The commandos, he said, were unprepared for such resistance. They had no option but to use guns.
No option? Did nobody consider teargas? Is Israel really going to claim that it was the victim here?
The simplest solution would have been for Israel to stand back and let the flotilla through. But that would have been to acknowledge that the three-year siege of Gaza — let alone the three-week ‘Operation Cast Lead‘ assault on it eighteen months ago — has been self-defeating. As Bradley Burston put it in Haaretz:
Here in Israel, we have still yet to learn the lesson: We are no longer defending Israel. We are now defending the siege. The siege itself is becoming Israel’s Vietnam.
Indeed. By laying siege to Gaza, Israel is only laying siege to itself. Perhaps now, under the rapidly building storm of international condemnation (this time, after all, it was not “only Palestinians” who were killed), the Israeli government will finally have no option but to use words instead of bullets, and face reality — the need not just to lift the blockade, but to start negotiating with the Hamas-led government of Gaza.
———————
End of the day postscript: The deaths on the largest ship in the Free Gaza flotilla may yet achieve the goal that the flotilla itself could not — forcing Israel to lift the siege. I can’t see how Israel can continue it now (though this may be simply a failure of my political imagination). If indeed the siege/blockade is lifted or at least eased, could Israel finally come to terms with the reality of Hamas? Or am I just desperately looking for a silver lining to this very black day?
Ted Blackwell says: I must admit that my reaction was very different than yours in that I was not, in the least, surprised at the Israeli commando interdiction of the lead ship. From what I have read, the commandos did not open fire (even though they were under physical attack) until they received permission from their tactical commander. I am surprised that their rules of engagement did not already give them the right of self-defense. While I agree that the Israeli political decision to isolate Gaza is a topic that could generate hours of debate, I would say that it is totally unreasonable to think that Israel would allow anyone by any means (land, sea, air) to breach that siege. That is not how they operate. Tear gas on the deck of a ship at sea would be “blowing in the wind” as Bob Dylan might say.
Ted — I don’t think the issue is “rules of engagement.” This was a military assault on a civilian vessel at night in international waters, and even in Israel, military experts acknowledge that it was bungled. Politically, the assault was clearly ill-conceived, or to put it another way, idiotic. But arguing over who is ‘right’ and who ‘wrong’ will get nobody anywhere. Self-righteousness only digs the rut deeper. The real issue here is not even the siege itself, which has placed one and a half million impoverished people for three years (plus a year before that under slightly less stringent conditions) in what is essentially a 140-square-mile internment camp, and which is highly questionable under international law. The real issue is the refusal to negotiate. The Israeli government and the Hamas-led government of Gaza hate each other, but in the long term, they have no option but to talk to each other. The terrible question is how many more people have to die before that happens.
Ted Blackwell says: Lesley, I’m not raising the “rules of engagement” to the issue level, it was more of a side comment. The biggest issue, as you said, is how to get Hamas and Israel to talk and negotiate … an almost impossible task, given that Hamas’ goal is the destruction of Israel. What is absolutely confounding to me is: why did any of those activists believe Israel would allow them to pass, and why did they believe they could attack commandos and not be engaged? The Turks are sending a larger vessel to challenge the blockade. This is “upping the ante” with much larger consequences for both nations, as I know you understand. I’m hoping Turkey and Israel can avoid an escalation. They are two nations with huge military resources.
It’s hard to say for sure right now, but it appears (per a report in The Guardian quoting Turkish news sources) that among the loose alliance of groups on board there were a dozen or so radical Islamists who were determined to fight no matter what, though that still does not explain the Israeli use of such disproportionate force. As for the expectations of the vast majority of the Free Gaza activists, their point, as I understand it, was not so much to actually reach Gaza as to draw world attention to the siege and blockade. That’s why I wrote in my previous post, Heading for Gaza, that I wished I were on board. The next boat aiming to run the blockade, within the coming week, is apparently from Ireland, and presumably will also be stopped, though this time without deadly force.
Meanwhile, re Hamas and Israel talking — I know, I know, it seems impossible. But then, when a well-informed friend called me one morning in 1977 and told me to turn on the radio for the next newscast because Egypt’s Anwar Sadat would announce that he was going to visit Israel, that was impossible too. Seriously, I thought he was joking. And then I turned on the radio.
Huub Vos 
It is stunning to watch this. Sad, infuriating.
Part of me wonders if the people living there will ever rise up and toss these hardliners and their militants out. They aren’t going to leave on their own, and it looks to me like they have the same problem we do here- the squeaky wheels are given bullhorns, and everyone not on the fringe watches in near silence.
Wordless misery. That says it all. Dammitt.
OK- here’s my question for you.
What drives this war? I keep running into discussions online, and the language always seems the same. The Israelis I know make the very good point that the Palestinians are indiscriminately shooting rockets at them and that they can’t exchange land for peace.
On the Palestinian side the argument is that they want their land, they want the blockade to end, and that the Israelis use their armies superior technology and firepower to respond with indiscriminate killing… and that all the dead are “martyrs”.
Why does it seem to me that using the same language will inevitably bring the same results? Where are the moderates? Who is using different language to define the problem, and to produce solutions?
Right now I see the two sides apparently speaking different languages (figuratively in addition to the rather obvious literal aspect). How do they expect to create understanding without creating common language?
Ah, but what makes you assume that either the Israeli government or the Hamas leadership is interested in understanding? They do already have a common language, however: hardline irredentism.
Ah- I guess I should be more specific. I see posts and read a lot of stuff from people on the far sides of this issue. What’s the language, what are the stories, the talking points of the people who aren’t on the militant end of this stick? I’m sure they are out there; why aren’t they heard more and louder? Too hard to listen to reason when there is easy hyperbole that needs so much less thought?
And where do we find that reasonable language? How does one help spread it? How do I reply to my Jewish friends who state that it is not possible to trade “land for peace” and that inevitably leads to why all Israel does is defend its people, or the Palestinian sympathizers (sadly, I can’t say I have any Palestinian friends who are muddying up my social media) who post the “martyr” dogma.
Lavrans — You’re right, the moderates are there (and here), but as usual, out-shouted, drowned out by the violence, noise, and bombast of extremists. One thing that strikes me is how absolutist both Israeli and Palestinian partisans in the United States are, often arguing almost cartoon stances. The emotional investment is undeniable, but however deep our anger and disgust, we need to remember that it’s also ruthlessly manipulated by hardline irredentists on all sides. We all need to resist this, since as you say, it only makes it all the harder to have any kind of productive exchange — of words, let alone territory. It serves the interests of nobody but the hardliners, those whose greatest fear is the prospect of the difficult mutual compromises necessary for any kind of long-term resolution. Those who thrive, that is, on conflict — and who oppose the current (non-Hamas) Palestinian bid for full UN status, which I totally support.
How can we say…one side do this and other side do blah blah.
Any so called even handed analysis would be justification of mass killing by apparent powerful and aggressor.
We are deceiving ourselves and feigned to be naive.
That’s what I’ve been arguing, to some extent. That to use the common method, which is to count bodies and try to decide who’s actions are more justified can only lead to entrenched positions, rather than conversation.
Better, it seems to me, that the conversation turn to the common ground that is so much harder to find. It takes the work of reason and restraint- to not think about that boy when thinking of the wrongs, but to think about the real lesson of his death. His death isn’t a beacon to the evil of one side, and it’s not an example of the callousness of one side, nor is he a martyr to a cause- his death is an example of what happens when two groups are willing to ignore the consequences of their actions.
No act of retribution will bring him back.
Conversation is meaningless when weaker side could be slapped around to bow to unjustified demands…work of reason and restraint is luxurious fantasy in this case.
Stronger A would never kill the child of weaker B, if he knows B can also kill his child in retribution.
We as outsider should have enough courage to call a spade a spade..yes why not count the bodies…after all these numbers are human beings..lets decide who is aggressor by number of bodies then quit saying “Israel has right to defend”…Mass killing in so called self defence is no defence rather terrorizing the neighboring inhibitants of different race and creed….oops !!!…I should not have used “terrorist” exclusive copyright of west.
The best we can do from outside…to not give Israeliz any moral justification of mass killing as their right to defend.
Lets not bomb Israeli kids in retribution, at least make them feel guilty…let them feel what they have done…do not give them justification by calling it two side problem.
No one knew the power of benevolence, patience and defeat unless Imam Hussain gave his life in utmost humaneness.
And yet, Netanyahu’s line also has perfectly good reasoning behind it:
“The moment we draw symmetry between the [intentional] victims of terror and the unintended casualties that result from legitimate military action against the terrorists, the minute that false symmetry is drawn, the terrorists win.”
Both tear at the heart strings, both are rational seeming words. The Israeli’s have their “martyrs”, too. They know the terror of rockets and what it is like to lose a child. When Palestine complains about the blockade, the Israeli’s can complain about the Hamas leaders agreeing to a two party state, so long as “Israel isn’t one of the parties”. When Gaza complains about the blockade, Israel can complain about being surrounded by hostile countries who want them eliminated merely because they are Jewish.
You look at a child’s body and say he was killed by Israelis, I can’t help but note that it was two hands that killed him, one a Palestinian hand, the other an Israeli hand. Perhaps you can excuse the blood on that Palestinian hand, but I cannot see the difference in his blood no matter which hand it is on.
More importantly- how can you say you want peace if you want the children of Israel to feel shame? From outside I know that all you get with shame is anger.
International terrorist wins but not against Israel…they win against their own Muslims.
A people who are defenseless, innocent, out-powered and outgunned are being attacked and killed while the world watches.
Gaza is a prison, where the inmates are killed for very little provocation, if any. They are being attacked for existing. That is enough provocation. It is not only the misery of a brutal death, but also dying in the knowledge that the world does not care, or perhaps, is with the aggressor.
However, the world does not watch in silence. Worse, excuses are being made for the killers. The victim is being blamed. The murdered has brought it upon him. Can it be termed a war if only one side does all the killing? Nothing has been done to provoke the aggressor, yet it remains provoked, because it wants to be provoked, because it can. Innocent women and children murdered in cold blood. Even before the killing takes place, the apologists have the script ready. Sounds familiar, all of this, does it not? A state of affairs that is easy to condemn. It seems not.
Who made these Palestinians hostile..you sould not worry about hostile countries…they all sit when commanded to sit..they are obedient monarch of west installed as western interest Tyrant on their people.
How those Palestinians who give their land and home to Jews in the first place, becomes hostile.
Friendly neighbor doesn’t suit Israel…they need hostile neighbor as reason for further expansion…and to carry on as watch dog for western interest in oil rich territory.
All these Saudi kings and midget of Jordan and Arab Sheikhs does not fear west…geogrophically they are no threat but YES they fear Israel and that we call purpose served.
I wish I could cut n paste this kids smiling dead body
They took away his life but not his smile. His smile is a sad reflection of cruel reality of global politics of hate. Shame.
I also see all the blame is put on hardliners from both sides.
Plaestinian hardliners(Hammas) were recently added in the picture…History of Palestinian suffering is well before any hardliners exist.
We come up with such gems when we are not ready to face the reality but always ready to hide the truth
AJ- look at your words.
They are the words of recrimination, that ask to dredge up the crimes, the insults, the slights of the past. I have heard your line of reasoning, and the accompanying refrain from Israel.
I am not an Israeli, I am not a Palestinian.
My question is what you would do, what would you ask, if you were to make peace in the region. What would you ask in order to live in peace and without the sword of Damocles hanging over your neighborhood? How would you make it possible to have a neighborhood that is equally filled with Israelis and Palestinians?
What would you do to make yourself and your neighbors proud to have Israel as a neighbor, as an ally? What would you do to make Israel want to have Palestine as a neighbor, and to be proud of calling Palestine their ally?
We all know the past well enough- how do you get beyond the history to a place where both can live in harmony? That’s what I am curious about. I don’t need to hear about the recriminations, about the pain and shame and fear. I know those stories. I don’t know the stories about how that is overcome.
lavrans
Pointing a crime with the culprit is not dredging the crime.
And truth should never be taken as insult…Yes past history establish the running course.
Apologist with ready script always come up with “Israel has a right to defend”.
Defend against whom…stone throwing kidz…and with assumption that neighboring Plaestinians are hostile…now we need history.
People are against each other due to race,creed and religion..Palestiniana happened to be Muslim.
Three time Jews were expelled from Jerusalem by Christians and all the three times Muslims welcome them back.
First Khalifa Umar Bin Khattab welcome them back then Saladin Ayubi and third time today’s Palestinians….all happened to be Muslim and Arabs. Historically they are not hostile towards Jews.
I am glad you point my refrain toward Israel, not Jews.
You right on spot ask for a solution…Although its not easy but very much possible…a greater responsibility lies on Israel….Hammas ready for 67 border…do you think Israel would agree.
Israel in 21st century can not aford policy of apartheid….one neighbor is rich with tall buildings and top notch schooling and best health facilities…other side is blocked even for necessary medicines and milk and food for babies.
For the sake of argument I buy that in the name of food, arms are smuggled into Gaza. Israel should take matters in its own hands and capture all the shipment and then supply on their own all the food and medicine to Gaza..that will win the heart of people there…first step necessary towards peace but eventually lead to lost effect of “hostile neighbor” rhetoric.
You know and all of us know Israeli blockade is nothing but to punish whole nation of Gaza…in my opinion Gazans are human being, hopefully you will agree with this opinion…no pun intended.
I wish I were a Jew to say all these words…my being Muslim will not compromise my zeal for justice.
We are human being, if we can not feel the pain of other human beings then we are apologist zombies, who is not ready to do the least he/she can do i.e. point the culprit and held him responsible.
May I suggest that justice is one thing, coexistence another? That there is no perfect justice in this world? That all sides need to compromise? [see here what I’ve written in the past about the impossibility of perfection.]
Lavrans has an excellent question: how do we get beyond history? Can we? Or are we doomed to keep digging the pit deeper and deeper? Are we so bound by the past that we can no longer imagine a future?
(I say ‘we’ with some trepidation, since whatever ‘we’ come up with here, it’s the people living there who have to do the hard work.)
Worth remembering too, AJ: I don’t know the percentage, but a sizable number of Palestinians are Christian, and have been for close on two millennia.
A solution I suggest has nothing to do with past…Lets win the hearts of people…treat them equal…a Palestinian baby died due to lack of medicine and food, should also be considered death of a human being..is it to much to ask….and all my suggestions addressed to those who think Israel has right to defend…a lesser hostile Palestinian is best defence.
I have another suggestion but that will earn me great disrespect from apologists….Lets equip Palestinians with 1/10th of arms Israel have…that will greatly reduce loss of life and better living conditions for Gazan…Israel won’t dare stopping their food supply in the name of arm smuggling.
I was not talking about perfection in anything…after all we are human being, we are endowed with senses and common sense and we can see the obvious…we don’t have to be rocket scientist to tell who is aggressor and who is suffering.
Lesley does not believe in perfection so she should not be believing in absolute imperfection…a whole nation is declared terrorist because their kidz can throw stones and they have few missiles too.
Their suffering is justified because their kidz are terrorist.
A killer always have a motive and justification for his act…we should not hold him accountable because our judgment against him could never be perfect…thats silly, though I was not talking about perfection…yes I was talking about the result of killer’s act…loss of human life and human suffering.
Palestinians are predominantly Muslim…many of them are African aborigine but still they are known as Arab…Lesley and I could never be on same page in any set of discussion.
When Will the Killing War in Iran Begin? It Already Has
“Economic sanctions are, at their core, a war against public health.” –The New England Journal of Medicine [1]
By Stephen Gowans
November 06, 2012 “Information Clearing House” – While campaigns are organized to deter the United States and Israel from acting on threats to launch an air war against Iran, both countries, in league with the European Union (winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize) carry on a low-intensity war against Iran that is likely to be causing more human suffering and death than strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities would. This is a war against public health, aimed at the most vulnerable: cancer patients, hemophiliacs, kidney dialysis patients, and those awaiting transplants.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32958.htm