Loss of a native land
By Hicham Safieddine, Palestine Monitor/Toronto Star 9/2/2003
An old Toronto man tells of his life in Palestine and his impossible dream of returning to Jerusalem It's too late for Sami Hadawi
Let death first lay me low, and Death free me from this daylight There is no sorrow above The loss of a native land - Euripides, 485-406 B.C.
In a recurring but blurry vision, the walls of a Jerusalem Christian cemetery beckon Sami Hadawi to lie under their shade and fall into a deep slumber. But Hadawi will never return home to Jerusalem. Like his wife before him, he leads his life in painful reminiscence and will carry the grief with him to a grave dug in a foreign land.
The 99-year-old Toronto resident's dilemma is inextricably linked to the thorniest of all issues at the heart of the Middle East conflict: Palestinians' right of return.
Israel denies it. Palestinians insist on it. The failure to reach a compromise has meant a continuing loss of opportunity for a resolution of the conflict.
The beginning of Hadawi's story, like those of other Palestinians, is buried under decades of displacement and yearnings for restitution.
He was born in West Jerusalem in what was then Ottoman-ruled Palestine. Growing up in his grandfather's house in the Jewish quarter of the city, he worked for the British government during its mandate of Palestine and at age 44 moved to a house he built for his own family in the Christian quarter.
Little did Hadawi know that the days following his move would usher in a period of homelessness for his family and coincide with the beginning of an era of regional wars and political unrest in the Middle East.
It was 1948, the year of the partition of Palestine and the creation of the State of Israel.
"First of All - the Wall must Fall!"
By Uri Avnery, Gush Shalom 8/30/2003
This slogan was born spontaneously, opposite the Wall in Qalqilya, at the place where it becomes a fence and turns east, penetrating deep into Palestinian territory. On the other side of the wall the Palestinians were demonstrating. We were looking for a short rhyme to broadcast by megaphone. A common effort brought forth the seven words that carry the whole message.
True, this is not the wall of Jericho that could be destroyed by the sounding of trumpets. The people who are building this obstacle want it to stand for eternity, much as "united" Jerusalem is the "eternal capital of Israel". The Israeli Right has no concept of a period of time less than eternity. But among Israeli Leftist there are also some who believe that the wall has created an "irreversible" situation.
Not me. Because I remember other "irreversible" situations. And other "eternities", too.
Our Wall is frequently being compared to the Berlin Wall. Visually and politically, this is a reasonable comparison. Also because the "Berlin Wall" was not only an urban monstrosity. It was part of the German section of the Iron Curtain, cutting all of Germany into two and extending from the Baltic Sea in the north to the border of Czechoslovakia in the south - almost a thousand km, approximately the same as the planned length of Sharon's monster.
Palestinian realities
By Hanan Ashrawi, Miftah 9/2/2003
JERUSALEM As is becoming increasingly clear, the Americans did themselves a great disfavor by ostracizing Yasser Arafat, because in doing so they bolstered his support among the Palestinians. Since the United States and Israel attacked him, people have been rallying around him.
By trying to isolate Arafat, the Americans also mistakenly distanced themselves from a source of legitimate power and decision-making in Palestine. So now they have to get to Arafat indirectly, through intermediaries, whereas before they could influence him directly.
The United States and Israel need to talk to Arafat in order to address any serious issue. There is no reason for their boycott of him. It is childish and manipulative. If the United States is serious about peace, it has to deal with Palestinian realities, not realities manufactured in someone's mind.
Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian prime minister, cannot do anything on his own without the cooperation of Arafat, just as he needs the help of Fatah and the Palestinian Legislative Council. Everybody has been trying to help Abbas, but he also has to help himself and understand he gains his legitimacy from the people and not just from the Americans or the Israelis.
There is such a thing as killing with kindness, and this is what the United States is doing to Abbas. Washington needs to understand the sensitivities and the balances and the intricate relationships within Palestinian domestic politics.
A Small Group of Dedicated People Might Actually Do Something
By Doris 'Granny D' Haddock, AlterNet 8/28/2003
Well, you've heard that wonderful Margaret Mead quote about how you should never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world, and that, indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. Well, I think it's time we stopped repeating that quotation and came to some agreement about what we happy few might do over the next five years or so. That is the purpose of my remarks today.
You know, there are two kinds of politics in the world: the politics of love and the politics of fear. Love is about cooperation, sharing and inclusion. It is about the elevation of each individual to a life neither supressed nor exploited, but instead nourished to rise to its full potential – a life for its own sake and so that we may all benefit by the gift of that life. Fear and the politics of fear is about narrow ideologies that separate us, militarize us, imprison us, exploit us, control us, overcharge us, demean us, bury us alive in debt and anxiety and then bury us dead in cancers and wars. The politics of love and the politics of fear are now pitted against each other in a naked struggle that will define not only the 21st century but centuries to come.
This struggle is real. A very close friend of mine, a college student, spent this summer in Guatemala to help small communities prosper in ways that support their local environments. Those villagers and their environments are under siege by international big business, using a captured U.S. government to push through damaging treaties such as the proposed Central America Free Trade Agreement and the hemisphere-wide Free Trade Area of the Americas. The villagers of Guatemala want global fair trade, but the corporations and their captive governments want free trade. If fair trade wins, a global middle class will rise, as farmers and craftsmen are paid fairly for their work, and as they gain a voice in their governance and their environments are protected for their future generations. If free trade wins, it is colonial exploitation, torture and murder written in blood across another century.
A grave report, tepid conclusions
Editorial, Ha'aretz 9/2/2003
The Or Commission's report, published yesterday, defines Israel's treatment of its Arab population as "the most important and sensitive domestic matter on the state's agenda." In light of this diagnosis, it was disappointing to discover that the commission became trapped in a contradiction between its findings and its recommendations.
The picture the commission paints is extraordinarily worrisome: a consistent policy, by all Israeli governments, of discriminating against the Arab sector; growing extremism among the Arab population and irresponsible behavior by its leaders, who have led significant portions of this public to aspire to separate from the state; an organizational and managerial culture in the police that recalls the worst days of the Israel Defense Forces in the early 1950s.
Yet the commission's conclusions are tepid and lack teeth. It does not recommend holding Ehud Barak to account for his flawed performance as prime minister; with regard to Shlomo Ben-Ami, it confines itself to recommending that he not be allowed to serve as public security minister again; it does not propose any sanctions against the Arab MKs; it advises closing the doors of the police to several senior officers, such as former commissioner Yehuda Wilk, who have in any case already left the force, and recommends that other officers be barred from promotion for limited periods. The only officer it calls for dismissing is the commander of the Amakim District, Commander Moshe Waldman.
Supplementing the silence
By Amir Oren, Ha'aretz 9/2/2003
American movies have a predictable plot line: The district attorney and the detective investigate the mayor's involvement in corruption and he tries to prove they are no less sinful than he is. In that eternal triangle, the particularly interesting relationship is between the old cop, who is about to retire, and the young, ambitious DA, a political animal who wants to move up to the senate or governor's mansion. In the Israeli version, the promotion is to the Supreme Court, but the appointment is influenced by the politicians - including the suspect and his colleagues. Until it's decided whether the prosecutor's dream is fulfilled, he not only participates in discussions chaired by the suspect and conducts the investigation with amazing clumsiness, he even picks on the cop, paralyzing him and his subordinates. The division of labor between the suspect and his family and the prosecutor, to foil the investigation, is simple: they are silent, he paralyzes.
In Israel, the police are stopped at the gates of Sycamore Ranch, and not because Ariel Sharon has VIP protection. The Shin Bet denies it is preventing the search at the Sharon estate. It only looks like the farm in the Negev is cousin to the famous Texan estate, South Fork, on the outskirts of TV's Dallas. If Texan sheriffs wanted to search for something in Bobby Ewing's house, he wouldn't have been protected by the proximity of his brother J.R.'s house on the same estate.
That's not the case with Gilad and Ariel Sharon. When the investigation began, the son suddenly moved from his separate quarters into his father's house. A protected tenant in a city of refuge, like in Biblical times, or in the new era, the wanted militants hiding in the the Muqata.
Meddling and mismanagement
By Hisham Ahmed, Bitter Lemons 9/1/2003
The troubled circumstances of Palestinians in the occupied territories today most aptly demonstrate the extent and depth of the fascism of the Israeli occupation. Systematic acts of assassination are at their height. More and more Palestinian mothers and families have their hearts broken at the hands of what I call the "slaughter of Sharon." This is taking place to deafening Arab silence and in the midst of international ineptitude. The curfews continue and Israeli jails continue to fill with Palestinian prisoners in intolerable conditions. In addition, the new Berlin wall, a wall of isolation, continues to snake through Palestinian land. In other words, one might say that, for Palestinians, the roadmap has been turned into a path of blood, anguish and suffering.
At the same time, and I write this with deep regret and sorrow, we have a Palestinian cabinet headed by Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) that continues to engage in political mismanagement. In my view, this mismanagement is negatively affecting Palestinian national interests tremendously. Incongruently, and despite the dramatic state of affairs I have just described, Abu Mazen’s government has not called for suspending talks with the Israeli occupation institution, but has instead called for cutting off talks with Palestinian resistance groups. Instead of directing its anger and its energies at pressuring the Israeli government to end its violations, we find this government almost across the board doing its best to weaken the struggle against the occupation.
Several statements by cabinet ministers damning the Palestinian resistance have contributed to the recent escalation of tensions within Palestinian society. The assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Abu Shanab by Israeli warplanes interrupted the beginnings of a serious Palestinian feud. A cabinet whose ministers consider Palestinian resistance--not the tenacity and belligerence of the Israeli occupation--damaging to Palestinian national interests does not express the feelings of the Palestinian street and does not represent Palestinian ambitions. (It must be said that not every minister in this government bears the same culpability, and some statements of sanity have made their way through the fog.)
New Coalitions: An Interview with Salah Ra'fat
By Rashid Hilal, International Middle East Media Center 8/30/2003
Hilal: What is the democratic coalition, and when will it be announced?
Ra'fat: The agreement for forming the Palestinian Democratic Coalition came after years of conversation between many political factions, among them democratic and progressive Palestinian groups and figures from outside and inside Palestine. In the last month there was an agreement between the Palestinian democratic union, “Fida,” the Palestinian People’s Party, the Palestinian Popular Struggle Front, civil groups, the unionism front, as well as democratic and progressive institutions to announce the establishment of the democratic coalition on the second of September in Ramallah. A preparatory committee has been formed to be responsible for continuing the preparatory works to form the Coalition in the country and in the refugee camps and the Diaspora.
The Palestinian Democratic Coalition is a national, socialist, and democratic movement that is progressive and secular. In addition, the Palestinian Democratic Coalition is part of the PLO and calls on the democratic patriots (men and women) in the country and the Diaspora. It is not a new party but a broad democratic and progressive faction that includes parties, political factions, representatives of social categories’, popular organizations, unionism fronts, youth and women commissions and independent democratic groups that aim to end the Israeli occupation and the annexation of Palestinian lands that have been occupied since 1967. The Coalition is trying to build plurality in a parliamentary, secular, and modern Arab Palestinian state that is based on the declaration of Palestinian independence and ensures the Palestinian refugees’ rights to return to their homeland and properties.
Economic fratricide
By Avi Temkin, Globes 9/2/2003
Like two sumo wrestlers, the Bank of Israel and the Ministry of Finance are constantly trying to prevent each other from shaping economic policy. For months, that has more or less summed up Israel’s macro-economic policy industry.
The Bank of Israel believes that the recession will continue in 2004, with all its consequences for the financial soundness of small and medium-sized businesses that have managed to survive.
In a rerun of events in late 2001, the Ministry of Finance is trying to present an optimistic forecast for the economy. The 2.5% growth forecast by the ministry will be a result of a surge in investment, particularly in inventory, global economic recovery, and a major improvement in the external environment in which the Israeli economy functions.
These theoretical assumptions could come true, but it is a dubious basis for a realistic economic forecast. From this standpoint, Governor of the Bank of Israel David Klein is right in telling the Ministry of Finance that making unrealistic assumptions could prove disastrous, and Minister of Finance Benjamin Netanyahu should present the cabinet with a more realistic 1% growth forecast.
Post-Sept. 11 Paranoia in US Academia
By John Sutherland, The Guardian 9/1/2003
Nowhere has post-9/11 paranoia struck more deeply than in American universities. Just ask Ali -- When travellers at US airports bitch at having to take off their shoes at gate security the staff quip: "Be glad Richard Reid didn't hide the bomb in his underpants." Since 9/11, airport security has been overhauled by the federally appointed Transport Security Administration.
There are innumerable pre-boarding delays. And do passengers feel safer as they file through the long lines at LAX or JFK? They certainly feel more nervous. America is currently in the business of exporting "freedom" globally - even to countries which seem indifferent to the idea. Yet the US itself is becoming, month by month, a palpably less free society. Much of the change is attributable to the Patriot Act, whose Mel Gibsonish acronym stands for "Provision of Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism". In short: "hassle". Nowhere is the hassle more oppressive than in higher education. If airline passengers are grateful Reid didn't hide the explosives in his boxers, university officials curse the fact that those murderous 9/11 Saudi terrorists were, many of them, in the US on student visas.
The Patriot Act impacts painfully on American universities. Campus police are obliged, under the pretext of "homeland security", to liaise with the FBI. So, to their indignation, are college librarians ("What is Ali reading?"). The Immigration and Naturalisation Service (INS) requires universities to provide confidential information about their Middle Eastern and Muslim students - those from countries suspected of "harbouring" al-Qaida ("Who is Ali emailing?").
Return to Familiarity
Editorial, Miftah 9/1/2003
This past week has seen a return to familiarity. Several Israeli operation were set in motion as several West Bank cities were raided while Gaza endured numerous missile strikes. Israeli military curfews have confined thousands of Palestinians to their homes, while soldiers with dogs staged house-to-house searches. Over the past 10 days more than 13 Palestinians have been killed, including two children and an elderly man, prompting the US State Department's deputy spokesman, Philip Reeker to say, "The killing of innocents has got to stop.”
As violence raged on, the return to familiarity took strong hold, when the US, which has tried to sideline Arafat, tacitly conceded he still pulled the strings by appealing to him earlier this week to help Abbas curb militants. Of course when Arafat urged militants Wednesday to reinstate a truce canceled after Israel assassinated Ismail Abu Shanab, the US went back to accusing him of being “part of the problem” and dismissed his efforts.
Dance, Exclusion and Cultural Policies
By Nicholas Rowe, CounterPunch 8/30/2003
The Choreography of Occupation -- [CounterPunch Editors' Note: Nicholas Rowe teaches dance to Palestinian children on the West Bank. He has recently returned to the Occupied Territories from a trip to Brazil, where he gave a speech to the Dance and the Child International conference. His speech, reproduced below, caused quite a stir. The Israeli delegates interrupted it half way, protested and left the conference as a result. Delegates from the US similarly condemned it, but delegates from the rest of the world overwhelmingly supported it.]
"You're either with us, or against us."
When President Bush made this statement in the wake of the September 11 attacks, it was to define the playing field of his so-called "War on Terror".
I admired this statement because I thought, "Oh good, at last a US President is openly admitting what the US government's foreign policy has been for fifty years". You're Either With Us, Or Against Us.
It was a great opportunity. Citizens from all over the world could see the ultimatum, respond and say: "Actually, no, to either choice. We believe there are other options".
The people did and protested. Too many politicians didn't , however, and nearly two years and two wars later, the "with us or against us" policy has carved up the world into sections of increasingly righteous hatred.
Leading historians and academics such as Samuel P Huntington and Bernard Lewis press this political thought towards the belief that cultural differences must eventually result in a "Clash of Civilizations", and specifically that there is something "wrong" with Islamic Civilization.
Do we, as dance artists of the world, agree?
|
