|
|
Let's get down to business {July 14, 2011 , 7:41 AM} You don’t have to be a Marxist to grant materialism this much ground: when one’s material assets become “limited,” life is revealed to be deathly elementary. For most of the day one’s thoughts become not simplistic, but simple; tastes become not base, but basic. Emotions like shame, love or rage are left blunt and raw. Under the sun, on the job, with precious little change in hand, these things show themselves to be true. I don’t pretend that my modest routine here in the West Bank gives me any insight into the lives of my friends who are permanent residents, but I do my best to extrapolate. Little things matter. There is more to the occupation than political subjugation, night raids and the metastasis of settlements. Yes, a nostril full of tear gas will ruin your day (trust me) but sometimes I wonder how much these grand struggles bother a regular Palestinian compared to the more mundane, humiliating features imposed by the Israelis, I’m thinking of the restrictions on travel, the absurd farming regulations, and the sabotage of business. Then there is the general incompetency of the Palestinian Authority in outmaneuvering this oppression from its postmodern HQ up north.
Not one of the translucent foreigners meets my gaze, because none of them ever turn their heads away from the spires at the top of the hill. Yesterday the boy serving me my falafel summed up the sheer monotony: “Bus to the Church; Church to the bus. Again, and again, and again.” The problem here isn’t just the frivolousness of tourism, which is endemic. The fact is that the effects of the occupation cripple what could be a major source of income for the PA, not to mention Bethlehem’s business sector. The stranglehold from Tel Aviv—having successfully convinced most Christians that the real show is within Israel’s borders—and the negligence of Ramallah both undermine this juicy opportunity to do what everyone else does with their historical relics and cash in. Sometimes these foreigners are blatantly told not to mingle with the Arabs, let alone grant them business. Yesterday on the main street I overheard a conversation between a tourist and a Palestinian kid selling some scarves from his shop. The would-be customer stammered for a bit before the kid leveled with him and asked him why he was so nervous. As it happens, it was because his tourist troupe had been told by their guide, as well as shopkeepers in Tel Aviv, not to patronize the Arabs—that the Palestinians get awful violent if one doesn’t make a purchase in their shops. Judging by the aforementioned marches up and down Manger Street, I am willing to assume that was not an anomaly. (If you’re looking for a happy ending amidst this post I can tell you that the gentlemen above did end up taking some fine scarves home.) Of course the impetus is on the Palestinian Authority to deal with this state of affairs and get a grip on the tourism business. And while golden boy Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has worked wonders for the past two years, Ramallah really hasn’t got its shit together in that department. The tourism ministry rattles off a lot of management-speak while each day nearly every single tourist walks right through one of the holiest cities in Christianity without giving the PA a dime. And that’s Bethlehem, not Nablus or Hebron. Bethlehem should be easy. Labels: Bethlehem, Israel, manger street, occupation, Palestine, palestinian authority, West Bank ---------- Post a Comment ---------- Foreign Policy Mad Libs! {May 24, 2011 , 6:55 PM} An example of how far one can carry on an interview (a) without knowing anything about anything and (b) without an actual journalist present. This is a Republican candidate who genuinely excites "the base." "The right of return? ...the right of return? ...line? Line, please?" Labels: american politics, American Right, fox news, GOP, herman cain, Israel, Palestine, pizza man, republican race, right of return ---------- Post a Comment ---------- Know your symptom {May 18, 2011 , 2:24 AM}
I have always been a great admirer of freelance journalist Michael J. Totten, even after he signed onto the usually laughable Pajamas Media network. A writer has to live, and since Totten continues to produce great work (now bound and available) I don't consider his slipping into Pajamas a mark of his selling out or jumping any sharks. No, I've read him long enough to know that at his weakest, he has always written passages like this: Israel wants nothing more than peace and normal relations with its neighbors, including its Syrian neighbors, but that feeling has never been reciprocated by the majority of Syrians and is certainly not reciprocated by the Syrian government. [My italics]And even head-scratchers like this: The Israelis therefore have every reason to believe that a large crown of people dismantling the border fence and crossing into their territory is a threat. And as it turned out, they were at least a little bit right. Many threw rocks, and 10 Israeli soldiers were injured.One can discern a decent writer's strain easily when he or she resorts to flabby, feeble language in an attempt to neatly sign and seal an otherwise bogus argument. The Israelis were "a little bit right" that a large crowd of people had the capacity to throw rocks. So after ten soldiers were injured (I'm expecting mildly, until it's proven otherwise) the army eschewed tear gas, opened fire, and ten protestors caught their last breath of fresh air. To this day I've yet to wrap my head around the notion, prevalent among intelligent but uncritical supporters of Israel, that the world's second most developed, equipped and uninhibited army has anything to fear from a crowd of gangly stone-throwers. (Don't try and peg me as an Erdogan groupie: I'm well aware of the lethal hypocrisy the fumes of populism obscure.) Totten goes on to place the calamity at the border within the context of the Syrian uprising: No doubt the Syrian government is thrilled that the Israelis opened fire. Bashar al-Assad desperately wants his furious citizens to think of the “Zionist Entity,” rather than his Arab Socialist Baath Party, as their number one enemy.Point taken. And thrown back, if I may. Yes, Assad is the worst enemy of Syrians, but why did the Israelis have to open fire and neutralize ten people at the border rather than break up the ruckus with tear gas, like any standard pacification of an enflamed but unarmed crowd? Might the IDF pursue a strategy that doesn't have the effect of "thrilling" Arab dictatorships? Are Syrians wrong to see Israel as their enemy as well? Regardless, Totten is right that the protests on the borders with Syria and Lebanon were, at least in part, organized political theater. As usual, I end up agreeing with his overarching point with a sour taste in my mouth after swallowing some seriously junk premises. Labels: Bashar al Assad, borders, Israel, Lebanon, Michael J Totten, Nakba, Palestine, protests, Syria ---------- Post a Comment ---------- Together again. {April 30, 2011 , 11:14 AM} Of the reconciliation deal, one anonymous reader writes, and only writes: It is a statistical fact that the wicked work harder to reach hell then the righteous do to enter heaven.I recognized it immediately as a quote of American humorist Josh Billings. In this context I assume it to be a disapproval of Fatah's declared peace with Hamas, suggesting their 'hard work' in forming a unity government is an evil thing, speeding their delivery to 'hell.' To this, I will repsond to our reader with another one of Billings's aphorisms: As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand.The truth is: this is an encouraging step forward for the Palestinians. It is at least that. Hamas was going to be around, perhaps longer, if the emnity between the two leaderships dragged on. There is no Palestinian state without this deal, and there is no peace without such a state. It's no surprise that Ban Ki-moon, presiding over the UN vote this September, is jumping for joy while Avigdor Lieberman is dropping what marbles he had left. This will very likely push the Islamists into at least tacit acceptance of Israel's existence, as Hamas leaders know that they will be torn apart if they muck up this chance to achieve Palestinian statehood.
Egypt will continue to be a deal broker, and the next item of the day is a prisoner swap. Gilad Shalit, and around 1,000 Palestinian prisoners, will see the sunlight sooner than later. I've just reread the first Billings quote with a different emphasis. Is it possible the commenter was talking about Israel as the hard working fellow destined for unpleasantness? Well, we can do a post on that next time 'round. Labels: Abbas, avigdor lieberman, Fatah, gilad, Hamas, haniyeh, Israel, josh billings, Palestine, reconcilation, shalit, unity deal ---------- Post a Comment ---------- Monsters {April 21, 2011 , 8:07 PM} To continue/expand an earlier discussion, here's Rand on the Middle East: Labels: Arabs, Ayn Rand, Israel, Palestine ----------
She CANNOT be serious.
It seems like all of that is consistent with her philosophy, which would have us credit and support the more “industrious” and productive belligerent in any case.
It's a Social Darwinist (I'm not too informed with Objectivism so I won't make any claims about it) idea that it's every man, or civilization, for himself, and that morality or justice somehow doesn't factor in. So in Social Darwinist terms, let the weak suffer and let the strong manipulate and take advantage of them. The Social Darwinists somehow did not account for human enlightenment and reason as part of the progress of man, and that using it to create systems of justice is part of our evolutionary cred. Surprisingly, they want to approach everything from a selfish standpoint, as if we are all in the jungle fighting for survival. The point now is to go beyond mere survival: it's to endorse human happiness, which means not letting most of the world's population suffer because it might mean they are "mooching" off the excessive profits of the few.
I wouldn’t scoot off to the topic of Social Darwinism yet, which is a slightly different kettle of fish.
Yes, there is a definite difference between Objectivism and Social Darwinism. Though it sounds strange, Social Darwinism actually stressed altruism a lot more, which Objectivism denounces. Cui bono? { , 5:32 PM}
All of this will have to be resolved where it began: members of the international community, notably the United States, will have to meddle. Contrary to the conventional wisdom that the Arabs hate the meddling of the West, the Palestinians want and need the Middle East Quartet (US, UN, Russia and the EU) in order to unify Gaza and the West Bank. Meddling can actually make peace as easily as it can break it. A glance in any direction—toward either expanding settlements in the West Bank or leveled buildings in Gaza—convinces most here that the Netanyahu government prefers a divided, and therefore feeble, Palestinian leadership. It is up to the great powers to, as Afif Safieh has phrased it, impose a solution whether Israel likes it or not. Every Palestinian I've met sure would. And as it happens, Israeli citizens would like it, quite a bit: the last opinion poll of the Israeli public revealed that it is ready to end the unprompted spouts of al-Qassam rockets and negotiate a truce with the Hamas government. So, to the simplistic question, “cui bono?” one could start by answering, “Israel.” For Hamas it would be both an immediate victory and a long term defeat: in the immediate sense a unity government would allow Fatah to do all the things that Hamas is ideologically prohibited from doing, e.g. negotiating with Israel, while Hamas reaps all the practical benefits of a government that normalized Israeli-Palestinian relations. Although Hamas would not directly participate in peace negotiations with Israel, it has indicated that it would be willing to be part of a Palestinian coalition government with Fatah under which Fatah would negotiate the actual treaty. However, rather than promising a permanent, and more potent, threat to Israel, throwing Hamas onto the world stage and bringing on the next election cycle could be the very thing that sends them packing. Either that, or the moderates in their group would finally win out, and the group would become just another Turkish-style political party with an Islamic inflection. With their popularity already plummeting, one would not expect the majority of Palestinians to continue to support a faction that promises them perpetual war rather than realistic compromise. And obviously Fatah would be pretty psyched, retaining more power within the Palestinian Authority and continuing to receive endorsement from the IMF, World Bank and, depending on what happens in September, the United Nations. Packing up for Britain in a few days. Labels: Abbas, Fatah, Gaza City, Hamas, Israel, Middle East Quartet, unity deal ---------- Post a Comment ---------- Connect Four {March 24, 2011 , 3:15 PM}  Yesterday was a giving news day.
On March 12th, someone snuck into a home in the illegal Itamar settlement, located in the Samaritan Mountains, and stabbed to death three children and their parents. This has prompted a few instances of retaliation by settlers in Hebron: on Monday one opened fire at a Palestinian funeral in Beit Omar while another stabbed a Palestinaian man in At-Tuwani. I imagine that the settlers in the Jordan Valley are a different face of this same retaliatory movement. They arrived at dawn on Wednesday in a group of 25, armed with rifles, claiming that they didn't want trouble—but they've come to kick the Arab shepards out of their homes. The IDF showed up shortly after and told all the Arab villagers who've lived there for 15 years to pack up. Later that day, the IDF saved any settlers the trouble of interrupting another funeral; since there are a wealth of settlements around Beit Omar, the village has seen increasing crackdowns, raids, and general harrassment. The Itamar killings have hardly lifted that fog of paranoia. So: Earlier in the afternoon on Wednesday, during a woman’s funeral in Beit Omar, Israeli soldiers fired tear gas, stun grenades and rubber bullets at mourners leaving one man with slight injuries. According to Muhammad Awad, spokesman for the National Committee Against the Wall, during the clashes other Israeli soldiers set up a checkpoint at the entrance to Beit Omar and searched civilians resulting in at least three arrests.This is the right hand of Israeli policy. The left hand—which knows what the right hand doeth—is currently striking Gazans from the air and shelling them from afar. Saturday saw two dead civilians and Tuesday saw four. These attacks are in response to the 50 rockets fired by Hamas and its proxies on March 20th, which made a splash but didn't end up killing or injuring anyone. Then yesterday an explosion rings out in West Jerusalem. It comes after many rumblings from Palestinian militant organizations about "response to Israeli crimes." But we do not yet know who is responsible for the Jerusalem bombing. One would suspect Islamic Jihad, but they have only praised the bombing, not taken credit. The same goes for Hamas. Praise, no credit. Why has no one taken credit? I am not yet persuaded to conclude what the editor-in-chief at PNN wrote this morning (that English rendition is mine). I am aware of Israel's resort to false flags in the past—the Lavon Affair, its funding of Hamas during the PLO's heydey—and I've heard rumors that Wednesday bomb was remote-controlled from a cell phone, and that this is wholly foreign to Palestinian terrorist methodology (though I know it isn't to Hezbollah). But I don't know how likely it is that the Israelis wish to be the ones to inaugurate a new era of attacks in Jerusalem after eight years of quiet; by all accounts so far the bomb was hastily placed, and one can imagine the secret service organizing something a bit more impressive. But as usual, in the absence of information, conspiracy theories thrive. I suppose we'll have to stay tuned. So: Innocent chldren are murdered in Itamar, which spurs other settlers to violence; they are protected by the IDF, which simultaneously knocks off innocents in Gaza; this lands a bomb in Jerusalem, which Hamas praises and Fatah condemns. And the split between those two parties drives two boys in Bethlehem to threaten self-immolation if reconciliation does not occur. But by the end of the day, their families talk them down, and the two boys leave the Mosque of Omar with sizzling hearts rather than smouldering skin. And the sun sets on another day in the Holy Land. Labels: Beit Omar, Gaza City, Hebron, Israel, Jerusalem bomb, Jordan Valley, West Bank ---------- Post a Comment ---------- |
|
|