Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
For the sake of Palestinians and Israelis, it can't be Gaza Last
Ultimately, the Gaza withdrawal is a welcome first step, provided that is done with honorable intentions. The strengthening of Israeli settlements elsewhere understandably dampen the enthusiasm and raise suspicions. But it’s time to start thinking of the human price -- a price that has no dollar amount nor gets much attention.
For the sake of Palestinians and Israelis, it can't be Gaza Last
by Sherri Muzher
(Wednesday August 03 2005)
"...the Gaza withdrawal is a welcome first step, provided that is done with honorable intentions. The strengthening of Israeli settlements elsewhere understandably dampen the enthusiasm and raise suspicions. But it’s time to start thinking of the human price -- a price that has no dollar amount nor gets much attention."
As the Israelis prepare to withdraw from Gaza, it is inevitable to evaluate what has happened in Gaza under Occupation, and what continues to happen in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. After all, there is a human price, not just for the Palestinians but also the Israelis. While there is absolutely no symmetry between a well-equipped military Israeli Occupier and the Palestinian Occupied who live at their mercy, the humanity of both peoples has taken beating in a chess game where each move gives short-term bragging rights. In the end, it is the people who pay a long-term human price.
For Palestinians, the cost has been a loss of human dignity and a struggle to maintain a sense of normalcy for each generation. And when you’re living under an Occupation that can see husbands and wives living in different regions because of Israeli government policy, normalcy can be extremely challenging.
Consider that much ado is said about the “culture of death” that has gripped Palestinian society. To a degree, that is the reality as posters of those killed during the uprising abound on buildings. However, raising children to believe that they can realize their dreams is difficult in the face of harsh Occupation policies.
For example, Palestinian national soccer players competed toward reaching the 2006 World Cup in Germany. The athletes, who hailed from the Occupied Territories, as well as the Palestinian Diaspora in Argentina and Chile, immediately won the admiration of young boys. And in a community that thirsted for interferences from a suffocating Israeli occupation, Palestinians were glued to their TV sets as they cheered on their players, with each triumphant goal such as during an 8-0 thrashing of Taiwan. But the odds against claiming a spot eventually prevailed as players were often prevented from getting to practice and/or political problems interfered. Sadly, not a surprise.
Back during Korea/Japan World Cup 2002 qualifying, a number of Palestinian players were prevented from leaving Palestine. That frustration turned to anguish when word came that gifted midfielder Tariq al-Quto was killed in a clash in the West Bank.
That is just one area where struggles at normalcy are made. Other examples range from concerts to theater. At times, there is success and many other times, there is failure. But the attempts never end.
It was French painter Francis Picabia who once said, “Wherever art appears, life disappears.” It is no wonder that the arts have proved to be a great escape for Palestinians despite the heavy travel restrictions and severe lack of funds, particularly in refugee camps like Aida, which has successfully churned out the Al Rowwad Children’s Theatre Troupe -- currently on a rare US tour.
One cannot discount domestic violence and poverty (2/3 live on less than $2 per day). Many families live day to day doing the best they can, but it’s a mistake for the international community to shirk its responsibilities of enabling a brutal military occupation which has helped lead to frustrations, confusion, feelings of powerlessness, and desperation. Accountability is a two-way street.
Further, despite billions in US annual aid, a recent Bank of Israel survey shows the number of poor Israeli families reaching 28%.
The unemployment rate is high and prostitution among young Israeli women has increased.
As for violence, consider the story of former Israeli Staff Sergeant Liran Furer, author of "Checkpoint Syndrome":
A graduate of at prestigious art school, he “became an animal at the checkpoint, a violent sadist who beat up Palestinians because they didn't show him the proper courtesy, who shot out tires of cars because their owners were playing the radio too loud, who abused a retarded teenage boy lying handcuffed on the floor of the Jeep, just because he had to take his anger out somehow.” (“Twilight Zone,“ Ha’aretz, 11/21/03)
In a nutshell, violence is encouraged.
However, this moral bankruptcy doesn’t stop at checkpoints but also affects other facets of life. The reality is that learned dysfunctionalism can take years, if not a lifetime, to work through. People just don’t turn off these behaviors at the flick of a switch.
Ultimately, the Gaza withdrawal is a welcome first step, provided that is done with honorable intentions. The strengthening of Israeli settlements elsewhere understandably dampen the enthusiasm and raise suspicions. But it’s time to start thinking of the human price -- a price that has no dollar amount nor gets much attention.
Yet, it’s painfully real and incredibly heavy.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Let there be peace.
"In 1994, under Oslo's Gaza - Jericho First Plan, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin withdrew from 88 percent of Gaza, where the 1 million Palestinians live. The 9,000 Jews in Gaza live in the remaining 12 percent of Gaza that remains under Israeli control, which is in a narrow strip along the Mediterranean. These areas include only 2,000 Palestinian Arabs. There is no demographic benefit to Israel ceding an area that is 82 percent Jewish."
Why did Arafat reject Barak's 'generous' offer at Camp David?
(Typical zionist assertion/propaganda)
At the failed Camp David summit, Arafat was clearly ambushed by Clinton and Barak, when both presented him a deal that was much more favorable to Israel than to Palestine. Because of domestic U.S. political reasons, a sitting U.S. president could never propose a deal that is unfavorable to Israel. What was fundamentally wrong at Camp David that Arafat was negotiating in miles while Barak was negotiating in inches. It's worth taking a note that it's the Palestinian people who owned and operated 93% of Palestine's land as of 1948, click here for a breakdown of Palestinian vs. Zionist land ownership as of 1946. In a nutshell, Arafat was presented with "a take it or leave it deal" either Palestinians had to give up their claims to most of East Jerusalem and forfeit their Right of Return, and in return Palestinians would "gain" a non-contiguous state on parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, or the whole Clinton-Barak offer had to be rejected outright; which he did.
One CENTRAL FACT, which is usually suppressed in the Western media, is that the Israeli government has previously offered most of the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip to King Hussein (with the exception of occupied East Jerusalem). However, the king of Jordan rejected the "generous" offer outright. In an interview with H.M. King Hussein, he stated:
"... I was offered the return of something like 90 plus percent of the territories, 98 percent even, excluding [occupied East] Jerusalem, but I couldn't accept. As far as I am concerned, it was either every single inch that I was responsible for or nothing." (Iron Wall, p. 264)
So to claim that:
"Barak went further than any other Israeli leaders for peace"
is a BIG LIE because other Israeli leaders were willing to handover more occupied lands and sovereignty to King Hussein in return for the Israeli version of "peace".
All Israelis, Zionists, and Americans must understand that no Arab leader could entertain the thought of such an offer, not even King Hussein himself when he was alive. From our point of view, anything is negotiable except for the Right of Return and East Jerusalem. What was offered at the failed Camp David summit is unacceptable to many Palestinians for the following reasons:
* The implementation of the Palestinian Right of Return, based on UN GA resolution 194, is THE KEY for ending the conflict. So any peace process that does not address the R.O.R. is nothing but a temporary cease fire, and the conflict eventually would flare up again. It should be emphasized that the majority of the Palestinian people are refugees, and for any agreement to hold, it must neutralize this vital political block.
* To even think that King Hussein and his grandfather King Abdullah refused to relinquish sovereignty over Jerusalem to the Israelis, and to expect the Palestinian people to do the exact opposite, is LUDICROUS. Keep in mind that it's a well known fact that the Hashemites has been a central factor in protecting Israel's interests even before its inception in 1948, This fact is rarely disputed among historians, click here to read more about the Hashemites role during the 1948 war.
* Jerusalem is extremely important from an Islamic point of view because it was the first Qibla before Mecca, and the third holiest site for Muslims after Mecca and Medina. Even if you disagree with this assessment, from a political point of view Jerusalem is the most unifying factor amongst Arabs and Muslims.
* Most Arabs cannot comprehend the thought that Arabs and Muslims fought so bravely to cleanse Jerusalem from the Crusaders, and to give it up on a silver platter to the Israeli Jews. It should be noted that hundreds of thousands of Arabs and Muslims died battling the Christian Crusaders between the 11th-13th centuries, for the sole purpose of cleansing the Holy Land from the Crusaders. Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims often wonder where the Zionist Jews were when the Holy Land really needed their assistance during the Crusade genocide! Was Palestine a "Promised" or "non-Promised" Land, that is the question?
* According to Barak's offer, the proposed Palestinian areas would have been cut from East to West and from North to South, so that the Palestinian state would have consisted of a group of islands, each surrounded by Israeli settlers and soldiers. No sovereign nation would accept such an arrangement-that could hinder its strategic national security and interests, click here for a map illustration.
* It's not only that the future Palestinian state would have been completely demilitarized and Israeli early warning radar installation would have been installed deep in the Palestinian areas, but also its economical, social, and political relations with its neighboring Arab states would have been severely scrutinized by Israel as well.
Not in Arafat's defense, however, it's worth noting that he took a risky political decision when he signed the Oslo Agreement in 1993, even prior to receiving assurances that any UN resolution concerning Palestine would be implemented, not even one. Consequently, over seven years after Oslo, Arafat has little to show his people, especially after giving up so much upfront and in the Wye River Agreement. For example,
* The occupied West Bank and Gaza strip have more Israeli Jewish colonies and bypass roads than ever,
* Palestinian Arab Jerusalem is continuously being ethnically cleansed of its Palestinian population, and its Palestinian Arab identity is being stripped day by day,
* Unemployment has tripled, and above all
* Arafat appears increasingly to be an Israeli and American stooge, whose primary job is to control the Palestinian people the way Americans and Israelis see fit.
It's fundamentally wrong and very misleading to blame Arafat for the outbreak of resistance against the Israeli Occupation Forces in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Zionists often prefer to blame Arab leaders rather than tackling the core issues of the conflict, this is usually done for the purpose of buying time hoping that Palestinians would lose hope. The Oslo Agreement's fundamental flaw was that it had attempted to scratch the surface of the core issues of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and not to necessarily solve them. Any agreement, similar to the Oslo Agreement, is destined for failure if it won't address the core issues of the conflict, such as the Palestinian Right of Return, the status of Jerusalem, water allocations, and the borders of the emerging states.
It is very possible that Palestinians and Israelis are not yet ripe for a final peace settlement, however, that is no excuse to accept any interim "peace agreement" that compromises critical Palestinian national interests. Until a fair and a just peace agreement comes up, which must address the core issues, both communities have to start educating themselves about the conflict and to hope for the best.
(Typical zionist assertion/propaganda)
At the failed Camp David summit, Arafat was clearly ambushed by Clinton and Barak, when both presented him a deal that was much more favorable to Israel than to Palestine. Because of domestic U.S. political reasons, a sitting U.S. president could never propose a deal that is unfavorable to Israel. What was fundamentally wrong at Camp David that Arafat was negotiating in miles while Barak was negotiating in inches. It's worth taking a note that it's the Palestinian people who owned and operated 93% of Palestine's land as of 1948, click here for a breakdown of Palestinian vs. Zionist land ownership as of 1946. In a nutshell, Arafat was presented with "a take it or leave it deal" either Palestinians had to give up their claims to most of East Jerusalem and forfeit their Right of Return, and in return Palestinians would "gain" a non-contiguous state on parts of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, or the whole Clinton-Barak offer had to be rejected outright; which he did.
One CENTRAL FACT, which is usually suppressed in the Western media, is that the Israeli government has previously offered most of the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip to King Hussein (with the exception of occupied East Jerusalem). However, the king of Jordan rejected the "generous" offer outright. In an interview with H.M. King Hussein, he stated:
"... I was offered the return of something like 90 plus percent of the territories, 98 percent even, excluding [occupied East] Jerusalem, but I couldn't accept. As far as I am concerned, it was either every single inch that I was responsible for or nothing." (Iron Wall, p. 264)
So to claim that:
"Barak went further than any other Israeli leaders for peace"
is a BIG LIE because other Israeli leaders were willing to handover more occupied lands and sovereignty to King Hussein in return for the Israeli version of "peace".
All Israelis, Zionists, and Americans must understand that no Arab leader could entertain the thought of such an offer, not even King Hussein himself when he was alive. From our point of view, anything is negotiable except for the Right of Return and East Jerusalem. What was offered at the failed Camp David summit is unacceptable to many Palestinians for the following reasons:
* The implementation of the Palestinian Right of Return, based on UN GA resolution 194, is THE KEY for ending the conflict. So any peace process that does not address the R.O.R. is nothing but a temporary cease fire, and the conflict eventually would flare up again. It should be emphasized that the majority of the Palestinian people are refugees, and for any agreement to hold, it must neutralize this vital political block.
* To even think that King Hussein and his grandfather King Abdullah refused to relinquish sovereignty over Jerusalem to the Israelis, and to expect the Palestinian people to do the exact opposite, is LUDICROUS. Keep in mind that it's a well known fact that the Hashemites has been a central factor in protecting Israel's interests even before its inception in 1948, This fact is rarely disputed among historians, click here to read more about the Hashemites role during the 1948 war.
* Jerusalem is extremely important from an Islamic point of view because it was the first Qibla before Mecca, and the third holiest site for Muslims after Mecca and Medina. Even if you disagree with this assessment, from a political point of view Jerusalem is the most unifying factor amongst Arabs and Muslims.
* Most Arabs cannot comprehend the thought that Arabs and Muslims fought so bravely to cleanse Jerusalem from the Crusaders, and to give it up on a silver platter to the Israeli Jews. It should be noted that hundreds of thousands of Arabs and Muslims died battling the Christian Crusaders between the 11th-13th centuries, for the sole purpose of cleansing the Holy Land from the Crusaders. Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims often wonder where the Zionist Jews were when the Holy Land really needed their assistance during the Crusade genocide! Was Palestine a "Promised" or "non-Promised" Land, that is the question?
* According to Barak's offer, the proposed Palestinian areas would have been cut from East to West and from North to South, so that the Palestinian state would have consisted of a group of islands, each surrounded by Israeli settlers and soldiers. No sovereign nation would accept such an arrangement-that could hinder its strategic national security and interests, click here for a map illustration.
* It's not only that the future Palestinian state would have been completely demilitarized and Israeli early warning radar installation would have been installed deep in the Palestinian areas, but also its economical, social, and political relations with its neighboring Arab states would have been severely scrutinized by Israel as well.
Not in Arafat's defense, however, it's worth noting that he took a risky political decision when he signed the Oslo Agreement in 1993, even prior to receiving assurances that any UN resolution concerning Palestine would be implemented, not even one. Consequently, over seven years after Oslo, Arafat has little to show his people, especially after giving up so much upfront and in the Wye River Agreement. For example,
* The occupied West Bank and Gaza strip have more Israeli Jewish colonies and bypass roads than ever,
* Palestinian Arab Jerusalem is continuously being ethnically cleansed of its Palestinian population, and its Palestinian Arab identity is being stripped day by day,
* Unemployment has tripled, and above all
* Arafat appears increasingly to be an Israeli and American stooge, whose primary job is to control the Palestinian people the way Americans and Israelis see fit.
It's fundamentally wrong and very misleading to blame Arafat for the outbreak of resistance against the Israeli Occupation Forces in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Zionists often prefer to blame Arab leaders rather than tackling the core issues of the conflict, this is usually done for the purpose of buying time hoping that Palestinians would lose hope. The Oslo Agreement's fundamental flaw was that it had attempted to scratch the surface of the core issues of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and not to necessarily solve them. Any agreement, similar to the Oslo Agreement, is destined for failure if it won't address the core issues of the conflict, such as the Palestinian Right of Return, the status of Jerusalem, water allocations, and the borders of the emerging states.
It is very possible that Palestinians and Israelis are not yet ripe for a final peace settlement, however, that is no excuse to accept any interim "peace agreement" that compromises critical Palestinian national interests. Until a fair and a just peace agreement comes up, which must address the core issues, both communities have to start educating themselves about the conflict and to hope for the best.
So, in esence, if you can't get every single thing that you want, thaen thats a license to kill as many civilians as possible?
Most sane humans wouldn't make that gratuitous leap.
Why are the Palestinians not allowed to fight for their land and freedom in anyway?
What about the U.S.
i.e. We have to have a military
i.e. It is a good thing if our young men die to protect our freedoms.
It is very bad if we lose our freedoms.
So why do we want the Palestinians to live under the Brutal Israeli Occupation and Oppression.
How come we do not want the Palestinians to die for their land and freedom.
People with Common Sense do not want to get rid of Israel.
The People of Israel are just like any other People, most are good and but some are not.
People with Common Sense only want to Free the Palestinians from Israeli Occupation and Oppression.
It is very difficult for People who are under Occupation and Oppression to sit back and just take it and do nothing....
Look at the U.S. It is not afraid to fight for Freedom, is it?
So to have Peace the Palestinian People need to be Free right where they are (The place they now live).
Once the Palestinian People are Free the U.S. and the U.N. have the power to prevent further conflict. Because you no longer have the excuse that the Palestinian People are under Israeli Occupation and Oppression. (Both side are then winners)
1967 is 38 years ago.
There have been wars and things have changed throughout history.
To solve the Israeli/Palestinian conflict you need to look at things the way they are TODAY....not in 1948...not in 1967.
There are "around" 5,000,00 Jews in Israel Proper.
There are "around" 1,200,00 Arabs in Israel Proper.
There are "around" 4,000,000 Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.
There are "around" 400,000 Jews in West Bank and Gaza.
To have Peace the Road Map to Peace calls for a "Viable" Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza.
So to end the tit for tat problem that we all know about, Let us make that Viable Palestinian State now.
The Arabs who do not like living in Israel Proper can then be free to move to Palestine.
The Jews who do not like living in Palestine can then be free to move to Israel.
Forcing People to move is not the answer.
Making the settlements the problem is not the answer.
Hating the Israelis is not the answer.
Hating the Palestinians is not the answer.
By The Way, we keep saying it is the Palestinian who are the terrorist, yet 3653 Palestinians have died and 1063 Israelis have died since this latest struggle for Freedom began in Sept 2000.
For details on who has died and how:
CLICK HERE > http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html
P.S. This is not a paid ad, but just a cite that gives facts and figures that can also be found elsewhere if you wish to double check.
What about the U.S.
i.e. We have to have a military
i.e. It is a good thing if our young men die to protect our freedoms.
It is very bad if we lose our freedoms.
So why do we want the Palestinians to live under the Brutal Israeli Occupation and Oppression.
How come we do not want the Palestinians to die for their land and freedom.
People with Common Sense do not want to get rid of Israel.
The People of Israel are just like any other People, most are good and but some are not.
People with Common Sense only want to Free the Palestinians from Israeli Occupation and Oppression.
It is very difficult for People who are under Occupation and Oppression to sit back and just take it and do nothing....
Look at the U.S. It is not afraid to fight for Freedom, is it?
So to have Peace the Palestinian People need to be Free right where they are (The place they now live).
Once the Palestinian People are Free the U.S. and the U.N. have the power to prevent further conflict. Because you no longer have the excuse that the Palestinian People are under Israeli Occupation and Oppression. (Both side are then winners)
1967 is 38 years ago.
There have been wars and things have changed throughout history.
To solve the Israeli/Palestinian conflict you need to look at things the way they are TODAY....not in 1948...not in 1967.
There are "around" 5,000,00 Jews in Israel Proper.
There are "around" 1,200,00 Arabs in Israel Proper.
There are "around" 4,000,000 Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza.
There are "around" 400,000 Jews in West Bank and Gaza.
To have Peace the Road Map to Peace calls for a "Viable" Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza.
So to end the tit for tat problem that we all know about, Let us make that Viable Palestinian State now.
The Arabs who do not like living in Israel Proper can then be free to move to Palestine.
The Jews who do not like living in Palestine can then be free to move to Israel.
Forcing People to move is not the answer.
Making the settlements the problem is not the answer.
Hating the Israelis is not the answer.
Hating the Palestinians is not the answer.
By The Way, we keep saying it is the Palestinian who are the terrorist, yet 3653 Palestinians have died and 1063 Israelis have died since this latest struggle for Freedom began in Sept 2000.
For details on who has died and how:
CLICK HERE > http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html
P.S. This is not a paid ad, but just a cite that gives facts and figures that can also be found elsewhere if you wish to double check.
always refreshing to hear some common sense arguements...
Well, essentially thats the Palestinian argumennt, apparently Barak only offered them 95% of everything they ever wished for and so , rather than make a meaningful accomodation, or a real counter proposal, the Palestinians is launched a hate fueled mass wave of terror. Others on this site have tried to justify the Palestinians behaviour by pointing out,"well, they wanted more than was on the table", but no other civilized peope would have been let off the hook for this type of out of control racist fury that the Palestinians have wrought upon the Israelis. Its racist and condescending to express this type of lowered expectations of behavior for a people simply because they are "other". The Palestinians need to be held to account for this intifada and not be rewared for terror.
Well, essentially thats the Palestinian argumennt, apparently Barak only offered them 95% of everything they ever wished for and so , rather than make a meaningful accomodation, or a real counter proposal, the Palestinians is launched a hate fueled mass wave of terror. Others on this site have tried to justify the Palestinians behaviour by pointing out,"well, they wanted more than was on the table", but no other civilized peope would have been let off the hook for this type of out of control racist fury that the Palestinians have wrought upon the Israelis. Its racist and condescending to express this type of lowered expectations of behavior for a people simply because they are "other". The Palestinians need to be held to account for this intifada and not be rewared for terror.
Nor Israeli terror. As the self-proclaimed 'democracy' Israel needs to be held to a high standard, and Israeli terror needs to be addressed, too.
"As the self-proclaimed 'democracy' Israel"
LOL!!! Let's vote on it!
LOL!!! Let's vote on it!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$55.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network