Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support -- click here to help us keep going

Analysis News

Between south Hebron, the Jordan Valley and Israeli democracy

A couple of West Bank incidents from the last few days, and one final thought:

1. Israeli singer Ehud Banai, who was due to perform in the archaeological, Jews-only site of Susya in the south Hebron Hills, cancelled his gig following left-wing protests, then canceled the cancelation, stating that his decision (not to perform) “fanned the flames of hatred for nothing.” His performance is due to begin as I write this post.

In his statement, Banai used the Jewish expression of Sinat Hinam (שנאת חינם, “hatred for nothing”), which in Jewish tradition refers to the internal quarrels that brought about the destruction of the Second Temple and the final deportation of the Jewish people from the land of Israel. The Israeli debate over his performance, Banai wants to say, has gotten out of hand.

The south Hebron Hills in general — and particularly in Susya — is one of the ugliest places in this land right now, a site of ongoing injustice against the poorest people in the region, many of them living in tents and in caves. Those Palestinians are subjected to constant harassment by the army and the settlers, 1,500 people face an immediate threat of eviction, their homes are destroyed every now and then and their water holes are covered with dirt and stones — all in an effort to clear the area of its Palestinian residents so it can be used by the army and the Jewish settlers.

The residents of Susya were deported from their homes to make way for a tourist site. There is a nice 15-minute documentary (below) by a couple of Israeli filmmakers who tried to get them to visit their old homes, before they were thrown out by the army.

The story is all the more disappointing since Banai is one of the heroes of modern Israeli songwriting, and one of his first hits from the eighties actually talks about a day worker from Gaza who works in a construction site in Tel Aviv. Anyway, the well-documented dissonance between artists and their work is not the topic of this post. Right now I’m thinking more about the way the entire debate was portrayed in Banai’s mind, and in the Israeli public debate: as an internal dispute between two groups of Israelis. A touching letter that a Palestinian resident of Susya wrote to Banai received little attention, and in the name of understanding between Jews, the singer decided to perform as promised.

2. On Friday, Dimi Reider reported on an incident in which the army prevented a group of activists and diplomats from reaching the site of a village that was demolished in the Jordan Valley a few days earlier. A French diplomat, Marion Fesneau-Castaing, was pulled out of a truck and held by the soldiers, stun grenades and tear gas were used. Later, it was revealed that Fesneau-Castaing either slapped or pushed one of the soldiers. The army was upset with the diplomats who, according to Israel, “took sides” and acted like “activists,” as the IDF Spokesperson kept calling them in its press releases.

Much like the South Hebron Hills, the Jordan Valley is the site of ongoing, government-led efforts to push Palestinians from large stretches of land with various bureaucratic excuses. Everyday, Israel is chipping away at more of the West Bank, creating more “facts on the ground.” Later, in rounds of negotiations, Israeli officials will demand the borders of any solution recognize “the new reality” and will not impose an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders.

The Palestinians don’t really have any way to object to this process: they don’t vote, so they can’t get any political representation; the courts are run by Israeli judges and they set an extremely high threshold for Palestinian land claims; grassroots political activity is met with great violence by the army, and so on. This is the most important justification for international intervention on behalf of the Palestinians – they are people stripped of other defenses and are deprived other forms of political representation.

Yet in the minds of Israelis, such intervention is a breach of our sovereignty. Haaretz reported today that Israel is now considering deporting the French diplomat, Fesneau-Castaing, as it often does to activists and even aid workers who come to work in the West Bank. The government in Jerusalem views Palestinians like prisoners who can be approached by visitors only on our its terms. Most of the world abides by those rules, and when they don’t – well, you see what happens.

3. I was invited to take part in a couple of panels at the J Street Conference next week in Washington DC. The first one deals with Israeli democracy, a topic I’ve tried to avoid in the past year or two as I began to rethink some of my old narratives and writings on this issue. Obviously, there is no escaping anymore. So in light of the events mentioned above, I suggest the following definition: Israeli democracy means two Jews arguing over the fate of a Palestinian.

Related
‘Performing in my stolen home’: An open letter to Ehud Banai
PHOTO: French diplomat at the feet of Israeli troops
Two state vs. one state debate is a waste of time, political energy

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • COMMENTS

    1. “I suggest the following definition: Israeli democracy means two Jews arguing over the fate of a Palestinian.” I suspect those on North American Reservations used to say something like this. Some Reservations were bad places in the 60′s and 70′s; Reservation gambling finally provided income for in some cases.

      True court review would give Palestinians instanced voice, but that is not democracy. Giving Palestinians a collective outcome voice is not identical to instanced voice in redress of particular grievances. The latter may be just in the margin of possibility, the former beyond the domain of whatever Jews argue. I see human particularism not as solution but constraint on self in articulating future steps.

      Reply to Comment
      • Average American

        I am happy that Israel has real people and singers and political resistance. I think the key point is the impossibility of “the Democratic and Jewish State” of Israel. It is not both Democratic and Jewish. It will never be both. The traditions of the “Jewish” part don’t allow the components of the “Democratic” part. Or it would be done by now!

        Reply to Comment
    2. Gideon (not Levy)

      I’d rather have the French diplomat, Marion Fesneau-Castaing, address J Street on the Q Why is ‘The Only Jewish Democracy’ Kicking Diplomats with “facts on the ground ???”

      Reply to Comment
    3. Ehud Banai didn’t cancel his concert at Susya because of the left-wing protests. He cancelled because right wingers vomited hate on his facebook page after reading that he “opposes the occupation.” I was very surprised to hear about his cancellation in the first place and after finding out what it was really about it made a lot more sense. I love his music and think he’s a good person, but a political cancellation is very unlike him.

      Reply to Comment
    4. jo hughes

      can someone please explain to me what is meant by ‘the final deportation of the jewish people from the land of israel? after the romans sacked the temple? sounds very much like a ‘christian’ myth to me. i was aware that approximately 3000 ‘rebels’ fled judea but not aware of ‘final deportation’.

      Reply to Comment
    5. Aaron Gross

      The point being, that those living under belligerent occupation by a democratic state are not themselves living in a democracy? OK, but the sky is blue, also, and I haven’t seen that fact published here.

      British democracy in 1947: Two Britons arguing over the fate of a Palestinian.

      Reply to Comment
    6. Richard Witty

      Noam,
      You have a voice. Are you one of the two Jews arguing?

      What do you do with that? Stop arguing? Or, continue?

      And, what do you argue for?

      The reality in Israel is that in 1993, 400,000 (more than 10% of the population showed up for a peace demonstration).

      And, that was AFTER likud had been elected to govern for how many years?

      Israeli views do change over time, and the result in change in government (after hearts and minds change).

      There remain viable two-state paths, if BOTH communities are willing in theory. Specifically, the two democracies approach, really near the green line.

      There is the widespread accepted assumption in the left that if there were a two-state, that Israel would be expected to be a democracy with equal rights for ALL, while Palestine would be expected to be some national oriented entity without equal individual rights for all.

      The two democracies movement that allows settlers to remain as a minority in sovereign Palestine, and affords them equal due process and protection under the law, raises the bar everywhere.

      It stops the settlement program as the institutionalization of state expansion (its Palestine and residents are Palestinian citizens, not Israeli, even if Jewish and messianic.) It ends the occupation.

      Anger is useful to change to something. But, the anger itself is NOT arguing for something, but only a bark (back off). Barks have temporary impact. Thinking and strategy for a good end have permanent.

      Reply to Comment
    7. Karl

      we will return this colonialist woman’s home to its rightful owners….. the Basque people.

      Reply to Comment

    LEAVE A COMMENT

    Name (Required)
    Mail (Required)
    Website
    Free text

© 2010 - 2014 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website empowered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel