Haneen Zoabi, an MK from the Balad party, speaks to Elsa Rassbach about Land Day and her relationship as a Palestinian to Zionism and citizenship.
By Elsa Rassbach
Since the 1980s, Palestinians have marked every March 30 with protests to celebrate Land Day. The day commemorates the first widespread struggle of Arab Israelis against processes of land confiscation intended to create Jewish majorities in certain communities. The marches and general strikes began in the Galilee in 1976, and resulted in the killings of six unarmed Arab citizens of Israel. Solidarity protests spread to the occupied West Bank, Gaza and the refugee camps in Lebanon. Since then, the day has marked the first common struggle for a Palestinian national cause following the founding of the State of Israel in 1948, an event Palestinians call the Nakba. This year on Land Day, worldwide Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) activities will take place against Israeli policies, as well as the Global March to Jerusalem, which will call attention to the continuing Judaization and ethnic cleansing in the city that was supposed to be the multi-ethnic, multi-religious capital of a future Palestinian state.
Haneen Zoabi, 43, became a Knesset member in 2009, as the first Palestinian woman elected on an Arab party’s list. She is a member of the Balad party, which seeks to transform Israel into a democracy for all of its citizens, irrespective of national, ethnic or religious identity. Zoabi was born in Nazareth to a Muslim family. In 2010, she participated in the Gaza flotilla on board the Mavi Marmara. I spoke with her recently by Skype.
What does Land Day mean to you?
To me, Land Day is a day of ongoing and a continuous struggle around the issue of “land property.” This is still the crucial issue between us and the state. The core of the Zionist project is a continuous stealing of land from the Palestinians and transferring it to the Israeli Jews. Renaming the places, the junctions, the villages, the streets, and giving Jewish names to the landscape is part of this “confiscation.” It’s a way to steal from us and confiscate our historical relation with our homeland. This is the meaning of Ariel Sharon’s famous statement in the Knesset in 2002 when he said that the Palestinians inside Israel, whom he called “Israeli Arabs,” in effect have only temporary “rights in the land,” the land not yet confiscated, but “all the rights over the Land of Israel are Jewish rights.”
During the 63 years since 1948, Israel has confiscated 85 percent of our land and turned it over to the exclusive use of the Jews. It has developed and built 1,000 towns, cities and villages, all of them only for the Jews. And zero for the Palestinians. We live now on 2 percent of our land. We don’t even have permission to build our own houses on our own land and thus have no rights to use our land that hasn’t been confiscated.
How does Israel’s definition of itself as a “Jewish state” affect the Palestinian citizens of Israel?
The “Jewish state” is a state that has been established by Jews and is run by the Jews for the sake of the Jews – all at the expense of the Palestinians. It’s a racist definition. The state declares me to be an outsider in this land, though I’m the opposite. I’m the indigenous people. I didn’t immigrate to Israel; it was Israel that immigrated to me.
The State of Israel claims that it can be Jewish and democratic at the same time, as if there were no contradiction between the two. Any debate within Israel regarding the inherent contradiction between being a Jewish state and being a democratic state is considered no less than a “strategic threat.” If we are not Jewish and refuse to give up our rights, then obviously we present not just an alternative view, but something that contradicts the state’s very legitimacy: Zionism.
How you define your struggle as Palestinian citizens of Israel in relation to the struggle of the rest of the Palestinian people?
Our struggle has two components, as citizens and also as Palestinians. And unlike the state, we don’t see why both components — our citizenship and our nationality – should clash.
On the contrary, citizenship should be inclusive. We are fighting for normal citizenship with full recognition of our national rights as indigenous people that would include our history, our identity, our culture and our nationality.
My citizenship is conditioned by the Jews’ privileges. It’s even conditioned to my loyalty to these privileges! Therefore, there is no way to struggle for full equality and full citizenship without challenging the concept of “Jewish state.” To struggle for democracy in Israel is to struggle against Zionism. And this is what unifies our struggle with the wider Palestinian struggle. Racism, Oppression, Judaisation, Apartheid and Undemocracy inside Israel; Apartheid, Occupation, Oppression, and Judaisation in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip; and the denial of the right of return – all of these mechanisms of control serve the same ideological project: Zionism.
Nakba Day, the first intifada, the second intifada – all of these days are days of unity. But still our struggle is not united, because it lacks a unifying vision and a unifying framework of legitimacy. The Palestinian issue did not begin in 1967 and does not only concern the territories occupied in 1967. It concerns the entire Palestinian people, and even the wider Arab region.
After the Oslo Accords of 1993 defined the Palestinians inside Israel as an internal Israeli matter, we reformulated our national project in a manner that secures our reintegration into the Palestinian people and guarantees our place as an integral part of the Palestinian issue, both as part of the conflict and as part of the solution. Our demand for a “state of all its citizens” has put the Palestinians in Israel at the heart of the direct confrontation with the Zionist enterprise and has forced the “Jewish state” to admit the primacy that it grants to Jewish-Zionist values over democratic values, and to recognixe the impossibility of coexistence between the two.
This is the role we play.
Elsa Rassbach is a filmmaker and journalist from the United States, now based in Berlin. She is a member of CODEPINK, an organization that has endorsed the Global March to Jerusalem. She is a frequent contributor to German and U.S. publications. Her award-winning film, ”The Killing Floor,” an historical dramatic film about a union’s struggle against racism in the Chicago Stockyards, will be re-released this year.
Read also:
Risk of unrest grows as Israel redraws relations with Arab citizens
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.
Bill Pearlman
A german code pink member. She must be a fun gal.
You have to give this woman credit for honesty. She wants Israel and the Jews gone. And is very clear about that. In other countries members of the legislative body are loyal to the country. In Israel I guess thats not a requirement.
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
No she doesnt “jews gone”. Look it is this self-imposed victimhood and mythmaking that give rise to conflicts. She want recognition and normal citizenship. Is that too much to ask from a state that say it is a democracy?
-
You know that some 750000 palestinians were ethnically cleansed in 1947-1948. I hope you dont accept “arabs gone” as legitimate?
Bill Pearlman
Were you reading the same article. The right of return is the finish of Israel. Everyone knows that.
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
…and the palestinians cleansing in 1947, 1967 ended the dream of a Palestine state. Therefore a one state solution would be the must just solution, and I think the inevitable result – if the annexation keeps on going.
AIG
Why should anything that Zoabi says about democracy and human rights be believed? Her best friends are the leaders of Hamas. Azmi Bishara, the previous leader of Balad, used to have constant contact with the Assad regime in Syria and always praised Assad. She herself visited Ghadaffi.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=17c_1298667465
She is a wolf in a sheep’s clothing. She is very successful though in fooling leftists that she is sincere but really she is just like any other Arab dictator, using false rhetoric to achieve her goals of getting rid of Israel.
rick sterling
Excellent interview and comments by Zoabi. No wonder she was threatened physically in the Knesset. Contrary to Bill Pearlman’s prediction, implementation of Right of Return along with elimination of ethnic preferential laws within Israel, only means end of Israeli apartheid. If they did it in South Africa, why can’t they in Israel/Palestine?
Ohad
Jack your comments makes no sense why is the two state solution is a worst solution then Palestine one all of the land against international law, and most likely a result of a huge war ?
palestinian
And we dont care about Isghael, next time when the so-called “nation” dream about a state they should make sure the land is empty.
Jack
Ohad,
Could you rephrase your question?
Ohad
Palestinian exactly honesty is good, now go talk to the UN
palestinian
I know Ohad , one of things I dislike about Zionists is dishonesty,deceptive creatures like …..Hyenas in Mowgli.I will have to talk to the US before the UN ,but we both know the credibility of both entities,the classy jungles.
Ohad
sure Jack , why is that you see Palestinian Arab right for self determination and a home but not the Jewish people, (even thou Israel is a legal state part of the international community and one of the very few states in the world that was created by a UN vote and a UN resolution).
in other words how is it better to put our efforts in the destruction of Israel as a posed to the two state solution and a chance for peace ?
Jack
Ohad,
I said I think a one state solution is best, how is that taking sides with palestinians?
-
Also Israel wasnt created through the UN. UN put forth a proposal that wasnt binding.
-
I support two states solution too, however as I said since the annextion keeps on going the two state solution is soon (if not already) dead.
Ohad
Jack I never claimed that you are taking sides with the Palestinians , I tried to explained to you how chasing the a one state Santa has the potential to be much much worst for everyone,
but the first issue with the one state solution is that it does not exist , I never seen a one state solution only slogans , but nothing ever (since the 40s when there was a slight chance of a bi national state ) was put on the table
Bill Pearlman
You know Jack justice is a subjective thing. I think that in a just world the Dodgers are back in Brooklyn and I’m having sex with models. Whats possible and feasible is a whole other story.
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
Its very possible that the one state solution will be the result due annexation. Dont you agree? Or will people actually accept the apartheid?
Reb Arie
Bill Pearlman – Zeh Maspiq! That’s enough! Learn to be humane.
As to the article itself. Ms Zoabi’s assertions are belied by the mere fact that she sits as an MK. Furthermore the Bet Ha’Mishpat Ha’Elyon (Supreme Court) has never once upheld a decision to ban Balad.
Bill Pearlman
I think the status quo is going to go marching along for the moment. In my opinion there are a couple of red lines that Israel cannot accept. No right of return, and no hostile military force on the west bank. The Palestinians say no to both. Nobody is going to grant citizenship to a million-2 whatever the number is Palestinians. So what do you expect to happen?
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
I can assure you that people will get more and more angry with Israel aslong as the annexation is alive, beyond the middle east. One just have to remember that western states were very supportive of Israel until it started annexing. According to you Israel hasnt done no wrong ever?
Bill Pearlman
People are always angry at the Jews. That started well before Israel. And if Israel did anything short of dissolution and the population fleeing the country your people would still be angry
Shlomo Krol
Historical Zionism was national liberation movement of Jewish people. It was just and its goal was just. It’s natural, that national liberation movements emphasize their ethnic and cultural dimension. The concept of Jewish state must be understood in this context. Now, Zionism achieved its goals. Today, in the historical homeland of the Jewish people there’s a society, a sovereign state, where Jews are majority, Hebrew is a spoken and developing language and Jewish culture is developing normally, in its natural place. In such situation, the word Zionism is devoid of any meaning, because its goals have been achieved. The last Zionists were Soviet refuseniks. When the words Zionism or Jewish state are used today, they in most cases mean something ugly: oppression of non-Jews, privileges for Jews, apartheid in the occupied Palestinian terrirtories, land theft and so on. This is why the opinions of Hanin Zouabi have merit. On the other hand, the fact, that there are still forces around, who actively and violently oppose not only the injustices of apartheid and discrimination, but the very fact and the very concept of the Jewish national self determination, add to the feeling, that the struggle is still ongoing. As Ariel Sharon somewhat demagogically mentioned in 2001: “we are still fighting the war of independence”. And this is what to some extent nourishes the concept of Jewish state and of Zionism – the sense (in my opinion exaggerated if not to say illusionary) that the national liberation has not yet fully achieved its goals. There is a serious problem here: on one side, the Palestinians are not to be expected to simply accept such injustice as being under the control of the state, which deems them second class citizens or not citizens at all, who have no rights in any sovereign state. On the other hand, the Palestinian struggle creates the sense that Zionism is still relevant and legitimate national liberation movement rather than a vague array of concepts and practices which perpetualize and deepen injustices.
I think that the way out of it is the solidarity and mutual recognition. We, Jews and Palestinians, must solidarize with the national, civil and human rights of each other because we want such rights for ourself. I think, this must be articulated unequivocally and this is the way to end the tragedy of the conflict, of violence, of oppression, of domination, of racism and apartheid. This is the way to normalcy, when such concepts as Zionism and Jewish state are no longer needed, are part of history. And this is why I don’t always agree with the confrontational rhetorics of Balad and of Hanin Zouabi: we need solidarity, not confrontation, to destroy apartheid, discrimination and Zionism together, because it would be good for all, Jews and Arabs alike.
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
Stop with your self-imposed victimization. I am not talking about jews, I am talking about the conduct of Israel as a state.
Bill Pearlman
Look, you and the rest of the people here can make all the distinctions you want about its not about the Jews its about Israel but the facts are this. The Jewish population in the diaspora is declining and aging. The vibrancy, on the whole, lies in Israel. And post holocaust Israel is the central enterprise if you will of the Jewish people. This has nothing to do with the micro outlook. Security fences, economics, whatever. The fact is that if Israel goes, so does Judaism. We’re not coming back from a destruction of the “third temple” . So, if your for one state and the right of return, then the natural outcome of that is the end of the Jewish people. And you know it.
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
Why do you smear yourself and your brothers?
But more concrete what is your solution to the conflict?
Bill Pearlman
Guess what Jack, first I don’t live In Israel so I don’t take the weight of a terrible decision. And secondly, unlike what seems like everybody else on the planet, I don’t have freaking clue. Because if there was an obvious answer that was feasible. It would have been done already.
Shlomo Krol
Bill, I don’t think that the issue of the Palestinian refugees should be used as a pretext for fear mongering, foot dragging, continuation of the colonial and apartheid policies. No pragmatic Palestinia leader is talking about the radical change of demographic realities. The dominant formula today is something like “just and agreed upon resolution of the Palestinian refugees problem, based on 194 UNR”. I think, that such formula is a good starting point. Of course it excludes from the onset the possibility to force upon Israel a radical change of its demographic composition.
Bill Pearlman
Shlomo, “just and agreed upon resolution” you can drive a truck through that one. But let me ask you this. Who is the Palestinian leader who has the power to sign an agreement and make it stick. Basically who is the pragmatist. Not being sarcastic.
Shlomo Krol
Yes, “just and agreen upon resolution” leaves space for maneuvre for both Israel and Palestinians. This is why I am saying that this issue should not be used for fear mongering – this is just an issue that has a chance to be solved.
I don’t think that we must look for a “Palestinian leader who has the power to sign an agreement and make it stick” (it is not synonimous with pragmatist by the way) or for an “Israeli leader who has the power to sign an agreement and make it stick” for that matter (you see, the Israeli Jewish and the Palestinian public both repeat the same mantra: there’s no partner). We need to try to create such a climate, which would bring about such leaders who would be able to resolve the problems. I think that the main component which is missing is not the strong leaders but the good will and the good faith on the both sides.
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
1. Israel said, PLO stop using terror then we could have peace.
2. PLO stopped using terror.
3. Peace? No.
4. Israel said, PLO recognize Israel then we could have peace.
5. PLO recognized Israel
6. Peace? No.
You get my point? There is no israeli leaders interested in peace. They stick with status quo until a greater Israel have been created and palestinians vanished from the land.
Bill Pearlman
Shlomo, I’m assuming your Israeli. And despite what people here think I don’t lecture Israelis about what they should do about all this. But I think your shooting for a some sort of nirvana that just isn’t possible. To me it comes down to two, really three things. No right of return because you already have problems with demographics in Israel. And I’m including the Haredi. No hostile military force on the west bank that controls the ridge line up there. ( you don’t have to be Stonewall Jackson to see how important that is.) And no withdrawal from the old city in Jerusalem. The Western Wall is maybe the one thing where I think the diaspora deserves a say. Because it is that important. And right now I don’t see the Arabs agreeing to any of that. Which is really a bare bones minimal Israel red line.
Mikesailor
Poor Bill P., he has been hoist on his own petard but doesn’t wish to acknowledge the fact. What exactly is wrong with a ‘state for all of its citizens’? If discrimination, brutalization and humiliation of a minority is perfectly acceptable, then: 1) why isn’t Bill living in Israel and 2) would it be acceptable for Bill to be treated in whatever country he lives, as a Palestinian or Arab Israeli is treated in his/her homeland?
Instead we are treated to a reprise of the same old whine. Israeli Jews, and possibly all Jews according to Bill, should have license because of past wrongs not suffered by him or them personally. it is all the fault of (pick one or more): the Arabs, The Goys, Self-hating Jews, non-Zionists, post-Zionists, anti-Zionists, leftists, Europeans, the world, the universe, God him/herself; the list is only limited by his fevered imagination and projection of all who are the ‘enemy’. He is mired in a fantasy wherein Jews can perform and excuse any acts against the ‘other’, but woe be unto them who would subject Jews to that same treatment. I think the term for that would be ‘bigoted racism’: the founding ideology of Israel. It is professed and applauded by all those too enamored by the fairy tales they tell themselves to see the realities and consequences engendered by their own actions. Is this thought pattern the real root of ‘antisemitism’?
Bill Pearlman
Take a xanax Mike
Kolumn9
Mikesailor, what is wrong with a state for all its citizens is that it is commonly used as code by people like Zuabi for a state with a minority Jewish population that will quickly, if not immediately lose any and all of its symbols, including the name. In other words, it is code for the pursuit of the destruction of Israel through a change in the democratic majority and a removal of all its symbols, followed by the kind of persecution of minorities the Arab world is famous for.
Were Zuabi actually calling for a state of all its citizens without calling for a drastic change in its makeup then there would be nothing wrong with it. However, she clearly isn’t and has on multiple occasions made it clear that she considers Jews to not be indigenous to the land and demanded an influx of millions of Arabs into Israel. As such people like her aren’t actually calling for a state for all its citizens, but a state for Arabs where Jews are excluded. They just happen to dress it up in clothing that the naive find more palatable.
Aaron the Fascist Troll
Wondering about this: “the Palestinians inside Israel, whom he called “`Israeli Arabs.’” What’s the objection to that term? Is it the “Israeli” part or the “Arab” part or each of them or neither separately but both together? Honest question, not a move to start some argument. I’m really curious.
Mikesailor
B.P.: Answering a simple question or series of questions is apparently beyond your intellectual capabilities. Enough said.
K-9: The influx of Jews into Palestine was an invasion of aliens. Many Jews lived in Palestine before Zionism raised its head, apparently quite peacefully. Yet arguing past history will get you absolutely nowhere. Many Jews are second and third generation and cannot return to the countries their parents or grandparents left decades ago. So, now you have a reprise of Northern Ireland where the Protestants, in nominal power over their few counties feared the Catholics would treat them as they had treated the Catholics in their midst. Yet, they made the leap into modernity accepting the Catholics as partners and the violence ended. Israel on the other hand continues brutalizing and discriminating against the indigenous Arab population using as an excuse the ‘fear’ that the Palestinians would treat the Jews as badly as the Jews have treated them. One of the problems is that the Israeli Jews feel they have a God-given right to Palestinian land and can continue the discrimination ad infinitum. Today, for instance, Haaretz reported on the new maps the Israeli military has drawn for new confiscations of Palestinian land. As to your idea of ‘code’ words, your racism is showing when you continually obfuscate what your opposition is saying. Is equal rights for all human beings or citizens of a state such an anathema? If you can’t argue that simple point, you are merely an apologist for the status quo which is untenable and will only lead to more suffering and bloodshed.
Aaron F.T.: I am using the terms which I would hope even you would understand. The largest minority of non-Jews who are continually discriminated against the overwhelming approval of both the government and the Israeli Jewish population. Those who also have no other place to go.
XYZ
Aaron the FT-
You have to learn to decode politically-correct Progressive-talk.
The term “Israeli Arab” is offensive to politically-correct Progressives. They want to be called “Palestinians who since 1948 are forced to carry Israeli identity papers”. So they are “Palestinians” just like the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. They identify with the regimes there. But there is one problem…the regime they identify with in the Palestinian territories has a constitution and the first clause of the consitution states that (1) The Palestinians are an integral part of the Arab world, and (2) The Palestinians will work for Arab unity. So, we see Palestinians ARE Arabs, but it is still forbidden to call Israeli Arabs “Arabs”.
Now, comes the second party. The same politically-correct Progressive-talk insists on calling Jews whose family origins were in the Arab Middle East “Arab Jews” or “Arabs of the Jewish religion”. Maybe 95% of these Jews reject this description but the politically-correct progressives push this line, here at 972 and other places.
So let’s summarize: Accoring to politically-correct Progressives
(1) Israeli Arabs are NOT “Arabs”, even though the Palestinian Constitution says they are, and
(2) Jews from Arab countres ARE “Arabs” even though they say they aren’t.
Got it?
Shlomo Krol
Bill, I am an Israeli and I don’t think that I’m talking about something irrational, on the contrary. Look, you are talking about the red lines of Israel. In regard of the first one, the Palestinian right of return, I already commented: this issue should not be used as a pretext for rejectionism, foot dragging, fear mongering or settlements expansion. This is the issue, which must be addressed and solved in a way which would be both just and would not change Israel so that it would be totally different country from the one existing today, and I think, that many Palestinians mean such approach when they are talking about negotiated and agreed upon solution. And, by the way, I don’t like the talks about “demographic problems” and I have no problem with the Haredi Jews. I believe in modern, inclusive and multicultural Israel.
As for the second “red line”: “No hostile military force on the west bank that controls the ridge line up there”. First of all, I think, that the current PA leaders do accept it, they declared not once, that they are ready for the state which would not have army which would threaten Israel. But look – for them, the Palestinians, the hostile force in the West Bank, and not just outside their boundaries, but inside, where they live – is what they have for three generations! It’s Israeli army and settlers. If it’s red line for us, can’t we understand, that it’s intolerable for them, too? And this is why the Palestinians reject Israeli military bases in Jordan valley as the part of security arrangements of the final status – something which Israel insists upon. So, I wouldn’t say, that the negotiations are stalled because of the Palestinian insistence on having a hostile military force in the West Bank, the opposite is closer to truth: Israel insists on maintaining military presence in the West Bank. Again, I don’t think, that this issue is cannot be solved. The good faith and good will is what we all desperately need. Now, the issue of Jerusalem: I think, that the Clinton plan was good: one city with sovereignity of Israel and Palestine over the areas of the city with the Israeli and Palestinian majority respectively and with special regime in the “holy basin”.
Yes, I am an Israeli.
palestinian
@ Aaron ,why dont they call them “Palestinian-Israelis”?
Piotr Berman
About points of Bill Pearlman (a nice contrast with many posts that were pointless):
1) No right of return because of already acute demographic problem that includes Haredi
Perhaps sex education for ALL citizens should be added to the peace treaty? And free contraceptives. Right now Israel is using more water that there is and Dead Sea is more dead every year.
2) No hostile military force on the west bank that controls the ridge line up there.
Perhaps some historically friendly military force? Contrary to Netanyahu’s interpretation of Purim story, Persians were historically very friendly with Jews, so perhaps Persians, and if not, Bangladeshis (cheap) or Ghurkas (idolaters, so that could be a little problem).
3) no withdrawal from the old city in Jerusalem. The Western Wall is maybe the one thing where I think the diaspora deserves a say.
Hm. Why the group with no vibrancy deserves a say? Perhaps diaspora could be invigorated by making a good replica of the Western Wall elsewhere?
In any case, one could promote mixed neighborhoods in Jerusalem instead of treating one group as “enemies” that have to be screwed in any which way and have a truly “indivisible city” as dual capital.
XYZ
Shlomo Krol-
You sound like the kind of person that wants peace and believes others like him want the same thing. No doubt there are many Palestinians who want a peace along the lines that you stated, but they are not in a position to do so. Why?
Because Palestinian individuals are only part of the whole Palestinian group. And the Palestinian group is only one part of the entire Arab group. And Arabs (and by this I mean Muslim Arabs) are only one part of the entire, world-wide Islamic umma (people).
This Islamic Umma has a destiny. Islam is not only a “religion” in the sense that it has a set of rules and beliefs that must be followed or else the person’s soul is endangered in the afterlife, but it has a historical-political destiny on the world stage…to be the vehicle for bringings Divine conciousness and rule to ALL of mankind. As I once heard former Jordanian Crown Prince Hassan (the brother of King Hussein and a decendent of Muhammed) say “Islam is the natural religion of mankind”. All of mankind is bound to become Muslim and to acknowledge its jurisdiction over the whole of mankind (just for information’s sake…Judaism has no such belief….in the Messianic Era the Jewish people will complete its return to its homeland in Eretz Israel but not outside it, and the rest of mankind will acknowledge G-d, but non-Jews will not become Jews if they don’t want to and they will continue to live in their own nations which will be at peace with one another).
As I stated above, in the Muslim worldview, Islam must be ultimately be politically be dominant in the world. The fact that it isn’t today is unnatural. Why is the Arab world in such a currently depressed state? The believing Muslim would say that the Muslim umma is not living up to its divine mandate. This involves both personal religious committment (fasting in Ramadan, giving the zakat for the poor, praying every dat, etc) PLUS a national imperative…that Islam should be observed, particularly in his homeland in the Middle East. However, what do we see? In Israel a dhimmi people are in control and this dhimmi people is the people whom Muhammed specifically stated had lost Divine favor. That is why Jerusalem was destroyed 2000 years ago as Muslims see it…yet now we see it is reviving in the city that had been replaced by Mecca and Medina in holiness.
This is intolerable to the Muslim umma. This is a direct challenge to their belief system. They will say that this is one of the reasons that the Arab states are in such poor condition…because their people have not corrected this unnatural state of affairs.
Thus, while Palestinian individuals such as we see here at 972 may be willing to make peace on the terms you are offering, the Palestinian leadership is acutely aware of the historical burden they are carrying in order to rectify the wrong of the creation of a Jewish state. All the more so the rest of the Arab and non-Arab Muslim world. Sadat made peace with Israel….look at what happened to him. Mubarak sort of kept the peace and look where he is today. They betrayed the Muslim umma, as they see it.
I am sure that not all Muslims see things this way, but those who do can bring powerful arguments against those who do want peace on the terms you want. Look at the election results in Egypt. A large majority for the Islamic parties. The no. 2 party, Noor-Salafists do not even have historical roots in Egypt but look how powerful their call was. I am sure a significant number of voters for the Muslim Brotherhood and Noor Parties were not even religiously observant…but the call these parties made to them struck a deep chord….for all Egyptians both religiously observant and those who arent…to return to their Muslim roots and to return to their glorious destiny. This means confronting Israel and not granting it any peace or legitimacy.
You may ask, how many Muslims really think this way? I don’t know, but I, as an Orthodox/relgious Jew who came from a non-Orthodox background in California and who got turned on to Judaism and Zionism and who later came on aliyah can find ideas like this pretty heady. Seeing the ancient vision of the Prophets in the Bible come alive in front of our eyes. Thus, I can understand a Muslim who thinks they way I described above and who would oppose peace with Israel on any terms based on the religious imperative. There are enough Muslims who do think this way who can, at the critical moment, persuade those who are not generally inclined this way to make the mental switch and turn to the glorious, maximalist Islamic destiny its true believers promise.
directrob
“You may ask, how many Muslims really think this way? I don’t know, but I, as an Orthodox/relgious Jew who came from a non-Orthodox background in California and who got turned on to Judaism and Zionism and who later came on aliyah can find ideas like this pretty heady”
.
XYZ, so it is just a theory without evidence. Maybe you should start to think about people more as individuals and less as part of a religious group.
Bill Pearlman
Look, Berman, I know you think Judaism is a fraud and a joke but not everyone feels that way. Other wise you wouldn’t have made a crack about the western wall. If I said Islam is joke. And Mohammad going to heaven on a horse sounds like a bad LSD trip I’d probably get banned.
Actually if it ever comes down to it Gurkha’s has peacekeepers would actually be a good idea. But again, No Arab leader as actually come up with a proposal. There has NEVER been a Palestinian proposal for an “end of the conflict” resolution.
Jack
Bill Pearlman,
Not sure why you are here arguing since every post reject what other people here have written to you. You have decided what to think and wont change.
Arab League (all arab states) have put forth the Arab League peace offer, only to be rejected by Israel. What offer based on 1967 borders have Israel ever offered?
XYZ
Directrob-
What do you think all these radical Islamic preachers say in their harangues ? What do you think the fellow Awlaki taught and what made President Obama come to the conclusion taht he had to be liquidated?
What about the terrorist in Toulouse? What did he believe? Where did he get it from? A Muslim woman in Toulouse said he would get young Muslims (including her son) to come to his house to hear these harangues and watch beheadings.
Now, I am well aware that most Muslims are not radical like that. Many may believe that this Islamic domination will come peacefully, without organized effort on their part and that the rest of us will accept it on our own. Others may say that Israel will dissolve itself as long as pressure (diplomatic, terrorist, military) is applied over a long period of time..i.e. a war of attrition). Some may think it will take 10 years, some may say 100 years (the time scale it took to push the Crusaders back). There is no agreement, but the extremists tell the moderates that their hesitancy is harming the cause.
Also, your admonition that I should think of people of individuals may be very nice, but in the Middle East, people are judged by what group (clan, religion, place of origin, etc) they belong to. I reported here the article by Amira Hass in Ha’aretz where she asked a Gazan why he supported indiscriminate rocket fire into Israel when it only harms their cause. She reported him as saying he didn’t care, he just wanted to kill Israelis. Maybe you should tell HIM to judge people as individuals. Maybe you should have told the Toulouse terrorist. I am sorry to be the one to break it to you but people don’t necessarily thing they way you want them to.
XYZ
Correction to last line of previous comment-
“I am sorry to be the one to break it to you but people don’t necessarily THINK they way you want them to.”.
That is why the Israeli Left has collapsed..they sold so many falsehoods that “the Palestinians are just like us and want the same things as us and so since we are reasonable, they will be the same and will accept an agreement with us” even though Arafat and the other leaders kept saying that wasn’t true.
XYZ
Jack-
The Palestinians who were forced out or fled in 1948 were NOT “ethnically cleansed”. They and their leaders started a war with Israel in order to prevent implementation of the UN Partition Plan and announced a Jihad in which the Jewish yishuv would be destroyed in a “massacre like that of the Mongols or Crusades” (Azzam Pasha’s declaration).
Made the Jews realize this was a war of no choice-life or death.
The phony “Arab peace plan” has never been really proposed to Israel, it is merely a declaration that was made after 9/11 in order to reduce pressure on the Saudis who were blamed for creating the atmosphere that led to the attacks. The Arabs have never proposed a face-to-face meeting or any sort of gestures to indicate that they want peaceful relations with Israel. Obama repeatedly pressed them to make such a gesture but they refused. It is only a public relations ploy. Don’t forget Olmert conducted negotiations with Abbas over a couple of years and the Arabs did NOTHING to press their supposed plan.
It also demands full “right of return” so it is obviously a non-started. The
Jack
XYZ,
The palestinians were cleansed from their land in 1947-1948 by the terrorist groups of Hagannah, Irgun, Lehi and similar. When they were cleansed from their area they were denied entry to their homes, a violation of international law and also prove the intent of the zionists groups – to cleanse the area from as much palestinians as possible.
-
UN put forth a partition plan. This plan was not binding, only a proposal. The palestinians rejected it and so did the arab states, however the zionists refused their rejection and then the cleansing was started in 1947. The arab states entered the war first 1948 as a response to this.
-
The arab peace offer is an offer grounded not only in international law (it goes beyond it by offering peace, trade with Israel with the whole of the arab world). The initial saudi plan was offered in 1980s. In fact Olmert as you brought up thought the offer was a “revolutionary change”.
-
Olmerts so called peace plan offered nothing on the major questions: Right to return, Jerusalem, Palestinian independent state, settlements.
Aaron the Fascist Troll
Still on the nomenclature here. From the responses, it seems that the problem is with “ARAB Israelis,” rather than with “Arab ISRAELIS” or “Arab-Israelis.” Correct?
*
Regarding the question, “Why don’t they call them Palestinian-Israelis?”, how should I know? Who’s “they”? Some Arab leaders outside of Israel/Palestine have called them “the Arabs of 1948.” “Arabs,” not “Palestinians.” Is that bad, too? The reason *I* don’t call them Palestinian Israelis is that it’s an uncommon term that would probably confuse people. But I’ve got no ideological problem with it.
Jack
XYZ,
“I reported here the article by Amira Hass in Ha’aretz where she asked a Gazan why he supported indiscriminate rocket fire into Israel when it only harms their cause. She reported him as saying he didn’t care, he just wanted to kill Israelis. Maybe you should tell HIM to judge people as individuals. ”
-
I dont think resistance harm them in the long run. However whats the reason by Israel when they fire indiscriminate into Gaza?
Cortez
“The Palestinians who were forced out or fled in 1948 were NOT “ethnically cleansed”. They and their leaders started a war with Israel in order to prevent implementation of the UN Partition Plan and announced a Jihad in which the Jewish yishuv would be destroyed in a “massacre like that of the Mongols or Crusades” (Azzam Pasha’s declaration).”
.
if they weren’t cleansed then why weren’t they permitted to return to their homes? Why didn’t Israel call for their return? Why was an Eastern European Jewish State built in the Middle East instead of Arab Jewish state? Why didn’t the state work to be inclusive of the Arab people from the beginning? Its clear Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their lands…although, as we see many of them stuck around.