Fighting for survival, not destruction of Israel

"When understanding is demented, destruction is near." -- Sanskrit proverb

I was preparing an article to respond to the current violence in Gaza when I realized that recent history is repeating itself. Thus, I looked at previous articles and decided to simply update an article I wrote in 2012 about that year's Israeli attack on Gaza. It seems to me that "peace"--to some--means a hope that the Palestinians will just disappear and stop seeking their rights protected under international law. Meanwhile, Palestinians are fighting for their survival, not for the destruction of Israel.

The process of peacemaking is a process that begins first with establishing healthy boundaries that protect both sides from each other, and then restoration and reconciliation takes place to heal wounds and promote forgiveness and healing.

It is a process that humanizes the oppressed in the eyes of the oppressors, who often live in a bubble and have no empathy for those other than their "own." It also teaches the oppressed the meaning and value of grace.

Peacemaking embedded in forgiveness is not a process that compels the victims to deny their reality, identity, and their needs. Peacemaking with forgiveness is a process that requires validation, acknowledgement of the abuse, and nurtures the victim to let go as a choice. For peace to begin to take root between Israelis and Palestinians, the facts and narrative of the Other, the price paid by Palestinians must be told.

Let me respond to the questions floating in cyberspace.

Israel's Right to Exist?

Before the creation of Israel, many Zionists' plan was to ethnically cleanse the land of its Arab natives. In 1895, Theodore Herzl, Zionism's founder, wrote in his diary:

When Israel was created, immediately following the passage of the Partition Plan in November 1947, the Jewish forces, Haganah, and the terrorists groups (Stern Gang and Irgun) launched their infamous "Plan D," aimed at capturing as much territory as possible inside the proposed Palestinian state. In the book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, Israeli historian Ilan Pappe writes:

Fast forward to 1967, the West Bank and Gaza Strip were occupied by Israel. What does occupation mean to Palestinians?

See: Occupation 101

The Occupation opened more doors for a continued "ethnic cleansing" of Palestinians. This was done mainly with the theft of Arab land, Arab-only home demolitions to build Jewish-only settlements, and connect them to Israel proper (pre-1967 borders) with Jewish-only bypass roads. All of this is done in a culture which recognizes Jews with rights, while Arabs with no rights before the law. Israel has no constitution that allows Arabs to challenge the system to fight for their rights. Rather, it has basic laws that elevate Jews above non-Jews. Hence, settlers are armed and protected by soldiers and Arabs are left unprotected.

Israel's right to exist cannot come through massacres, deadly force, and the humiliation of Arab residents. It cannot come through starving 1.7 million Gazans unless they accept submission to Israel. It cannot come through carpet-bombings of civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. It cannot come through the expulsion of Arabs from their land, Arab-only home demolition, and construction of illegal Jewish-only settlements. It cannot come through violating International Law. It cannot come through allowing Israel the right to act without any sense of boundaries or accountability to any rule of law. Israel must earn its way to legitimacy and make amends for the history of terror and violence in the region as well as the numerous massacres and war crimes upon which it was built.

SEE: Biased myths confuse Arab/Israeli partition

Jews and Arabs were fighting for centuries?

SEE The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict

Peace Process or Piece Process?

See Peace Process that produced violence

In the 2012 Israeli attack on Gaza, Juan Cole, a political analyst, wrote the following:

See: Top Ten Myths about Israeli Attack on Gaza

Israel unilaterally withdrew completely from Gaza?

Some will argue that Israel left Gaza. However, Avi Shlaim, a professor of international relations at the University of Oxford argued here:

See: Israel's starvation diet formula in Gaza and the expansion of the 'Dahiya doctrine'

What if we were under attack?

Juan Cole, answered this best in his blog, Stop Saying 'If X fired Rockets at U.S.': It's Racist, & Assumes We're Colonial:

Human Shields?

As mentioned in the last blog, Mourning and a call for justice, when Palestinian children or civilians are killed, Israel blames Palestinians for their death. In every massacre or attack, Israel responds to the death of civilians by accusing Palestinians of using them as human shields. Commenting on the 2012 attack on Gaza, Stephen Zunes, a political analyst, posted this on his Facebook:

Retaliation or indiscriminate killing?

With every surge of Palestinian violence, Israel has struck with an evident lack of mercy. In the past, we heard "put the fear of death into the Arabs," "mow them down," and Israeli Deputy Defense Minister, Matan Vilnai, threatening Palestinians with a "shoah," which means a holocaust.

As mentioned earlier, Israeli defiance of international laws still continues. On April 18, 1996, less than three years after the famous handshake between Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, Israel bombed a U.N. shelter in Qana, Lebanon, killing over 100 civilians. Israel denied that it knew about the civilians and labeled a U.N. report, which found conclusive evidence that Israel had intentionally killed the civilians in the U.N. base shelter, as "anti-Jewish."

In April of 2002, Israel entered Jenin in a military operation leading to 52 Palestinian deaths. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch charged that Israeli Defense Forces personnel in Jenin had committed war crimes. The April 2002 United Nations visiting mission on Human Rights was refused entry into Israel. A UN fact-finding mission suffered the same fate due to the following conditions set by Israel:

That the UN agrees not to prosecute Israeli soldiers for any violations of international law that might be uncovered during by the mission. And that the mission limits its scope exclusively to events in Jenin.

In 2012, Israeli transport minister, Israel Katz, recommended forcing the Gazan population into Egypt and cutting off their water and electricity.

See: Inciting war crimes: Israel minister says force Gaza population into Egypt, cut off water, electricity

Self-Defense?

Noam Chomsky, professor of linguistics at MIT, responded to this classic argument best:

Security?

See: Israel to counter Palestinian attempt at UN

"If the Palestinians go to the UN General Assembly with a new unilateral initiative, they must know they will be subject to severe measures by Israel and the United States," the station quoted Lieberman as saying on October 24.

Where is the Palestinian Gandhi?

In an interview with Norm Finkelstein, a political analyst and author of many books on the situation, I asked him the following question:

Wazwaz: Quite a few people assume that peacemaking means that you speak and act like Barney the purple dinosaur and they quote Gandhi and Martin Luther King selectively. In fact, both men were considered terrorists in their lifetime. MLK was very vehement against the war in Vietnam and very critical of American foreign policy. You recently explained that Gandhi also did not see nonviolence as allowing yourself to be raped and doing nothing. Can you explain nonviolence and respond to the call for the Palestinian Gandhi?

Finkelstein: Gandhi's opinions on nonviolence are complex and not always consistent. But it should be clear that Gandhi ranked courage and bravery as high as nonviolence, and he repeatedly said that if you don't have the courage and bravery to resist the oppressor nonviolently then you should use violence. He repeatedly denounced those who used nonviolence as a cover for their fear and cowardice.

It's true that some Arabs have expressed unjust anti-Semitic feelings. Similar sentiments were expressed by Jews toward Arabs. However, this conflict is not about hatred of Jews or hatred of Arabs, but an illegal military occupation that is against international law. The anti-Jewish and anti-Arab feelings are byproducts of the conflict, not the root cause of it.

This conflict is not a Jew vs. Arab conflict. It is not Judaism vs. Islam conflict. Israel remains in violation of abundant UN resolutions. There are quite a few Jews, some quoted in this blog, who came out and spoke against the Occupation. Some saw the striking similarity between what they suffered in the holocaust and what they are seeing in the lives of Palestinians.

Hajo Meyer is the author of The End of Judaism: An Ethical Tradition Betrayed. In this Huffington Post article, he writes of the similarities between his experiences in Germany and what he saw of the suffering of Palestinians. Here are his words:

See: An Ethical Tradition Betrayed

Until we recognize the Palestinians as a people with rights protected under international law, the conflict will continue and the map of Palestine will continue to shrink. Calling for restraint while financing an illegal military occupation against international law and protecting the occupier from accountability for violations of international law will not produce peace or security for anyone, but violence and insecurity for all.

Electronic Intifada

Juan Cole

American Muslims for Palestine