The first event was a speaker panel from Combatants for Peace, an organization of Israelis and Palestinians who used to be fighters in the intifada/conflict but now work on the peace movement. The Israelis are a lot of IDFers who refuse to serve in the West Bank. Essentially their goal is to end the occupation with the idea that if the occupation ends, violence will stop. I’m still processing my opinions on these issues, but I found their stories fascinating. The courage of these men was really inspiring. The Israeli had to defy his orders on moral grounds, committing an act of civil disobedience essentially, when he refused orders to serve in the West Bank. He talked about the conflict between being an Israeli, doing duty for your country, and serving in the impressive force that the IDF is on the one hand, and the moral opposition he feels to the occupation on the other. The Palestinian talked about the hardships his family has encountered: the tragic killing of his brother by an IDF gunshot while they were driving down the street, for example. Yet despite his tragic situation, he has turned away from violence and committed himself to working with the very people who murdered his brother. Needless to say, their stories were inspiring and I’m really glad I got a chance to hear them speak. There were some pretty obnoxious American-Israelis in the audience who were pretty belligerent with their questions, and just made things awkward for the rest of us, but there were also some really interesting questions asked that got to the heart of a lot of issues. The two men on the panel advocate a two-state solution which is something I've been thinking a lot more about lately, so it was interesting to hear their perspectives.
The second event was even more thought provoking and mind bloggling: a tour called “What is a Settlement?”. We (students from HebrewU, Tel Aviv, various Yeshivas, and a few community members) drove into the West Bank to Gush Etzion, which is a large block of settlements southwest of Bethlehem. There we spoke with two residents of the settlement. They told us why they live their, the history of the settlement, why they feel so attached to that particular piece of land, and basically gave a spiel that made some sense out of the complicated question of who and what the settlements and settlers are that we read about in the papers all the time. Afterwards we drove through the area, looking at some of the settlements, the lay of the land, the path of the “separation wall”, and how Palestinian villages and Jewish settlements differ so starkly. During that time we had a woman from PeaceNow, who is an expert on settlements, present a very different perspective on the issue—one that was much less sympathetic to the settlers.
Now I know that absolutely nothing about the larger Arab-Israeli conflict is black and white, but I went into this tour feeling like the settlements issue was at least as clear cut as any related issue can be, with the opinion that the settlements are illegal, settlers have no business being there, and any settler who says differently is just being selfish and doesn’t have the right to be on that land. I pretty much felt they were just complicating matters for everyone and asking for the conflict their presence creates. Now, that opinion has been thrown into a lot more question. After listening to the two Gush Etzion men, I think I understand a lot more where they’re coming from. For instance, this particular settlement has been around since before 1948. These men’s families have lived on this land for over 75 years and it is their home—they want to live where their ancestors lived and that is why they refuse to leave. They have a close relationship with the neighboring Palestinian villages (supposedly), are enthusiastic about the peace process, condemn the extremists who make a bad name for the settlers, and are really just normal guys who want to live their lives and raise their families on the land they’ve always lived on. In some ways, you can’t argue with that. They have done nothing wrong.
But then you think about the fact that there are probably Palestinians who feel the exact same way about the land there too. This land is technically outside the “green line”, so it’s in Palestinian territory, but it’s recognized by Israel and an international “consensus” that it will remain part of Israel forever. The security wall is built specifically to include this community, veering away from the demarcated green line to do so. So if there’s a two state solution and Gush Etzion is allowed to remain part of Israel, how do you tell the settlers in settlements 20 km away that they aren’t allowed to be part of Israel? Where is the line drawn (literally)? And what about the Palestinians living in neighboring communities? They’re swept in with the Israelis with no one considering their rights, their desires, and their emotional, familial ties to the exact same property. Furthermore, Gush Etzion is really as uncontroversial a settlement as you can get. Not all settlements are like this. So is the way to decide which settlements are legitimate and which aren’t to look at when and how they were founded? It seems awfully subjective, but maybe that’s the way to go.
The Gush Etzion guys talked about how they put the love of this land before their lives because technically it’s dangerous living there. But when asked if they would be willing to live there with the same life, same rights, Israeli citizenship, etc but within a Palestinian state, they said they would not be brave enough to do so. I wonder if that fear springs from a fear of how an Israeli minority would be treated in a Palestinian state? They’re probably judging such conditions based on how Palestinians are treated in Israel. Maybe if Palestinians in Israel had full equality (it’s really hard for a lot of them to get citizenship, there’s mega profiling when it comes to check points, difficulty getting permits to cross Israel/territory borders, etc), the Jewish minority in a new Palestine wouldn’t worry. I think it comes down to the question: what are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of peace? I understand that this is their home, this is the only thing they know, this is the place they love and the place in which they dream of raising children and grandchildren. But if staying there means continued strife, and if there’s even a chance that moving away will bring the region a step closer to the peace that’s so desperately needed, I think it’s just stubborn not to. Obviously I don’t live there, it’s not my home, and it’s entirely possible that if I were in their shoes I would feel exactly the same way. So I’m not saying every Israeli in Palestinian territory needs to move right now. But, I do think it’s something that needs to be more seriously discussed and considered. And if they’re not willing to leave, they need to be willing to live under Palestinian control. Because I don’t see how the peace process can progress in any other way.
Honestly, I don’t know what it feels like to live there. I don’t know what the security threat really is, but what I do know is that the situation is much more complicated than I thought. I definitely got a lot of questions cleared up and understand the situation a lot better after the tour today, but I also came away from it was a million more questions. I’m still processing everything I heard and saw today and working on coherently expressing what I think about it all, but for now I have to say that it’s all even more tangled that I anticipated. But I love being here to really see it all first hand.
No comments:
Post a Comment