| Home | Arts | Celebrities | Chat | Classifieds | Comments | Communities | Contacts | Customs | Délirium | e-Souks | | |
| Food | Harissatheque | History | JRencontre | Links | Lottery | Memories | Music | Medias | Objective | | |
| Photo-Gallery | Portal | Registration | Search | Religion | Telecom | Travel | | |
|
THE EXPLOSION
I thought you might find this detailed account of what is happening in Israel informative
and useful. And I'd be interested in your thoughts on how we ought to respond.
Some people are suggesting a special Yizkor ceremony at Yom Kippur services for the dead
Palestinians and Israelis. Others are talking about vigils calling for a shared
Jerusalem.You can see my reactions by going to www.Beliefnet.com
or www.MSNBC.com (under the category
"opinion"). I'd be interested in your thoughts.
Shanah tovah u'me'tukah.
Rabbi Michael Lerner
Editor, TIKKUN Magazine RabbiLerner@tikkun.org
THE EXPLOSION --A message from Israeli Peace Activists Adam Keller & Beate Zilversmidt
Tel-Aviv, October 3
We knew that it would come; in a way we saw it coming, and still - it took us by surprise.
On the first Friday when we heard of "rioting" on Temple Mount - the morning
after Sharon had paid a "visit" to the Al Aqsa Mosq - we still thought that this
was a one day event, an outburst at an occasional offense, and maybe also a reminder like
there had been before as to what the explosion would be like if the peace talks would come
to naught. Gradually we start to realize that the big explosion is happening here and now.
From talking to Palestinian friends it seems it also surprised them. Nobody had really
expected that there would be such an overreaction by the police, whose only response to
what started with stone throwing was shooting to kill.
On Saturday there were riots all over the Palestinian territories, which was the first day
of Rosh Hashana (holiday marking the begining of the Jewish new year). Activists of Gush
Shalom and Committee Against House Demolitions started calling each other, mobilizing
within a few hours via phone and email a tiny vigil - including of course Uri Avnery - at
the Prime Minister's residence in Jerusalem, with as its most remarkable event: a
religious bypasser, supporter of the Shas Party, complaining "why did Sharon have to
do it the day before Rosh Hashana. Now I can't go pray at the Wailing Wall."
On Sunday, Oct. 1, at 8.00 o'clock - after public transportation restarted at the end of
the two-day Holiday, and after another day of violence and bloodshed - and the spreading
of the terrible pictures of the killing of a so obviously innocent child. On the pavement
in front of Dizengoff Centre, Tel-Aviv main shopping mall, as central a place as can be
found to address the metropolitan public, we arrive, some forty peace activists. We know
most faces, though some have not been seen for years. Different groups are represented:
Gush Shalom, Committee Against House Demolitions, Hadash, Women for Political Prisoners,
Nuclear Whitleblowers... in fact, many participants have overlapping organizational
affiliations. Some have brought signs with them. Others take up marking pens and improvise
their own slogans, sitting down on the sidewalk. Soon, two ragged lines take up position,
holding both sides of the intersection. Sign after sign is displayed to the bypassers and
the motorists halted at the traffic light:
"Stop shooting!" - "Down with the Occupation" - "Stop the murder
of demonstrators!" - "We have no children for unnecessary wars!" -
"Get out of the Territories - Now!" - "Killing Palestinians is not the way
to peace" - "Hands off Temple Mount" - "Sharon sets the fire, Barak
kills" - "Enough blood has been shed" - "Yes to the 1967 borders"
- "29 dead Palestinians on Rosh Hashana - Happy New Year!". We have come with
some trepidation to this site. During the Intifada, on days similar to this one, peace
demonstrators have more than once been violently assaulted on this very spot. But this
evening there is nothing of the kind. There are, in fact, astonishingly few reactions of
any kind. Most bypassers just glance at the signs and continue on their way. How are we to
interepret this indifference? As lack of support for what the army and police are doing?
As lack of moral concern? Probably a bit of both - and what does that say about Israeli
society at the start of the Third Millenium?
A police patrol car stops by, then another one. A mild-mannered officer approaches the
line. -"Who is your leader?" -"We have no leader". -"Who is
responsible for this demonstration?" -"We all are". -"Who organized
it?"
-"The Internet". He scratches his head. For a moment he seems about to arrest
us, or at least some. Then he goes back to the patrol car. Half an hour later, he comes
again, accompanied by a female colleague. "Listen, you guys! Do you know that the
whole of Jaffa has burst out in violence?
More than half our force is over there, and here you are tying up two patrol cars. Can you
not end this, so that we can go to reinforce our fellows over there?" We find it
difficult not to laugh. Just before the officer came over we had held a quick consultation
and decided to pack up the signs and go to Jaffa so as to stand in the way of the police
which had reportedly started shooting the (not so innocuous) "rubber bullets".
Could the outbreak of spontaneous anger of Arabs in one of the most miserable slums in
Israel be combined with the more measured protest of middle-class leftist Jews? But when
we pile into taxis and private cars and arrive in the Ajami Quarter of Jaffa - a short
distance, yet worlds away, from downtown Tel-Aviv - we find Yeffet Street, the main
throughfare of Arab Jaffa, completely empty: pavements strewn with stones, many smashed
windows, some scorched paches on the pavement, no demonstrators.
At home on a later hour, we hear - among all the dispatches from further away - a report
of "a new outbreak in Jaffa, ending the shaky ceasefire agreed between the police and
the Jaffa Arab leadership". Of our own action, not a word. On such a day, editors do
not seem to consider a demonstration without violence to be news.
Today (Monday) we are more than a hundred, outside the Defence Ministry. From the outside
there is not much to see of the nerve centre of all that is going on in the Territories.
But as soon as we take up positions on the parking lot opposite the main gate, an armed
sodier in full battle gear crosses the street in between and approaches us, with a
suspicious look on his face, talking quickly into a small communications device. A quite
unusual sight. We demonstrate here quite often, and in general the only soldiers you
encounter are unarmed office staff going out to grab a quick lunch.
Again, as yesterday, there responses are surprisingly mild. Not many pass here on foot,
but the traffic on the narrow Kaplan Street is heavy and congested. Civilian and military
drivers pass slowly and get a full sight of our ranked slogans, especially of the giant
banners prepared by Gush Shalom and Hadash; they could hear the full-throated chanting
"Peace - Yes! Occupation - No!" and "How many children did you kill
today?". Yet the amount of heckling, the number of reactions of any kind, seems no
greater than in vigils held here on normal days. At the very end, just as we are about to
pack up, a lone TV crew at last appears. We discover,
however, that it is of the Japanese Television. For the mainstream Israeli media, our
protest is still non-existent.
A phone call from Jerusalem: some 170 people, mostly youths, had turned up for the
simultaneous demo outside the Prime Minister's residence. That event had a quite
complicated history. It was originally called by Peace Now; this movement seems, however,
in crisis - many of its leaders shying away from any criticism of Barak, the Labour Prime
Minister which practically all of us supported in last year's elections. The Peace Now
manifesto published today in Ha'aretz apportioned blame for the violent outbreak between
Sharon and the Palestinians, effectively clearing Barak of share. A few hours before it
was to take place, Peace Now called off the action, apprehensive lest "radicals"
like ourselves would appear with their own slogans and turn the protest in
"unwanted" directions, Still, a dissident faction, mainly from the more militant
youths, decided to hold the demonstration anyway, though not under the Peace Now name -
and did it quite well, with help from Meretz youths as well as the Jerusalem activists of
Hadash, the Bat Shalom women and Gush Shalom.
Another phone call - from Lili Traubman, Bat Shalom activist at Kibbutz Meggido in the
north. They had their own women's vigil - right there, very near the storm center of the
riots inside Israel. The Arab women who planned to join could not arrive - roads blocked
by police - but expressed support on the phone and told of shootings and police brutality
at their doorstep. Ten Bat Shalom women stood at the highway, with signs reading
"Peace will win" and "Jewish-Arab parnership". They did get many
reactions - no indifference at that part of the country. Some positive reactions, many
hostile. In a sad harmony, some Jews and some Arabs had the same reaction: "Peace?
What peace? There can never be peace with THEM!"
And so, it is late evening - another evening after a long day of escalation and violence
and bloodshed which we could not stop. And how many hale young people, living and
breathing at this very moment, will be in their graves by tomorrow night?
***
How did we come to be in this miserable situation - two months after the high hopes of
Camp David, less than a week after Barak and Arafat met for what was described as a
"highly cordial meeting" in the living room of the Israeli PM's private home?
Obviously, the fuse was lit by the notorious Ariel Sharon, leader of the opposition Likud
Party, in a calculated provocation - designed, at least in part, to bolster his position
in the right-wing against the intended comeback of former PM Netanyahu. There was no need
of the accumulated wisdom of the US State Department pundits to guess what would result
from the trumpeted "visit" of a man whose entire military and political career
consisted of fighting Palestinians and killing them. A visit to the sensitive Temple
Mount/Haram A-Sharif Compound, made even more sensitive since the failure of Camp David.
(To add insult to injury, it took place precisely on the anniversary of the 1982 massacre
at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut, a massacre carried out by the armed
militias which Sharon as Defence Minister had let into these camps.)
But it is far too easy to put the entire blame on Sharon - as the Americans and some
Israelis do. The conflagration would not have started, if not for the decision of Prime
Minister Barak to let Sharon trample into this sensitive spot, exactly at the moment when
an a web of delicate international diplomatic formulas was being woven to find a
mutually-acceptable arrangement for the holy place's future. In fact Barak - and the PM's
second in command, Prof. Shlomo Ben-Ami, the prominent "dove" who holds a unique
combination of the Foreign Affairs and Police portfolios - did more than let Sharon into
the Mount. They provided the Likud leader with an escort of more than a thousand police
and semi-military "Border Guards", effectively reconquering Temple Mount
(actually, it was a far bigger Israeli force than that which originally conquered the
place in 1967). Add to this the well- known fact that Israeli police in general, and its
"Border Guards" in particular, tend to regard Arabs as dangerous enemies - and
the result was inevitable.
Even that does not fully explain the extent and fast spread of the conflagration: forty
Palestinians and four Israeli soldiers dead within a single weekend, with the number
steadily rising by the hour; hundreds of wounded, many of them maimed for life; widespread
riots all over the Palestinian Territories, often escalating into full-scale battles
involving not only handguns but also anti-tank misslies, machine guns and helicopter
gunships; the angry outburst spilling over to the Arab citizens of Israel itself, with
large riots at practically all Arab population centers and the blocking of main highways.
By this evening, at least seven Arab citizens of Israel have been shot to death by
"their" police force... Such conflagrations do not result from a single
provocation, gross and insulting as it may be. There had been quite a lot of fuel building
up, mounting anger and frustration among the Palestinians. The normal routine of
occupation, which rarely gets into the media: another row of olive trees uprooted by order
of the Israeli miltary governor; another settlement extending itself over a parcel of land
which a Palestinian family had cultivated for generations; another rough search by Israeli
soldiers at a roadblock; another late-night raid on a Palestinian home by Israeli
"special units" - all made the more unenduarable when peace negotiations are
supposed to be going on with the declared aim of putting a definite end to the conflict,
and when Barak has managed to convince much of international opinion that
"Palestinian intransigence" is to blame...
At Camp David, and ever since its failure, Barak has striven to block off the
Palestinians' option of declaring independence unilaterally; using the particular
conditions of the US elections year, Barak got the administration and Congress to take an
openly biased position, condemning "a unilateral Palestinian step" while turning
a blind eye to the ongoing settlement extention and other unilateral Israeli steps; also
the United States' European and Japanese allies effectively withdrew their pledge to
recognize the independence of Palestine. Barak had been striving to dictate rather then
negotiate, repeatedly proclaiming that "the ball is in Arafat's court" and
demanding that the Palestinians accept terms that - while more generous, on some issues,
than offered by previous Israeli PM's - still fall short of the minimal Palestinian
aspirations, especially with regard to Jerusalem and the Palestinian refugees. Altogether,
there was very much reason for all Palestinians - grassroots and leadership, Arafat's
followers as well as those of the opposition factions - to feel frustrated and
dissatisfied; Sharon's provoaction united them as nothing else could have.
Israel's Arab citizens had their own load of long-standing grieveances - decades-long
discrimination in all spheres of life; an unemloyment rate double or more that in the
Jewish sector; a government bureaucracy which treats them not much better than their
brethern under occupation. And just recently, they have been stirred into anger by a
series of inflammatory racist remarks uttered by Alik Ron, commander of the Gallilee
Police. It might be more than a coincidence that Ron is rumored to be seeking a political
career that he is known to have recently held a series of meetings with Sharon...
"The New Intifada", as Palestinians now call it, has changed the focus of public
opinion, both in Israel and internatioanally. From the debate on diplomatic formulas it
returned to the harsh reality on the ground - the reality of occupation, once again
flooding the international TV screens. Particularly poignant episodes were seen in living
rooms across the globe, such as the 12-year old boy Muhammad Al-Dura - caught with his
father in a cross-fire outside Gaza City, desperately seeking shelter behind a small
barrrel, and shot to death by the relentless fire of Israeli soldiers. (The soldiers claim
they did not know it was a child.)
For Israelis, a public debate was opened (or rather, reopened) by the death of two
soldiers in defence of settlement enclaves, inhabited by religious- nationalist fanatics
and located in the midst of Palestinian territory. "He sacrificed himself for
Netzarim, for this settlement which is perhaps not at all necesasary" said on TV the
cousin of David Biri, the soldier killed in a Palestinian ambush while on settler convoy
duty. This kind of sentiment could, in time, develop into a mass movement which may sway
government policies - as happened with regard to Lebanon - but it would take quite a bit
of time and far too much bloodshed.
Is there still a chance of a more immediate solution, of a revival and successful
conclusion of the negotiations which seemed moribund even before the present outbreak?
Paradoxical and cynical as it may seem, earlier episodes in our region's history have
shown violent outbreaks and confrontations serving as a catalyst to deadlocked diplomatic
processes. The "Tunnel War", as the armed confrontations of September 1996 came
to be known, bore much similarity to the present outbreak, both having an Israeli
provocation around Temple Mount starting the immediate conflagration throughout the
Palestinian territories - and in 1996 it ended with Netanyahu signing an agreement with
Arafat and agreeing to withdraw from Hebron (most of Hebron, anyway). Earlier, it was the
Yom Kippur war which broke a logjam in Israeli-Egyptian relations and eventually led to
peace between the two countries and Israel's withdrawal from the whole of Sinai. But on
more than one occasion, conflicts and violent confrontations have also been known to
spiral uncontrolled, beyond what anybody planned or intended...
With all the carnage, both sides so far avoided anything irrevocable; the Israeli tanks
placed around Palestinian cities have not been sent in - not even to relieve the
sorely-pressed garrison at Joseph's Tomb, in the heart of Palestinian Nablus; and though
Hamas fighters are reportedly taking active part in the fighting, there have been so far
none of the spectacular terrorist attacks which can rouse the people of Israel's main
population centers to fear and anger. Clearly, room is still left for renewed
negotiations. Indeed the basic maxim of recent Israeli politics - that an agreement with
the Palestinians is vital to Barak's political survival - is, if anything, reinforced by
recent events. And the alternative ploy occasionally mooted by Barak aides - getting
Sharon into a "National Unity Government" - has just become far more
illegitimate, inside and outside Israel.
It is a tragic feature of what is going on now that at Camp David, Barak in principle
agreed to give up many of the positions which are at present being ferociously fought over
(for example, the settlement enclaves in the Gaza Strip). He agreed to give them up - but
only at a stiff price of Palestinian retrocessions, some of them very unpalatable and
others completely unacceptable to the Palestinian side. Will he now soften these
positions, at least to some degree? Having gone already so far at Camp David, can he not
simply get out of the occupied territories?
One can only hope and do what can be done, to protest and pressure. At the initiative of
Gush Shalom, a venerable peace sticker, first published in 1982 with the slogan
"Bring the Soldiers Back from Lebanon" and subsequently published again and
again, was given a new lease of life. Now bearing the caption "Bring Them Back from
the Territories", it should soon become a frequent sight in the streets of Tel-Aviv.
Adam Keller
Beate Zilversmidt
| Home | Arts | Celebrities | Chat | Classifieds | Comments | Communities | Contacts | Customs | Délirium | e-Souks | |
| Food | Harissatheque | History | JRencontre | Links | Lottery | Memories | Music | Medias | Objective | |
| Photo-Gallery | Portal | Registration | Search | Religion | Telecom | Travel | |
Pour toutes informations, critiques et commentaires, envoyez un émail a : jhalfon@mediaone.net