| Day 13 continued... |
| The national movement towards freedom and equality faltered in the �80�s, bringing about the emergence of political Islam. Into the vacuum stepped groups like Hamas. Christians for the first time faced the dilemma of wanting for nationalistic purposes to be attached to a movement that discriminated against them on religious grounds. The growth of political Islam polarized Christian and Muslim Arabs; now, our host tells us, there is not a crisis, but there is some discomfort between the two groups. The danger, of course, is that Christians are becoming more and more marginalized in an already marginalized Palestinian society. Only after the inifadah, we are told, did dialogue begin between Israelis and Palestinians. This town was on the forefront of both the intifadah and the dialogues, which were started in 1988, during the worst days of the crisis. They didn�t particularly want to stop fighting, our host explains, but they did want to start talking. As a result, they fought during the day and talked at night. Our lecturer himself was arrested, he explained, by an Israeli who attended a dialogue group he had established. The Israeli, our host related, did apologize for arresting him. In the face of forced emigration, they have tried surreptitiously to get Palestinians to return as Americans, Germans, and other foreign nationals, so that Israel cannot force them to leave. Palestinians, we are told, have no control over their outlets or inlets, no control over immigration or goods. According to our host, �The peace process has no direct relation to the lives of the people here�it is abstract.� He explains that in the peace process they are talking now only of interim arrangements�not Jerusalem, not borders or immigration or refugees. Our lecturer tells us that there are times when his freedom of movement does not exceed more than two square kilometers. The issues that affect the Palestinians, therefore, are �Will I be able to move about freely? Can I travel? What are my economic chances? Will my kids be OK?� And these, our host says, are precisely the things that are not talked about, and are, in fact, made even more difficult by the interim terms. Palestinian settlements are entirely surrounded by Israeli controlled areas, so that people in one Palestinian controlled area cannot reach another without passing through Israeli controlled territory. Palestinians labor under a staggering conglomeration of laws; Ottoman law, British mandate laws, Jordanian laws, Israeli law and over 14,000 military commands established during thirty years of occupation are all still enforced here. The difficulty with land ownership goes back to the Middle Ages. From the 16th century to WWI, you could get an Ottoman land deed, but most people didn�t register, because they would have to pay taxes if they did. They preferred instead to rely on the testimony of their neighbors if a dispute arose. Those who did register reported only a small percentage of their land, and relied on their neighbors to vouch for the rest, thus avoiding heavy taxes. The British and Jordanians didn�t give deeds, so when the Israelis came and saw that there was little in the way of firm, western-stlye proof of land ownership, they were able to confiscate it. Even if Palestinian residents could prove that they had been cultivating the land for thirty or forty years�usually seen as acceptable proof of ownership�the Israelis reserved the right to annex the land for security reasons or, as in the case of Har Homah, recreational purposes. In thirty years of occupation, we are told, not a single additional classroom was added to public schools in Palestinian areas. Hospitals are in shambles. The Israelis, we are told, are aiming for a �delicate demographic balance,� which means that all areas should have Jewish population of at least 78%. When you are seen as a demographic problem, our host notes, it is difficult to extend a feeling of goodwill. The next part of our lecture consisted of a question and answer session, which I shall endeavor to transcribe as accurately as possible. Question: Does the PLO want to destroy the state of Israel? Answer: Israel is the only state in the world with no defined borders. In 1964 at the Arab States Summit (which later initiated the PLO) a charter was introduced which proposed the establishment of a secular autonomous Palestinian state from the Mediterranean Sea to Jordan, with complete freedom for Jews who were here before 1917, Christians and Muslims. Any Jews who came here after 1917 would be considered illegal immigrants, and would have to leave. The charter would treat Jews the same way Jews now treat Arabs, and would grant them residency rights only. This is the point that some interpret to mean the destruction of the state of Israel. Before the peace process, the PLO emended the charter, but Israel was unconvinced, so Arafat reiterated the emendations with the Palestinian National Congress during Rabin�s time, and again during Netanyahu�s administration. When people want to hold up the peace process, they focus on this charter. On the Arab side, literature and popular sentiment towards fanatical groups like Hamas have changed, but on the Israeli side, Netanyahu has brought them back to square one with propaganda. Question:How do you feel about Israeli Arabs? Answer: They are part of us, but I respect their position as being part of the state of Israel, and they can help bridge the gap between the two peoples. Nevertheless, they are still identified as second-class citizens. Question: What concrete steps are you taking to show good faith? Answer: I don�t accept the Israelis telling me that I have to prove myself�the minute I do this, I present myself as guilty. |
 |
 |
 |