Common Ground News Service - Middle East

Palestine between religion and secularism

by Aziz Abu Sarah — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 -0500

WASHINGTON, DC - In the last three decades, Palestinian identity has undergone tremendous changes. According to a UNDP poll published last April, 47 percent of residents of Gaza and the West Bank identify themselves first and foremost as Muslims. This is surprising, considering that the Palestinian community was once regarded as one of the most secular in the Arab world, and that three decades ago political Islam had a very limited role in the Palestinian national movement. Tellingly, the study also found that 80 percent of young Palestinians are chronically depressed, demonstrating a widespread belief that the future holds little hope for them.

The Hamas victory in the last Palestinian elections is only one of the latest signs that the community is looking for answers in a time of desperation, corruption and oppression. In their pursuit of change, Palestinian voters turned to Hamas hoping for honesty, inclusion and a vision for the future.

However, polling shows that many Palestinians grew disenchanted with Hamas soon after the elections, as Hamas failed to deliver on its promises for a unified Palestinian agenda. Many voices have been arguing that the Islamic leadership has failed and that religion should not play a role in Palestinian political life. This secular movement claims that religious groups like Hamas and radical Jewish groups are a big part of the problem and therefore should be eliminated from the political and civil process.

But while it is true that religious leaders and organisations have added fuel to the conflict, this doesn�t mean that a secular leadership is the only answer. On the contrary, religion can and must play a greater role in solving the problems faced by the Palestinian community.

There is ample historical precedent for the dual role that religion can play in shaping political ideology. In the United States, for example, the period before the Civil War was a time of anger and hopelessness, and then too religion was used to justify oppression and corruption. Religious and political leaders cited Judeo-Christian biblical arguments to teach slaves that they were inferior to whites, and churches and ministers led the effort to preserve slavery in the South. Baptist Reverend R. Furman spoke for many Southerners when he wrote that �The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example.� Even Confederate President Jefferson Davis used the Bible to claim that slavery was established by heavenly decree. Nor did these beliefs end with emancipation: Christian theologians continued to support segregation, terror and racial attacks against blacks in the community well into the next century.

However, religious leaders were also the ones at the forefront of a massive movement toward emancipation and civil rights in the United States. Whites and blacks like Jonathan Daniels and Martin Luther King Jr. countered religious violence, ignorance and racism with a religious message of love, non-violence and activism. They didn�t turn against religion when religious leaders failed them but rather challenged the status quo on religion. It is well known that King Jr. used his church podium to preach a new message of hope.

In a similar way, although Islam has been used by many Palestinians to support violence and even justify corrupt political institutions, people have forgotten that Islam is also rich with scriptures of peace and compassion. Islam�s Prophet himself refused to fight for 13 years while in Mecca, teaching and preaching under oppression and torture.

In the Palestinian territories where many people are turning to religion, faith cannot be ignored and should not be handed over to the radicals. We must reject the idea that our political choices are limited to either religious extremism or a purely secular vision.

The time is ripe for a non-violent movement in the Palestinian community to rise up from the least expected places�from the mosques, the religious institutes and the Islamic centres. These places are often accused of being the birthplace of violence, but they can also be the birthplace of positive ideas for change. Faith-based non-violent movements have succeeded in the past to rally the multitude and change the political reality where it seemed impossible, and it can provide the same answers today.

Non-violent methods have already achieved some success in Palestinian villages such as Budrus, where both religious and secular Palestinians joined hands to resist the separation barrier which was slated to run through their land. Their protest was successful and the route of the barrier has been changed. However, the Palestinian non-violent movement is still divided and is mostly secular. I believe that the movement needs a moral and spiritual message of justice that can bind us together, and this cannot happen without the strong presence of religious leaders and religious members of the community. Just as Reverend King and Jonathan Daniels countered violent Christians with a different Christian theology to reclaim their religion and morals, Palestinians too must use religion as a force to unify rather than divide.

Freedom of religion doesn�t just mean the freedom to worship�it also includes the freedom to use religion constructively in motivating people to make positive changes in government. In a region where religion has been hijacked for extremist agendas, religion is an essential element for creating a better future. This is why Palestinians today have the opportunity to use religion to inspire the birth of a non-violent movement that can unify them in their pursuit of freedom.

###

* Aziz Abu Sarah is the Director of Middle East Projects at the Center for World Religions, Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution at George Mason University at George Mason University, and a winner of the Eliav-Sartawi Award for Common Ground Journalism. His blog can be found at http://azizabusarah.wordpress.com. Email: azizabusarah@gmail.com. This article is part of a special series on freedom of religion in Israel and the Palestinian Authority and was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 04 February 2010, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

A Palestinian woman enters politics

by Asma Asfour — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 -0500

RAMALLAH � In May 2005 I was elected to be the first woman to join the Sinjel Municipality in the Ramallah district. At that time a new law had been passed which set a minimum quota for women�s representation in local councils. The assumption underpinning the law was that women should take part in decision-making processes. So, despite the fact that the idea hadn�t yet been widely accepted in many rural communities, women from different economic and cultural backgrounds suddenly found themselves taking part in political life.

In 2005 a twenty-six year old woman like me knew nothing about local governance despite advanced educational degrees. It did not even occur to me to nominate myself until it was publicised that the new quota law meant that two women would be joining my local municipality. Jokingly, I wrapped the Palestinian hatta [keffiyeh, or headdress] around my neck and said to my colleagues at work, �I am going to run against Mahmoud Abbas!� My friends looked at me indignantly as if I had broken a taboo, and asked, �are you nominating yourself for the municipal elections?� I wanted to say �yes�, but my courage betrayed me. Nevertheless, I decided to overcome my fear because I knew the council - which for the most part was made up of elderly uneducated men chosen for their familial affiliations � did a poor job in addressing women�s needs.

This conversation with my friends resulted in a number of men from various parties showing up at my home and suggesting that I join their list of nominees for the Council. Luckily I didn�t face any objection from my family but the people close to me wondered if I should really take the risk.

I have learned it is not easy for women to take part in political life. Traditionally, they have been chosen for their political affiliation, not their ability to serve their community. In general women�s participation in formal politics has not been proactive. It was rare to find a woman who came forward and nominated herself, especially in the rural areas. When a woman does take part in politics, as I found out, she is assessed twice: once as a politician and secondly as a woman.

My presence on the Council was not met with great enthusiasm, with men finding it hard to accept women who discuss and propose, and perhaps even argue. Some people even suggested that a female presence at municipal meetings was unnecessary and that the relevant documents should simply be brought home. But as I had been working side by side with men within academia I thought, why should I refrain from working alongside men from my local community? The strategy that I employed to accommodate these difficulties was the belief in gradual change.

During my time in the Council I tried to involve myself in various issues. I nominated myself as a member of the municipal finance committee and continually argued with our mayor when he didn�t request my attendance at meetings with representatives from other councils to discuss a deal or an agreement. I trusted my ability to initiate projects that achieve a minimal level of prosperity for women in the area I come from. But the political circumstances that accompanied the Hamas victory in 2006 resulted in donors withdrawing their funding and thus my initiative was shelved.

Indeed, things have begun to change since the introduction of the quota. Over the past five years the presence of women in municipal councils has generated a sense among some women that they can come forward and participate in public life. Women who will be elected in the upcoming elections will now have a greater effect on political life. Now more accustomed to women�s presence in politics, people are realising that closing their eyes to gender issues and women�s participation is counter-productive. It is time to understand that the future of our society should be built by all its members.

As a Palestinian woman, I�m proud of Laila Ghannam and Janet Michael, the two women who hold prominent roles in Ramallah city. Real change could happen when we have a female president in Palestine. Then we, as Palestinians, would finally reach inner reconciliation with ourselves as human beings who believe in equality and democracy.

It stands to reason that a Palestinian society with a greater degree of social equality will be in a better position to reach a sustainable resolution with Israel and to build a strong independent state. The road won�t be easy but now that Palestinian women have begun to take part in political life, we can begin to imagine that such a future is possible.

###

* Asma Asfour is a member of the Sinjel Municipality and is an activist for women�s issues. This article was written forthe Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 04 February 2010, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Renovated cinema to bring new life to Jenin

by Jon Donnison — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 -0500

JENIN - Standing in the dusty, half-lit lobby of Cinema Jenin with paint splattered builders beavering away all around, it�s hard to imagine that this venue was once the place to be on the Jenin social scene.

The cinema in the centre of the West Bank city was first opened in 1957.

But over the years Jenin has seen some of the worst violence between Israelis and Palestinians, and the cinema was eventually forced to close during the first Intifada, or Palestinian uprising, in the mid 1980s.

But now it is being renovated, and is due to re-open in August 2010.

�It will be finished. It will definitely be finished�, says assistant project manager Mamoun Kanan with a cheeky smile, as he stands on the pile of rubble that will eventually be the cinema�s main entrance.

The cinema will seat more than 300 people, in the original chairs from the 1950s and 1960s, which are now being restored.

The inspiration for the cinema�s renovation followed the success of the film �Heart of Jenin�.

The award-winning documentary directed by German filmmaker Marcus Vetter followed the story of Palestinian Ismail Khatib.

Five years ago, Mr. Khatib�s 11-year-old son Ahmed was shot dead by Israeli soldiers who mistook his toy gun for a real one during the second Intifada.

The Israeli military expressed regret for the death.

Lives saved

Remarkably, Khatib chose to donate his son�s organs to five children and a woman in Israel. Ahmed�s kidneys, liver, heart and lungs were transplanted into Israeli citizens including Jews, Arabs and a Druze girl.

For five of them, the organ donations saved their lives.

�For me this new cinema is for Ahmed�, Mr. Khatib says. �It's for all his friends. They can come here and feel Ahmed all around them.�

At the time, Mr. Khatib said saving lives was more important than religion, adding �I feel that my son has entered the heart of every Israeli�.

I ask him how it would feel to one day watch an Israeli film in Cinema Jenin.

�No problem,� he says, �it�s all about respecting each other�s culture and learning�.

Until a few years ago, Jenin was a dangerous place. It was not uncommon to see gunmen from different Palestinian militant groups on the streets.

Incursions from the occupying Israeli army were frequent.

Now things seem relatively calm. The Palestinian Authority has stepped up security and Israel has relaxed some of the checkpoints into the city.

Some militants have sought work in the security forces. One has even opened a theatre company.

�Red carpet�

It is estimated the new cinema will cost close to 500,000 euros. Much of the money has come from the Palestinian Ministry of Culture. The German government has contributed 170,000 euros.

The musician Roger Waters from Pink Floyd has also donated a state-of-the-art sound system for the cinema.

In August 2010, the cinema is due to host the first Jenin International Film Festival. �Heart of Jenin� will be shown on the opening night.

�The whole project is a real positive change for Jenin,� says Mr. Kanan. �We have high unemployment here and it will provide jobs and boost the economy.�

�Also it�s fun. People here need something to enjoy.�

Kanan says the cinema will eventually show films from all around the world.

�Israeli films?� I ask him. �Yes of course, because we are looking for peace. International movies, Palestinian movies, Israeli movies. It�s all the same. We are all human above everything.�

A special council is being set up including the mufti, the local Muslim religious leader, to help decide the films that will be shown.

In the 1960s and 1970s, locals say the cinema used to show sex films one night a week.

�There�ll be none of that this time,� laughs projectionist Franz Macher, who�s over from Germany to train young Palestinian projectionists.

�These days society is much more conservative so we need to be careful what we show. We don�t want to censor films, but we would rather show a good film censored than not show it at all.�

�What about violent films?� I ask.

�Yes the mufti has not forbidden it but he has asked us to be careful about violent films. People have seen enough violence here already.�

That will be no problem for five-year-old Safedin, whom I met outside the cinema.

He is keen to see �Toy Story�, while his eight-year-old sister Kutel is hoping for �Barbie� on the opening night.

In a ramshackle room at the back of the building sits the old cinema�s projector.

Two metres high, the machine still whirs into action after a bit of tinkering from Mr. Macher.

�In the summer we�ll be rolling out the red carpet�, says Felix Gebauer, who�s organising the 2010 Jenin Film festival.

He says they are expecting Hollywood star Leonardo Di Caprio and the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to be among the guests, although neither have given public confirmation of their attendance.

But 15-year-old Ghassan, who runs the food kiosk next to the cinema, is not impressed.

�I want to see the Barcelona football�, he demands. "I hear they are coming too."

###

* Jon Donnison writes for the BBC. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from the BBC.

Source: BBC News, 28 January 2010, http://news.bbc.co.ukCopyright permission is granted for publication.

Arab MK slams Holocaust denial, wins praise from Jewish colleagues

by Jonathan Lis — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 -0500

JERUSALEM - Israeli Arab MK Ahmed Tibi (United Arab List - Ta'al), one of the most vocal critics of government policy in the Palestinian territories, evoked praise from his fellow lawmakers after delivering what Knesset speaker Reuven Rivlin called �one of the best speeches he has ever heard in the plenum� about the Holocaust.

During the parliament�s special session to mark International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Tibi said that the victims of the slaughter must be attentive to the suffering of others, a remark which hinted at the Palestinian casualties of the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip last year.

The full text of this article can be found at: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1145549.html

###

* Jonathan Lis writes for Ha�aretz. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from Ha�aretz.

Source: Ha�aretz, 27 January 2010, www.haaretz.com
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Segregation blues

by Larry Derfner — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 -0500

JERUSALEM - I spent the day in Nazareth recently, doing a story about Israeli Arabs in hi-tech, and when I got in the car with the (Jewish) photographer to leave, I said to him, �Isn�t it a relief to talk to Arabs as regular people?� He smiled in agreement.

I had the same feeling when I was doing a story on B�Tselem, the anti-occupation NGO in Jerusalem, and found myself making coffee in the kitchen next to an Arab woman who was getting a glass from the cupboard or something. We were together for about a minute, I don�t remember any conversation, any particular notice we took of each other. It was only afterward that I felt this revelation: For a minute, I wasn�t living in a segregated country. For a minute, the sharing of space with an Arab, as equals, was unremarkable.

This is a vision of life in this country as most Jews and Arabs, I think, wish it could be�and it�s so amazingly rare. We cross paths, but usually on opposite sides of a counter or standing next to each other in line. With few exceptions, we live in segregated neighbourhoods, our kids go to segregated public schools, they play in segregated parks.

Nearly 25 years ago, not long after I moved to Israel, I rented an apartment in the Kababir neighbourhood of Haifa, right on the informal border between the Jewish section and Arab section. The building had two Arab families along with about 10 Jewish families. I�d see one of the Jews talking with one of the Arabs in front of the building, griping about the plumbing, about the noise�the things neighbours talk about. I got to know one of the Arab families, and once they invited me in to their apartment.

It�s only in the decades since then that I�ve realised how rare an experience that was for an Israeli Jew. Before moving to Modi�in, I lived in three different apartments in Jerusalem, two in Tel Aviv and one other in Haifa, but that year in Kababir was the only time I�ve had any Arab neighbours. In Modi�in, a city of 70,000, the only Arabs I�ve seen are illegal Palestinian construction workers sneaking into town or under arrest at the police station.

In 20-plus years as a journalist here, I�ve interviewed hundreds of Arabs, but only had one as a colleague. I�ve never had an Arab friend or even an acquaintance. I can�t recall a party or any purely social, non-professional setting I�ve been in where an Arab was present.

I know there are quite a few Israeli Jews who do have considerable contact with Arabs, who get to know them through work�especially if they work in a hospital�but the great majority of Israeli Jews, unless I�m badly mistaken, have exactly no Arabs in their circle of friends, co-workers and acquaintances.

Isn�t this wonderful? I feel like I left Los Angeles, went back in time and moved to Mississippi.

And let's face it�what we�ve got in this country is not �separate but equal�. We Jews are the privileged ones; the Arabs are the supplicants. They�re knocking on our door; we�re not knocking on theirs.

This, finally, is why it was such a relief to be talking with Arab hi-tech people in Nazareth, to be puttering around a kitchen next to an Arab NGO employee in Jerusalem. The equality and ease we had, as fleeting as it was, relieved me of my guilt�my guilt at being in a superior position to Arabs in this country, simply because I�m a Jew.

Ah yes, Jewish liberal guilt. I know�I can�t stand it, either. In fact, one of the most vivid memories I have of my first days in Israel are of a field trip to the Knesset, of standing outside in the snow and thinking, �Thank God I don�t have to be a liberal anymore. Here my people are the underdogs, I don�t have to feel guilty or apologise to anyone.� Little did I know.

Things are in sad shape when it�s such a rare thrill to be in the same room with an Arab and not have the walls crack from the tension, for the words, �Arab... Jew... Arab... Jew...� not to be running through your head. I don�t have the patience for this. I really don�t want to set aside a day to take an Arab to lunch. I don�t want to have to join a goddamn encounter group for my kids to play one game of soccer with Arab kids.

I�m really not such a big liberal. I don�t need Israel to be the rainbow nation, and I don�t expect it to be. I actually want it to go on being a Jewish state. I�m just tired of it being a Jewish Mississippi.

###

* Larry Derfner is a feature writer and columnist for The Jerusalem Post. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from The Jerusalem Post.

Source: The Jerusalem Post, 27 January 2010, www.jpost.com
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Palestine must be a secular state

by Hussein Ibish — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

WASHINGTON, DC - As Palestinians press the international community to live up to its commitment to ensuring the establishment of an independent Palestine alongside Israel, conversation is intensifying about the character of this new state. In their own interest, Palestinians should buck the regional trend towards religious politics and ensure, from the outset, that it is firmly and irrevocably a secular state.

There is no question that the Palestinians are, in general, a relatively conservative and religious people, but this is all the more reason to embrace a secular form of government. Secular government does not mean official atheism, iconoclasm or hostility towards religious belief and practice. It means rather the strict neutrality of the state on religious matters and, therefore, the upholding of religious freedom for all citizens. It means the freedom of all religious communities from state interference, but also the freedom of the state from the dominance of any one religious authority.

Palestinian society is strikingly heterogeneous. A very significant percentage of Palestinians are Christians of numerous denominations, and they have played a major role in the national movement and in society generally. Any move to establish a government structure based on Muslim religious principles by definition would marginalise, if not discriminate against or exclude, Palestinian Christians.

Numerous Palestinian leaders have expressed the willingness to allow Jewish Israeli settlers who wish to remain in Palestine and abide by the laws of the new state to do so. This raises the prospect of a Jewish minority in Palestine as well. It is likely that Israel, rather than Palestine, would insist on a complete evacuation of settlements, because of the political difficulties arising for any Israeli government should Jews or Israelis remaining in the new Palestinian state encounter any significant difficulties. However, the willingness of Palestinian leaders to embrace a Jewish minority as equal citizens or residents under the law is an important principle that ought to be upheld.

Obviously, a secular government will be essential to affording Palestinian Christian and possibly also Jewish religious minorities equal treatment under the law and equal access to all the benefits of citizenship. Numerous Middle Eastern states, including Israel, serve as examples not to be emulated in the social treatment and political status of religious minorities, even when freedom of religion is officially afforded.

Even within the Palestinian Muslim community, there is significant heterogeneity. Palestinian Muslims range in orientation from the politically secular but religiously devout, to the Islamist (and even in some cases extreme Islamist), to the religiously disinclined. There are also significant constituencies of atheists and agnostics within both the Palestinian Muslim and Christian communities.

Historically, secular values have been a major feature of the Palestinian national movement, and the recent trend towards re-defining it in religious terms has been almost entirely counterproductive. Driven mainly by Islamists led by Hamas, but also engaged in by nationalists seeking not to be outbid on religious legitimacy, the intensification of religious rhetoric, accompanied by increasing levels of militarisation and violence during the second intifada, had disastrous results for the Palestinian national movement.

This sanctification of the struggle on the Palestinian side has been matched by a less well-recognised but equally fanatical and dangerous rise in religious zealotry in Israeli society. The shift away from a conflict characterised by the competition for land and power by two entho-national groups, as it has thus far largely been, and towards a holy war over the will of God and control of sacred spaces is profoundly threatening to both Israelis and Palestinians alike. Political conflicts are amenable to negotiated agreement. Holy wars are not.

My colleagues and I at the American Task Force on Palestine have long recommended that the Palestinian state be democratic, pluralistic, non-militarised and neutral in conflicts. Obviously, for a society to be genuinely pluralistic, it cannot be dominated by one religious opinion but must allow for the greatest possible expression of religious diversity.

All societies are heterogeneous on matters of faith, and Palestinian society is obviously so. This is one of the reasons why historically the Palestinian national movement has been politically secular in spite of the relatively devout nature of much of Palestinian society. This principle is being seriously threatened by the rise of religious politics, but it must be resolutely defended.

Any Palestinian state worth struggling for and establishing must represent all of its citizens equally. This requires the establishment of a Palestinian system in which the state is neutral on religious matters - in other words a secular government.

###

* Hussein Ibish is a Senior Fellow at the American Task Force on Palestine. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 28 January 2010
www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

One Intifada was enough

by Marzouq El-Halabi — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

DALIT AL-CARMEL, Israel - Recently I have been hearing again the all-too-familiar Palestinian threat that the lack of progress in the negotiations with Israel will eventually lead to a third Intifada. Some Palestinians even speak about the option of a third Intifada as if they are going to a wedding celebration or a night of pleasure in Vienna!

Although it is true that Israeli politics have shifted away from the path of negotiation and reconciliation, and are veering towards renewed violence against Palestinians, this does not justify a third Intifada.

In fact, it is now clear that the second Intifada has undermined more than benefited Palestinian national aspirations. While the first Palestinian Intifada at the end of the 1980s was a legitimate popular struggle that led to the Oslo Accords, the second Intifada was unnecessarily violent and brought two Israeli military campaigns against the West Bank and Gaza, inflicting heavy damage to the Palestinian cause - politically, economically and morally. For this, we cannot blame the Israelis alone. The fact that the Palestinian factions chose the path of violence makes them also culpable.

Moreover, the fact that the Palestinians at the time did not disassociate their struggle from international fundamentalist terrorism and did not counter the link that Al-Qaeda, for example, made between its actions and the Palestinian cause, gave Israel an excuse to make an analogy between Hamas violence and international Jihadist terrorism.

Actually, the main reasons for the outbreak of the second Intifada were internal Palestinian factors, such as attempts by Hamas to compete with Fateh and other factions over who has a �monopoly� over the Palestinian cause, supported by a growing focus on sacrifice and martyrdom.

The result of this Intifada was a political split between the Hamas �state� in Gaza and the national authority in Ramallah, morphing into internal violence, which produced scenes that are no less horrific than those produced by the occupation and which brought the late Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish to wonder which martyr will enter heaven first, the one killed by his own brethren or the one killed by enemy fire!

The Palestinian struggle has been plagued by a propensity to expend lives without consideration, as if those leaders of the struggle consider people, especially the Palestinian youth, as cannon fodder or fuel for a revolution, to be disposed of at will. Preoccupation with the victims did not include attempts to reduce their numbers. Scores of Palestinian youth have been victims to the idea of sacrifice and martyrdom, many more than the resistance actually required. As a result, martyrdom has become more significant than liberation, and sacrifice more important than ending the occupation.

The just Palestinian cause of demanding an end to the occupation and establishing Palestinian sovereignty became immoral ever since it stopped dedicating its resources to life and freedom and began to use human beings as pawns to internal fighting.

It is now becoming more apparent that we have other non-violent options which are ultimately superior both politically and morally. In the last few years we have seen a proliferation in non-violent activities. Villages like Naalin and Bilin have been engaging in weekly protests against the separation wall for several years. An official Palestinian decision at this stage, to adopt the non-violence option in the framework of continuing the struggle with Israel would mean a historic adjustment of the Palestinian struggle, opening up new horizons, internally and externally. It would mean that the time of expending human lives without restraint and making political and material sacrifices without due accountability would be over. It would mean that the Palestinian would have his dignity restored and the right to life would triumph over the idea of martyrdom.

Nobody can doubt Ghandi�s nationalistic feelings, or Martin Luther King�s resoluteness. Palestinians can be similarly resolute without stepping over into armed action or endless violence. Non-violence does not undermine the credibility of Palestinian demands or the just cause of this people. One Intifada was enough.

###

* Marzouq El-Halabi is a writer, columnist and political advisor. He writes a regular column for Al-Hayat newspaper. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 28 January 2010
www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Israeli and Palestinian mothers birth a new generation of peace with healing lullaby music

by Eliana Gilad — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

TIVON, Israel - What does an Israeli neonatal intensive care unit and the biblical prophetess Miriam, sister of Moses � a figure equally respected by both Jews and Muslims - have in common?

They both employed the conscious use of voice, rhythm and music as a means of natural healing in the face of calamity during times of change.

What began as an informal healing music project in an Israeli neonatal intensive care unit during the beginning of the second Intifada in 2000, evolved into a healing music research project, named the �Voices of Eden�. It has provided a unique opportunity to discover alternative means of communication that effectively bring together a culturally diverse population and enable cross-cultural encounters in an intensive care setting.

Meir Hospital in the Israeli city of Kfar Saba, where the research took place, serves a multicultural population of parents to premature babies belonging to Jewish and Arab families from different cultural, musical and political backgrounds. In addition, the population speaks two different languages. Sometimes the most difficult situations are the greatest mothers of invention.

Informal maternal vocal training offered during live healing music sessions in the unit allowed the mothers, the nurses and the physicians to experience each other as a source of support and nurturing - despite their different backgrounds. So much of what divides us occurs in verbal communication. Wordless singing, on the other hand, bypasses the need for speaking and opens the way for a more primal form of communication.
The universal desire to care for one�s child is a powerful common ground. Perhaps if mothers � no matter what their origin � who experience the stress of caring for their premature infants in an intensive care unit could experience healing music together, they could create personal bonds that transcend political, cultural and religious divides.

Wordless singing has no boundaries. It takes us back to our maternal roots in the womb. Breath, heartbeat � these are universal elements. The mothers who share this experience with each other are likely to reach a greater degree of mutual acceptance. It also gives their small babies a deep sense of safety.

In ancient times, prior to Abraham, women were the healers. They used their voices and rhythm as natural healers, with common archaeological evidence of these practices found in ancient Egypt, Persia, Iran, Syria, Palestine, Israel, and Lebanon. In Jewish tradition, Moses� sister, the biblical prophetess Miriam, was also a midwife. It is written in the biblical commentary that Miriam taught women (Targum Michah) and in the book of Exodus she leads them in rhythm and song praising the Divine for leading the Hebrews to safe passage from slavery through the treacherous parted seas.

Over time, a wordless music modality was developed combining both an Eastern and Western approach to music. Ancient healing and transformational music is based upon the premise that wordless singing embodies inherent healing qualities. It also bypasses the intellect, allowing the listener to connect to the essence of the sound, as opposed to the cognitive idea of the words themselves. This can have a calming effect upon the listener. Today this music model is being taught to health care professionals, pregnant women and new mothers throughout the world.

Social media and the internet has allowed the Voices of Eden project to disseminate information especially during the 2006 war with Lebanon, when mothers from around the world, including Saudi Arabia and Dubai, wrote to support the efforts of the Jewish-Israeli and Palestinian-Israeli mothers making peace with their voices. A healing lullaby music blog was launched to empower mothers to connect and express their authentic and natural voices.

The �peace education� through healing music has allowed what began as a Jewish-Arab project to inspire other healing projects such an in-service training for Israeli Jewish and Arab health care workers, a Greek-Turkish-Cypriot healing music encounter in Nicosia, Cyprus, as well as a healing music symposium at the United Nations in New York.

The healing music project has brought together Jews, Christians and Muslims in a rebirth of the ancient healing arts common to both cultures. Professionals, who have been through training in healing music, are now incorporating wordless healing melodies into their own practice. One director of a natural birth centre who works with Israeli and Palestinian birth professionals uses wordless melodies recorded with mothers and fathers from Jewish, Christian and Muslim backgrounds. Another student who is a Druze is taking the healing music to a Jewish-Arab nursery in the Galilee where she works.

The intention of the project is to inspire and empower others to connect and express their own primal, boundary-less voices. This is one way in which harmony can grow.

###

* Eliana Gilad is founder of the Voices of Eden project (www.voicesofeden) and works with pregnant women, new mothers, healthcare professionals and peace leaders from all over the world to help them express their authentic voice and remain calm in the midst of change. She is the author of �Rhythms of the Natural Voice� and �Quiet in the Eye of the Storm�. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 28 January 2010
www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

A Specter is haunting Israel, its name is Goldstone

by Leonard Fein — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

NEW YORK - Goldstone yes, Goldstone no, Goldstone yes and no, Goldstone here, Goldstone there, Goldstone everywhere.

An exchange in Jerusalem the other week with a close observer of the Goldstone report:

�I am so tired of talking about Goldstone.�

�Me too.�

And then, for the better part of an hour, we talk about Goldstone.

The day before, at a dinner party, one retired senior diplomat says, bluntly, �I�ve not read the report, but we deserve it all.�

�Even �crimes against humanity�?�

�Yes, all of it. The occupation, nearly 43 years now, what did we expect?�

And the next day, over coffee, a leading journalist argues, vehemently, that Goldstone has greatly and unfairly damaged Israel, provided aid and comfort to Israel�s enemies, to those who are bent upon delegitimising Israel.

Gently, now, gently. I have no desire to revisit the Goldstone controversy. I want instead to examine two words that are much used and abused these days. The first arises directly from within the Goldstone report, the second from the controversy regarding the report.

Intentionality: I fully accept the insistent assertion by a number of Israelis with whom I have spoken directly on the matter of whether Israel specifically and intentionally targeted innocent civilians during its war in Gaza, as Goldstone suggests. To a person, they have direct access to information regarding Israel�s conduct during the war; to a person, they deny that innocents were targeted. I believe them.

That said, how shall we understand the hundreds of deaths of innocents, be they the 762 noncombatants including 318 minors under the age of 18 that B�Tselem reports, or the 295 uninvolved Palestinians, including 89 under the age of 16, that the Israeli army acknowledges? In my view, given the specific circumstances of the war � the asymmetry of a proficient war machine confronting an elusive and inherently camouflaged enemy, Gaza�s congestion, Israel�s determination to restore the fearsome reputation of the Israel Defense Forces in the wake of the Lebanon debacle of 2006 and to keep its own casualties to a minimum � the number of bystander dead is distressing but not especially surprising. Whether Israel was required by international humanitarian law, which was Goldstone�s analytic framework, to behave differently � say, by putting its own troops at greater risk � is an important question I leave to the experts.

There is a difference between intent and responsibility. In my view, the killings were not intentional as we laypeople use that word. That does not, however, mean that Israel is not responsible. One among the many reasons an independent investigation is so important, even urgent, is to sort these things out, to achieve clarity on the degree and nature of that responsibility.

The other word, given new momentum by the Goldstone debate, is legitimacy � or, more cumbersomely but more precisely, delegitimisation. Defenders of Israel have for some time been accusing those who recklessly attack Israel, wildly exaggerating and even concocting its flaws and failures, of being guilty of an effort to �delegitimise� the Jewish state. Lately, the accusation has been directed even at mainstream critics of Israeli policy.

I am not quite certain what delegitimising Israel means. Does it mean that Israel�s critics seek to eliminate the Jewish state? Plainly, there are those who do. But the vast majority of those who are growingly critical of Israel � I think here in particular of the European Union � do not even hint at putting an end to the Jewish state. Quite the contrary in fact. They call, ever more urgently, for the implementation of a two-state solution. And in fact a two-state solution is the only way to assure the survival of the Jewish state � a point widely recognised in Israel.

Now, whether Israel deserves the criticism to which it is daily subjected for its alleged reluctance to move more energetically toward a two-state solution is a matter of legitimate debate. But surely it is not the idea of a two-state solution that calls into question Israel�s legitimacy as a Jewish state. Quite the contrary: Anyone who calls for a two-state solution implicitly recognises and accepts the validity, the legitimacy, of the Jewish state.

It is those who prattle on about a one-state solution who reject Israel�s legitimacy. These days, the one-staters are in the ascendance. There are those who say that the point of no return has already been reached, that a two-state solution is no longer possible. Others say that midnight, though imminent, is still avoidable. In the Arab world, there is a growing feeling that time is now on its side, that the Jewish state will soon implode as the world gives up on two states living side-by-side in security and peace.

That does not mean that a two-state solution offers a problem-free resolution to the conflict. All we know for sure is that absent a two-state solution, the Jewish state is doomed, while with two states there will be new and perplexing problems and possibly new and dangerous threats as well. Choosing a possible downside over a certain doomside is a no-brainer. We dare not conflate criticism, even impatience, with delegitimisation. Who goes there, friend or foe? If for a two-state solution, hence accepting of a Jewish state, then friend.

###

* Leonard Fein is a writer, teacher, and founder of Moment magazine. He is founder of Mazon: A Jewish Response to Hunger, and the National Jewish Coalition for Literacy. His more than 900 articles and essays have appeared in dozens of newspapers, magazines, and journals. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from the Forward.

Source: The Forward, 20 January 2010
www.forward.com
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Sheikh Jarrah - a microcosm of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

by Lara Friedman — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

WASHINGTON, DC - Another Friday where Israeli police react with fury and force, trying to bar and then break up the event, and arresting peaceful protesters.

Another Friday and more evidence that democracy � and key pillars of democracy like freedom of speech and freedom of association, let alone the freedom to protest peacefully � are under threat in Israel.

When the Sheikh Jarrah protests first started, an Israeli friend told me that they would never have any impact � that Jerusalem is something that Israelis just can't think rationally about. He said that even though we are talking about settler activities in neighbourhoods that few Israelis can find on a map, let alone ever visit, the average Israeli hears �Jerusalem� and stops listening.

I hope he is wrong. Because this is about more than settlers targeting houses in this one Palestinian neighbourhood. Sheikh Jarrah is a microcosm of the entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict � as pointed out by Didi Remez in a podcast he did with APN earlier this week, following his arrest in last week�s protest. It is about Israeli actions and policies that are wholly inimical to peace. It is emblematic of the battle between those who believe in a negotiated peace � for Israel�s own sake � and those who prefer the zero-sum logic of occupation, domination, and perpetual conflict.

In one neat little package the Sheikh Jarrah protests encompass the core issues at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the peace process: territory, settlements and borders, displacement of Palestinians, and of course, Jerusalem.

I have watched (from afar) these protests grow, week after week. I have watched them gather more and more �mainstream� support, especially in the face of the extraordinary actions of Israeli police. I hope my friend turns out to be wrong � that Sheikh Jarrah will be the issue that focuses Israelis minds on what is really at stake and motivates them to action

###

* Lara Friedman is Director of Policy and Government Relations for Americans for Peace Now. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from Americans for Peace Now.

Source: American for Peace Now, 22 January 2010
www.peacenow.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

The role of informal education in shaping the image of the Other

by Nilly Venezia — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

GIVATAYIM, Israel - Recently I took part as a moderator in an international conference that examined dialogue between people from different backgrounds in a multicultural society. The conference was also attended by the American writer Rebecca Walker who was born in the United States in the mid 1960s to a white Jewish father and a black Christian mother, when such marriages were still considered illegal. She was, therefore, categorised as an �illegal� baby. Walker talked about her long-term experiences of rejection; to the Jews she was not �white enough� and to the black children at the school she attended she wasn�t �black enough�. At the end of her talk I asked Walker if she could describe a moment in her life when she didn�t feel �illegal� or outside the consensus. After a moment of silence she answered: �No I cannot remember such a moment�.

Feeling like one is �outside the consensus� is not unique to people living the black-white divide. It is a universal social phenomenon which exists in societies where the social and political systems cultivate prejudice towards the Other.

The experience of living �outside the consensus� also describes the mutual feelings that exist between the Jews in Israel and the Palestinians on either side of the green line. . Each side perceives the other as a �stranger� who threatens his/her security on an existential level as well as in the day-to-day. Hence, we tend to cast the Other in the role of an enemy who exists �outside the consensus�. By �enemy� I do not mean an external enemy, one that threatens our existence in the political sense, but, rather, an internal and subjective enemy�i.e. the way in which each one of us�whichever of the above categories we fit into�perceive the Other.

In Israel, informal education as a social mechanism plays a major role in shaping deeply rooted perceptions of the Other. Children�s books and stories contain stereotypical messages regarding the Other. In Israeli youth culture, for example, the figure of the Arab as a legitimate character in children�s literature, films or computer games is almost non-existent. And when the image of the Arab is presented, it is almost always depicted as the enemy.

Television may be the most important medium in shaping the image of the Other. An example is the popular programme �Big Brother� which the station directors define as a documentary that presents a mirror image of Israeli society and is considered an �opinion shaping programme�. Once the participants� awareness of the cameras subsides and they begin to let their guard down, one can hear aggressive and racist statements about the Other. Even the adverts broadcast during the programme reinforce those stereotypes, except for the occasional case when the image of the Arab Other is shown in a �positive light� linked, of course, to Hummus and coffee.

Over time the immersion in a social environment saturated in stereotypes and prejudices about other identities and cultures, teaches the individual within that society which are the identities and cultures that are highly valued and which are less so.

Thus, the Israeli-Jew, or the Palestinian Other becomes part of our emotional makeup. This emotional aspect attributes inaccurate and distorted characteristics to the Other but the power of this image is so great that it impacts the way we think, feel and act towards the Other. The implication is that even if we believe in liberal values of respect for and acceptance of the Other on a cognitive level, the force of these negative feelings towards the Other make it much harder to practice them.

In order to bring about change we must start our search from within. Therefore, encounters between Israeli-Jews and Palestinians (from both sides of the green line), intended to create personal relationships and lessen prejudice, are important but they are not enough. Our first step is to ask ourselves, what is the place of the Other within us? How was this image created? From where do we derive the knowledge which is present in our rigid thought templates that feed the emotional experience of the Other?

To achieve change, we must begin the process with the agents of change in society. These are, first and foremost, the educators and media professionals who are, in essence, social leaders. During their training in colleges or academic institutions it is necessary to work on cultivating personal awareness of prejudice, stereotypes and social mechanisms. Indeed, this awareness building will necessitate courage and a supportive environment, but it is one of the most important ways to initiate social change.

###

* Nilly Venezia is the founder and director of the Venezia Institute for diversity and multiculturalism. She holds an MA in multicultural education and is a facilitator of dialogue in multi-identity groups. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and is part of a special series on informal education in the Israeli-Palestinian context.

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 21 January 2010, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

With new media we are the media

by Eyal Raviv — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

TEL AVIV-JAFFA � �Be the change you want to see in the world� said one great informal educator. Modern technology empowers us to be that change�for peace.

By enabling self-expression and interaction, new media tools are helping our efforts for conflict resolution in the Middle East. Horizontal transfers of knowledge on social networks like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter empower us to build understanding through lateral learning. While teaching tends to be top-down, lateral learning lets us learn from one another. We decide what we learn, as well as where, when and how.

Traditional media no longer dictates our news, we do! Take Facebook for example. Status updates keep us up-to-date with our friends; news feeds tell us what is new and comment walls let us post and receive feedback. Like my status? Give me a thumbs-up or just leave a comment. Through video-sharing on YouTube, we produce and distribute video content. On Twitter, we tweet our news in 140 characters or less. With new media, we are the media.

Social networks are empowering us as peacemakers. By making it possible for Israelis and Palestinians to interact, they let us see and humanise the �other�. In a conflict where Israelis and Palestinians are physically separate, new media allows us to see and hear each other beyond the stereotypes and the physical barriers.

In 2007, I created mepeace.org�a social network and platform for peacemakers. The name communicates the goal: �Middle East peace�, and the method: combining �me� and �peace��it begins with each of us. Ha�aretz nicknamed it the �Facebook of peace� because it works like Facebook and is based on a shared commitment to Middle East peace. All are welcome to join.

The web platform has become home to thousands of �peacemakers� in Israel, Gaza, the West Bank and more than 100 other countries. These peacemakers are communicating through text, photo and video and supporting one another with personal profiles, blogs, real-time chats and more than a thousand active discussions.

Some claim such a peace is virtual. But through mepeace.org, peacemakers meet online and on the ground�overcoming many barriers to meet at the organisation�s Peace Cafes, �Peace Talks� and other events. The organisation is now offering joint leadership training for young Israelis and Palestinians. Young people are most in touch with networking tools which enable youth (often stereotyped as potential radicalisers) to actively contribute. A new generation of activists is in creation.

Next for mepeace.org is building an online resource centre for conflict resolution. Knowledge for communication and conflict resolution exists to support people's hopes, but information must be organised and shared. Community and knowledge-sharing can nurture peacemakers from the bottom up.

True, the Middle East consists of different viewpoints from moderate to extreme. At the core, each of us wants peace. We may seek peace differently, but let us not be indifferent.

We can use technology to reach out and overcome our differences. We can connect, convince and create coalitions. Today with WIFI and smart phones, the internet is portable and so are our networks. We carry with us the power to effect mass change. Can we utilise this power for peace?

Yes, we can. Social networks are empowering individuals and organisations in significant ways. With this power comes responsibility. While our political leaders fail to forge peace, let us network for peace. Let us not wait for our leaders�we are the leaders we have been waiting for. Networked and empowered, we have the tools we need to learn, to teach and to inspire one another. Together, we are the change we want to see in the world.

###

* Eyal Raviv is the founder of mepeace.org�a network for peace. He is studying conflict resolution at Ben Gurion University and can be reached at eyalpeace@gmail.com. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and is part of a special series on informal education in the Israeli-Palestinian context.

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 21 January 2010, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Jerusalem: the city of two peaces

by Lewis Gropp — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

COLOGNE - Jerusalem is a central point of reference for the three great monotheist faiths. King David made the city the political and religious capital of Israel, creating a centre for Judaism within and beyond the region. Jerusalem is a holy city for Christians as the place of Jesus of Nazareth�s teaching, crucifixion and resurrection. It was here too that the first community of early Christians proclaimed their religion. And for Muslims, the city is traditionally the third most holy in Islam after Mecca and Medina. Before they prayed facing the Kaaba in Mecca, the most sacred site for Muslims, they directed their prayers towards Jerusalem.

In the course of its 4,000-year history, the city has been destroyed, looted and pillaged some 40 times. Today�s Jerusalem, which was supposed to be a common bond with shared history and sacredness for the three religions, unfortunately presents a picture of discord and serves as a point of contention for people with contradictory claims to religious influence.

This city, nonetheless, bears the seed of peace in its name. The Hebrew word �Jerusalem� can be interpreted to mean city of two peaces, referring to both the earthly and heavenly peace heralded by the Old Testament prophets. The etymologically observant will recognise the Hebrew shalom in the name�and the related Arabic salaam, both of which mean peace.

Starting from this idea, Jordi Savall and Montserrat Figueras�specialists in music of old centuries and UNESCO Artists for Peace in 2008�have produced an unusual musical project, Jerusalem: La Ville des deux Paix (the city of two peaces). On this musical album, accompanied by a 400-page book detailing the historical and musical background of the city, the two artists explore musical traditions from Jerusalem�s various epochs: the Jewish, the Christian, the Arab and the Ottoman eras.

For the dialogue-centred Jerusalem project, Savall and Figueras brought together Jewish, Muslim and Christian musicians from many countries that have left traces on Jerusalem�s musical traditions over the centuries: Israel, Palestine, Greece, Syria, Armenia, Turkey, England, France, Spain and Italy.

The section on the �Jewish city� begins with its foundation and ends with the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in 70 CE. It is presented musically through a selection of the most beautiful psalms of King David as preserved in the ancient musical tradition of the Jews of southern Morocco, along with a piece on the 1st century Rabbi Akiva, one of the most important fathers of rabbinical Judaism.

The Christian section embarks with the arrival of Queen Helena, mother of Emperor Constantine I, in 326 CE and ends in 1244 CE. It opens with a dark, meditative hymn to the Virgin Mary, attributed to Emperor Leo VI (886-912), and closes with a quiet, humble improvisation on the hymn, �Pax in Nomine Domini!� (�Peace in the name of the Lord!�).

Among other pieces in the Arab section of the album, a version of the 17th chapter in the Qur�an�entitled �the Israelites��describes the Prophet Mohammed�s ascent to heaven from the Temple Mount/Haram al Sharif through song.

The album�s most dramatic piece is a historic recording by Shlomo Katz, a Jew of Romanian origin. Before Katz was to be executed in Auschwitz in 1941 during the Holocaust, he asked for permission to sing the hymn, �El Male Rahamim� (�God full of compassion�). Deeply moved by the magnificence, emotional depth and intensity of the music, the Nazi officer on duty allowed Katz to escape. In 1950, he recorded the song as a lasting testament and hymn to the victims of Auschwitz. Exuding a moving sense of tragedy and grace in itself, the piece becomes a devastating musical document in the knowledge of its history.

�Music�, according to Savall, �becomes the indispensable means of achieving a genuine intercultural dialogue between human beings from very different nations and religions, but who nevertheless share a common language of music, spirituality and beauty.�

Savall and Figueras� Jerusalem album is an astutely compiled mosaic of religions and cultures. Every song, every set of lyrics forms a possible starting point for exploring the dramatic and chequered history of the medieval East and West, and the points they have in common.

###

* Lewis Gropp is a freelance journalist based in Cologne, Germany. Specialising in faith issues and world literature, he is also an editor at Qantara.de, an online magazine that covers issues relating to the West and the Muslim world. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 12 January 2010, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

There is no place for �no-solutionists�

by Ori Nir — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

WASHINGTON, DC - Increasingly, you hear them at public events and symposia. You read their analyses in the press and on blogs. They are the �no-solutionists�.

Ultra-sceptical, hyper-cynical, often giddy about their political nihilism, they typically argue something along these lines: �As a realist, I realise that there are problems in this world that simply can�t be resolved. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of them.�

Such scepticism can no longer be dismissed as spiteful vexation, now that Israel�s Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Ya�alon and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman often make these arguments, and as many in Israel and in the United States buy into this pseudo-realism.

Ironically, this argument brings together the extreme left and the extreme right. Both are harnessing it to their agendas, agendas that�deliberately or not�will turn the festering status quo of a diplomatic impasse and Israeli West Bank settlement activity into an endless quagmire.

This approach is both wrong and wrongheaded.

It is wrong because a reasonable solution to the conflict is, in fact, feasible. Majorities on both sides strongly support a two-state solution. Israeli and Palestinian negotiators have in the past made significant progress toward mutually acceptable compromise formulas. Even on issues that involve heavy emotional baggage for both sides, such as Jerusalem and refugees, leaders on both sides have devised reasonable formulas that large majorities of Israelis and Palestinians supported.

Both parties have made giant steps toward a historic compromise by agreeing to recognise each other, to talk to each other and to negotiate over all the outstanding issues. The gaps between the parties, as broad as they may seem, are not unbridgeable. Israelis and Palestinians, as well as international brokers, can freshen up creative proposals such as the Geneva Initiative or the Clinton parameters. If leaders endorse reasonable, workable proposals, majorities on both sides will follow, as recent polls have shown.

The �no-solutionists� approach is wrongheaded because the repercussions of abandoning the active pursuit of Israeli-Palestinian peace are disastrous for Israel and for the United States. Israel will not be able to exist as a democratic Jewish state without a two-state solution. Over time, the lingering occupation of the West Bank is eroding Israel�s democracy, making Israeli society increasingly violent and isolating Israel in the international arena.

Peace between Israel and its neighbours is key for American interests, too, as often pointed out by President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama. Therefore, even if political leaders assess that the prospects of a peace agreement in the immediate future are low, they owe it to their people and to their international allies to leave no stone unturned in pursuit of peace. Pursuing Israeli-Palestinian peace is a national security obligation and a moral imperative�both for Israel and the United States.

Dismissing peace efforts as futile, or even putting the peace process on temporary hold, pending better circumstances, is potentially disastrous. Such an approach might turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy. It might discourage Israelis and Palestinians, as well as their friends internationally, from striving to create conditions conducive to peace.

While some Israelis and Palestinians may think that the price of a two-state solution is unbearable for their nations, the price of not reaching peace will be heavier for both peoples.

Most Israelis recognise that the alternative to a two-state solution is not the status quo, but rather a disastrous scenario: An apartheid-like relationship will develop between what will soon become an Israeli-Jewish minority and a Palestinian majority in historic Palestine. This is a recipe for the devolution of the conflict from one that can be solved into the type of ethnic strife that the former Yugoslavia witnessed a decade ago.

Those who walk away from the pursuit of a two-state solution are inducing the birth of a bi-national state. By doing so, they not only condemn Israelis and Palestinians to endless bloodletting, they also induce the beginning of the end of the Jewish state.

###

* Ori Nir, the spokesman of Americans for Peace Now, was the Palestinian affairs correspondent for the Israeli daily Ha�aretz. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from the author.

Source: Washington Jewish Week, 06 January 2010
www.washingtonjewishweek.com
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

With Palestinians painted into a corner, peace talks hinge on US guidance

by Omar Karmi — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

RAMALLAH - With pressure mounting on the Palestinians to return to negotiations with Israel even without a full settlement construction freeze in occupied territory, the onus has very much shifted onto US diplomatic efforts to ensure that talks are renewed.

Mahmoud Abbas, the chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, continues to resist the pressure, which is now coming from Arab countries as well as Washington, insisting that Israel must completely end construction work in settlements before he will return to talks.

The longer the PLO holds out against the pressure, the harder it will be for Mr. Abbas to back down from that pledge, and the greater must be the incentive offered from Washington. Palestinians consider settlement construction a way for Israel to create facts on the ground that pre-empt the outcome of negotiations. What is the point of negotiating while the land in question is disappearing even as talks are held? Saeb Erekat, the PLO�s chief negotiator, asked this week.

In response, the United States has urged the sides to consider the bigger picture, or �look at the forest�, in the words of Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, on Friday. Washington wants the sides first to discuss borders as a way to resolve other issues. Borders, after all, cannot be agreed upon without also implicitly agreeing on settlements and Jerusalem.

However, in and of itself, asking the sides to discuss borders first will not mitigate for the lack of a full settlement freeze. In parallel, the United States is understood to be drafting letters of guarantees to both sides. It has been reported the White House plans to offer the Palestinians assurance that any state will be based on the 1967 borders with only minor adjustments and the Israelis a promise that some settlements will remain and be annexed to Israel.

To avoid any danger of contradiction in these guarantees, the United States should sketch out a final position in terms of percentages, said Gershon Baskin, head of the Israel-Palestine Center for Research and Information in Jerusalem.

�The problem with dealing with borders is you can�t detach borders from the size of the territories. If the Palestinians are given a guarantee that a Palestinian state will be 22 percent of the land between the river and the sea, then you can ask them to come to the table to negotiate borders first,� Mr. Baskin said, referring to the size of the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 in relation to historic Palestine.

That way, Mr. Baskin suggested, Palestinian concerns that Israel would take more territory during negotiations through settlement construction should be allayed, and the sides could focus on where exactly borders should run, knowing the amount of territory each state would be.

It is doubtful that Washington intends to be very explicit in its assurances, however. Washington burnt its fingers when it endorsed the Palestinian call for a full settlement construction freeze only to back down and embrace the settlement �freeze� that Israel eventually came up with�one that excludes settlement construction in East Jerusalem, construction for buildings deemed essential for the public good in settlements generally, as well as 3,000 housing units already approved elsewhere in the West Bank.

Indeed, perhaps the most crucial question Palestinians seek answered is to what extent Washington is willing to exert any serious pressure on Israel. George Mitchell, the US envoy to the region, recently hinted in an interview with the US PBS network that Washington did not have to extend loan guarantees to Israel as one means of pressure.

But Mr. Mitchell appeared to be speaking for himself and immediately qualified his statement by saying that he still thought the best way forwards was for Washington to convince the parties of what was in their self-interest. That is a formula that has been tried for 18 years, ever since the first peace conference in Madrid, and with no result. Without serious US pressure on Israel, Palestinians say, negotiations are unlikely to succeed. And should another peace process fail, it could spell the end not only of the PLO leadership, but for the Palestinian Authority, which was only meant as a transition authority for seven years until full statehood was achieved under the Oslo process.

�Without US pressure on Israel, talks will fail,� said George Giacaman, a Ramallah-based analyst. �Failure will mean the end of the road as far as negotiations are concerned. It will result in a political vacuum on the Palestinian side and, further down the road, more violent confrontations.�

###

* Omar Karmi is a foreign correspondent for The National and can be reached at okarmi@thenational.ae. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from the author and The National.

Source: The National, 12 January 2010
www.thenational.ae
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

YouTube and changing reality�The ripples of technology

by Gomer Ben Moshe — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

KIBBUTZ HANITA, Israel � �My name is Harvey, I am a journalist�. The guy on the phone sounded cheerful. He had heard of our project, the Israeli-Palestinian Midwives Co-existence Group, through a mutual friend. He said that he would like to make a film about the project and asked how I felt about it. It has been a couple of years since we started this special project in which midwives from Israel and Palestine meet and share their knowledge and experiences. All we ladies involved in the project feel strongly about it, but we remained small and virtually anonymous so we figured that some promotion might do us some good. We wanted people to know about it and we needed the funding that could come with the awareness that a film might raise.

A few weeks later, Harvey accompanied us on a visit to a birthing centre in the West Bank that we had links to, where he spent a few hours filming and interviewing us. After editing the material, Harvey sent us the link to YouTube where a three-minute film all about the co-existence midwifery project was presented.

My Palestinian partner and I were very excited. We emailed the link to different people, starting with our closer circle of friends and family and slowly the ripples grew wider. We received enthusiastic emails from all around the world, telling us how beautiful, interesting and exciting the project is.

To me, the way the film spread was a wish come true. A month earlier, during a joint meeting of the Israeli and Palestinian midwives, I had asked all the participants to tell two people who would then tell two other people about the project. I had felt that could be the quick and cheap way to spread the word about our work. However, we discovered that the film was a much more efficient, quick and easy way of achieving this. It was also done in an interesting and concise way that communicated exactly what we wanted. It showed the viewers �other realities� in the region, and this we hope will, in turn, make this reality more widespread�a reality in which people are honoured for who they are and not for their beliefs or for their costumes; a reality where women talk, laugh, create and share despite the fact that they come from �enemy� peoples. This reality has more to it than the hate and oppression which is presented in the official media (e.g. national TV, radio and most newspapers).

One might argue that a film like this one is not �objective�, and that it only shows the �good aspects� of the project. But there is no such thing as �objectivity�. Once people, feelings, needs, expressions and history are involved, reality is subjective. Each one of us holds a deeply personal point of view.

Another argument against putting a film on an internet site like YouTube has to do with the fact that some of the people appearing in the film might experience the visual exposure negatively. In our case, we tried to handle this by getting everyone�s approval prior to uploading the film. Yet, people might change their minds later on, due to comments and pressures that might arise. There is not much that can be done about this in advance, but open communication within the organisation can help calm emotions. I see the benefits of this kind of exposure and I feel that it is �worth the risk� once it is done with everyone�s consent.

In our complex reality, the walls erected between us are a result of years of learning the official version of history and repeated exposure to a media that presents reality in stark black and white terms. Therefore, the use of accessible high-tech tools to present a different reality is legitimate and very sensible. The telling of the story helps create it.

###

* Gomer Ben Moshe is a midwife and is the Israeli co-ordinator for the Middle East COHI project (the Circle of Health International: www.cohintl.org). This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and is part of a special series on informal education in the Israeli-Palestinian context.

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 January 2009, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Let us first debate amongst ourselves

by Rami Mehdawi — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

RAMALLAH - Ever since the Palestinian Nakba, through decades of affliction to the present day Israeli occupation, Palestinian society more often than not didn�t know what it wanted, and when it did, it didn�t know how to achieve it.

Achieving what we want will come first and foremost with self-knowledge. The problem is that who we are and what we want is not one thing, but many. Our approaches to our struggle are numerous, depending, amongst other things, on geographic location or generational perspective.

This diversity needs opportunities for dialogue. The question is how can we get the Palestinian in the refugee camps of Beirut to communicate with the Palestinian in Chile? Or the Palestinian in Gaza with the Palestinian refugee in Jordan?

One humble, albeit simple, solution for creating dialogue amongst disparate Palestinian communities is the formation of an electronic Palestinian society. The project I have founded is such an attempt. Called the �Electronic Palestinian Civil Society Institutions Forum�, it is a virtual space for dialogue, open to Palestinians wherever they may be. It is not for profit and is not affiliated with any political, intellectual or ideological party.

The forum is a space to highlight and discuss immediate urgent and strategic matters that face Palestinian society in its march towards liberty and an independent state. It is also a rich place for informal learning and education about alternative approaches to our common issues.

The forum facilitates coordination and networking and encourages a high level of cooperation by extending bridges between civil society institutions, the private sector, the Palestinian National Authority and individual Palestinians. The idea is to enhance freedom of opinion and expression and to create the appropriate environment for societal partnerships and exchanges. In this way we hope to contribute to a culture of democracy and active citizenship.

In this precarious phase of our history with our liberation and state-building project in such a fragile condition, we must carry out a critical review of the history of the Palestinian struggle and popular methods so far. Internet-based forums can become indispensable platforms for consolidating social groups in support of our national liberation project by linking Palestinians around the world, rejuvenating potential capacities, mobilising previously wasted energies, allowing for the free flow of ideas and knowledge and facilitating learning about the various approaches to the struggle.

The new electronic methods of human communication are key to helping us tackle the overwhelming task of knowing what we want as a society and consolidating our approaches to achieving it. Palestinian NGOs and international organisations operating in the West Bank and Gaza should be considering the use of new technology as a strategic priority.

Consolidating the Palestinian objective is a necessary first step in our quest for independence and peace. Only once we have achieved this, will we be fully ready to engage with those Israeli organisations which believe in the fairness of our struggle. Only then can we contribute to enhancing the Israeli peace camp for the joint purpose of overcoming extremist elements within Israeli society.

No doubt, a healthy Palestinian dialogue and the creation of a unified strategy will also bolster the Israeli peace camp�s chances of attaining political power within Israeli society. If and when such a scenario becomes realistic, we can then start to work towards a common understanding over divisive issues and restore international confidence that both our peoples can achieve peace.

###

* Rami Mehdawi is the Director General of the Palestinian Labour Minister�s Office and founder of the electronic Palestinian Non Governmental Organizations Forum (PNGOF). He holds a Masters degree in Democracy and Human Rights.This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and is part of a special series on informal education in the Israeli-Palestinian context.

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 January 2009, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Conflict resolution, one book at a time

by Roi Ben Yehuda — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

NEW YORK - A basic fact of conflict is that people�s perceptions of each other matter. Viewing someone as subhuman or demonic, for example, reduces people�s inhibitions towards using violence against them. Likewise, negative images of the other escalate conflict through engendering fear, misunderstandings, blame and zero-sum thinking.

Research conducted by psychologist Albert Bandura has demonstrated that individuals inflict much harsher punishments on people whom they view negatively, as opposed to people whom they perceive in neutral or sympathetic terms. Importantly, his experiment also showed that subjects invested with positive qualities were least likely to be harmed.

Because how we imagine others is consequential, it is essential for conflict resolution practitioners to find creative ways to mitigate the destructive influence of negative stereotypes. One approach to tackling this problem was developed by American psychologist Gordon Allport who argued that qualitative contact between conflicting groups is a meaningful way to reduce hostility and prejudice as well as cultivate more positive attitudes between group members. By qualitative contact, Allport meant direct interpersonal relations between participants of equal status who pursue common goals with the help of institutional support. Some great examples of contact theory put into practice are organisations like Seeds of Peace and bilingual Jewish-Arab schools in Israel such as Hand in Hand.

While personal contact is key to transforming threatening images of the enemy, unfortunately, it is not always a possibility. This is because people, particularly during times of conflict, may not be able to meet face-to-face. Obstacles to contact can include restrictions on travelling, legal concerns or physical danger. Moreover, even if people are able to meet, the contact itself may feel too threatening or emotionally taxing.

In such circumstances, the problem of perception needs to be addressed through other means. One such approach is engagement with literature�a type of vicarious contact theory.

The novelist Iris Murdoch once said that the purpose of literature is to �prove that other people really exist�, meaning that literature calls on people to generously insert themselves into the lives of others. In so doing, books (especially those that deal with the problem of dehumanisation) can help children and adults to (re)-develop their capacity for broad empathy and sympathy.

Echoing and amplifying this idea, the philosopher Martha Nussbaum has written: �Narrative art has the power to make us see the lives of the different with more than the casual tourist�s interest�with involvement and sympathetic understanding, with anger at our society�s refusal at visibility.�

Highbrow as it may seem, there is empirical evidence to back up the pro-social value of literature. In the United States, for example, studies done with white elementary school students have shown that reading stories with multi-ethnic and multi-racial characters significantly reduces negative perceptions and attitudes. Other studies found that reading fiction (as opposed to non-fiction) correlates with a high level of empathy, and that putting yourself in other people�s shoes is one of the most effective ways of reducing stereotyping and in-group favouritism.

Reading novels and storytelling may seem like a poor substitute for person-to-person contact, and to some degree this is true. But, there are also advantages. Chief among them is that literature provides a uniquely safe space for identification. Moreover, contact on the pages of books also has the advantage of allowing the reader to withdraw�emotionally and cognitively�when identification becomes too strenuous.

This is not to suggest that reading ought to replace direct contact, but rather that because an engagement with literature can prepare people psychologically for the difficult work of reconciliation, it should serve as a handmaiden to the practice of conflict resolution.

Some recommendations for incorporating literature into conflict resolution practices include selecting a canon of relevant literature. Books such as Elie Wiesel�s Night, George Orwell�s Animal Farm, the autobiography of Malcolm X, Ralph Ellison�s Invisible Man, Fawaz Turki�s The Disinherited and S. Yizhar�s Khirbet Khizeh, are some examples.

In addition, it is important to create guidelines�a springboard for discussion�so that the messages in the great books may be properly internalised. And where possible, it would be best to work with education ministries to develop a curriculum for widespread use in classrooms.

Alternatively, book clubs and workshops can be formed, both within communities and among conflicting parties�thus combining both direct and indirect contact.

To be sure, negative attitudes and perceptions of the other are not going to be altered overnight. However, if we are to prevent, manage or transform conflicts it is essential we find creative ways to do so. Reading literature is not a bad place to start.

Conflict resolution, one book at a time.

###
* Roi Ben-Yehuda is an Israeli writer based in the United States. He is a regular contributor to Ha�aretz and a doctoral student at the Institute of Conflict Analysis and Resolution at George Mason University. Roi�s personal blog is called RoiWord: http://roiword.wordpress.com. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

Source: Common Ground News Service (CGNews), 14 January 2009, www.commongroundnews.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

No justice and no wisdom: Despite legal authorisation, Israel�s actions in Sheikh Jarrah are immoral

by Arie Arnon — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

BEER-SHEVA - In recent weeks, Israel�s citizens have been hearing about a new bone of contention in Jerusalem. Almost every Sunday, we receive reports about protests, violent clashes and even arrests in Sheikh Jarrah or in what is referred to in some of the reports as the �Simeon the Just� compound. What is the capital raging about?

The issue, according to the mayor and those responsible for the entry to the homes which led to the protest, appears to be a simple one: The disputed property is owned by Jews and the time has come to return it to its owners. The matter even reached the court and this was the ruling.

I suggest that we stop for a minute and think about the far-reaching implications of this claim. Before 1948, according to the mayor and his supporters, the ownership of the disputed property belonged to Jews. It�s true that Arab families have lived in the buildings since then, but now they must leave the houses and return the ownership rights to the Sephardic Community Committee which held the ownership rights the year the State was established. In customary legal language this is called �restitution�. In other words the property will be returned to its owner.

But will the mayor, in the name of justice and consistency, call for restitution of Palestinian property found in west Jerusalem? Or does Israel, by force of power or by force of Israeli legislation, aspire to work to return the property to Jews but not to Arabs? True, the Israeli legislation which designed the land laws, including laws of absentee landlords� assets and other pranks, makes it possible to turn Arab property into Jewish property but not vice versa. But is there anyone who believes that by doing this, an illegitimate act is turned into a legitimate one?

Not a foundation for co-existence
The solution for the issue of lands lost by their owners in 1948 is not an easy one. One day both sides may be wise enough to renegotiate living together in this country, dividing it into two states, or living together in one country, and they will also discuss difficult questions like this one. They may choose to return all the property to its owners before 1948, they may choose to return some of it to the owners and compensate them for the rest of it.

But until all these open questions are discussed, the favourable use of force Israel has in Jerusalem in order to determine what is allegedly right in terms of ownership rights, must not blind us from seeing the injustice in this matter. �Restitution� of ownership rights to one side only by force of favourable power is not a foundation for co-existence. Even if this has been done in the past in different places, for example in Gush Etzion where Israel implemented the �restitution� principle, there is no moral justice for this.

Israelis should remember the claims filed by Jews against the expropriators of their property in Europe. Israelis will also claim their property in the Arab countries from which they came. But as long as we have not reached a settlement, Israel�s aggressive moves do not show wisdom, nor are they based on justice and morals, even if the Israeli legal system authorises them.

###

* Arie Arnon is a professor of economics at Ben-Gurion University. A major focus of his has been the political economy of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from Ynetnews.

Source: Ynetnews, 01January 2010, www.ynetnews.com
Copyright permission is granted for publication.

Assessing Egypt�s position

by Hassan Khader — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 00:00:00 -0500

RAMALLAH - Egypt�s actions in Gaza have been a source of confusion for some time. Four factors govern Egypt�s policy towards the Gaza Strip:

1. The Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, the upholding of which is a key
priority for Egyptian national security.

2. Concerns triggered by Israel�s desire to transfer responsibility for the Gaza Strip onto the Egyptian state, especially in light of Israel�s redeployment from the strip, and its attempts to rid itself of the obligations imposed by international law on the occupying power.

3. Concerns arising from the de facto rule in the Gaza Strip by the Muslim Brotherhood, which poses an additional threat to Egyptian national security. This threat results from the well-established ties between the Gaza Muslim Brotherhood and its banned mother organisation in Egypt, and the special relationship linking the Brotherhood generally with Iran, Syria, and other radical Islamist organisations in different parts of the Arab world.

4. Its ongoing efforts to end the Arab/Palestinian-Israeli conflict through negotiations that would lead to a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, while simultaneously avoiding Egyptian adoption of any positions that contradict its peace treaty with Israel or that would jeopardise its relations with the United States.

These factors are all interrelated, and under certain circumstances some issues become paramount, while at other times different concerns become priorities. Three overarching facts are most significant to this process: first, that the Gaza Strip shares a border with Egypt; second, Egypt is a major player in the Arab moderate camp; and third, the historical relationship between Egypt and Palestine.

The border connecting Egypt and the Gaza Strip makes it possible for militants to infiltrate into the Sinai and launch attacks against Israel from Egyptian territory. Just as the Syrians prevent any attacks on Israel from their territory in the Golan, notwithstanding the historic relationships between Syria and countless Palestinian and other radical organisations, Egypt must prevent attacks on Israel from its territory.

The border also raises the possibility of Egypt losing control over security in the Sinai in the event of cooperation between the Muslim Brotherhood on both sides of the Gaza border. These concerns are exacerbated by the fact that the special relationship between Hamas and Iran has now created a de facto Iranian presence on Egypt�s borders.

Egypt considers the Palestinian issue to be central not only to its national security, but also to its regional responsibilities. Accordingly, based on long historical experience, Egypt has formulated a complex policy on this issue.

What matters is not whether the Egyptian perceptions are right or wrong, but rather that the Palestinian issue is the prime source that influences Egypt�s national security policymaking. In view of this, and because the policies and stances of the Palestine Liberation Organiz ation and the Palestinian Authority coincide with Egypt�s positions, any recognition of the legitimacy of Hamas rule contradicts Egyptian interests. But because it is the only way to achieve their national goals, the Egyptians have tried in various ways to unite the Palestinian polity, which would ultimately have to entail the integration of Hamas into the Palestinian political structure and enable the Palestinians to adhere to a unified stance that is consistent with regional and global realities.

Hamas� conduct on the border with Egypt constitutes an open challenge to core Egyptian policies. One example of this confrontation has been the shooting at Egyptian soldiers from Gaza, recently resulting in the death of one of them. This suggests that Hamas leaders fail to comprehend the reality of their situation and the realities of Egyptian politics.

In any scenario, the results will not favour Hamas, even though the Egyptians too have found themselves forced into making difficult decisions such as building a wall along their side of the border with the Gaza Strip.

As for the humanitarian catastrophe befalling the people of Gaza, the responsibility does not rest on the shoulders of the regime in Cairo (which would show no mercy to anyone if threatened), but on the shoulders of those who assess the political situation with anything less than the kind of calibrated scale used for measuring gold.

###

* Hassan Khader writes a weekly column for the Ramallah-based Al-Ayyam daily newspaper. This article originally appeared in Al-Ayyam in Arabic and was translated to English by the American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP). It is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from ATFP and the author.

Source: Al-Ayyam (English translation by ATFP), 08 January 2010,
www.al-ayyam.ps and www.americantaskforce.org
Copyright permission is granted for publication.