I am sure that there are times that my tortured Jewish approach to events in the Middle East must aggravate readers. Anna Baltzer is clearer than I am about this, so is Jeff Blankfort. They get the Jewish part out of the way and don't try and speak to the Jewish community per se, they talk to America about how we're funding apartheid. While I try and do both. I don't fully understand why I am so engaged by the Jewishness of it, it is after all a form of tribal loyalty, exhibited for all to see; and then a Jewish friend gave me his answer tonight.
He'd sent me a link to a horrifying story in the greatest newspaper in the world about the eviction of an elderly Palestinian couple from their apartment in East Jerusalem to make way for settlers who have claimed the property. This story is so terrifying, and presages further evictions–it is really out of Kafka, out of Kafka's Jewish fears and authoritarian understanding, with the same stifling east European bureaucratic thuggish nausea of Kafka.
I told my friend that this is simply "ethnic cleansing," and "sometimes i just think, why do i even try and save that country from
its fate when it is behaving in this way. and by fate i mean: this is going to go on another generation. there will be more wars,
bombings, etc. not the big one, but 2000 here, 5000 there. lebanons. and in another generation they'll have to accept it…but I don't want to walk down the road reasoning with a crazy man any longer…"
He's responded with two emails. The first was more distinctly tribal:
"What if my grandparents had emigrated to palestine instead of here?
would i have known better, & become a jonathan pollack, or a pacifist? When i come across a brainwashed 17-year old with a
gun defending settlements who throws a palestinian's passbook in the
mud & laughs about it, i wonder if i would have done any better had i been raised in the zio-reich, with rahm emanuel's dad as my pediatrician, & an arab scrubbing my dad's floor.
"It's
not a matter of saving a country from its fate. it's the tribe. that's
why i feel inspired, tho not literally, by people like august bondi, the jew who fought alongside john brown."
His next email was more universalist in feeling:
i'm more concerned about
stopping the oppression, & that means the oppression of the
palestinians. suicide bombings are also oppressive, but mostly they're
blowback
from the treatment of palestinians.
having ceased to care about the children of the Palestinians, should
not be surprised when they come washed in hatred and blow themselves up
in the centres of Israeli escapism. They consign themselves to Allah in
our places of recreation, because their own lives are torture. They
spill their own blood in our restaurants in order to ruin our
appetites, because they have children and parents at home who are
hungry and humiliated. We could kill a thousand ringleaders a day and
nothing will be solved, because the leaders come up from below – from
the wells of hatred and anger, from the "infrastructures" of injustice
and moral corruption.
"If all this were inevitable, divinely
ordained and immutable, I would be silent. But things could be
different, and so crying out is a moral imperative"
You can't continue having Israel and stop the oppression of the Palestinians, any more than you can have Algerie Francaise and stop the oppression of the Algerians.
This story would please Richard Witty. The eviction is rubber stamped by Israeli Courts therefore "justice" is being done.
Have you guys in America seen stories of 11 European Parlamentarians visiting Gaza by boat called "Dignity" – they arrived by way of international waters, will be leaving Tuesday.
It was not really covered in Europe, apart from one article from the Independent. Amusingly, Internatinal Herald Tribune is very diligent in covering all those stories, while it's parent, New York Times stays mum.
This is barbarous. Creeping ethnic cleansing is a reality. Israelis are sliding down the slippery slope and picking up speed… God help them, they certainly show no signs of being able to help themselves.
Otto, on the off chance you haven't read "A Savage War of Peace", its worth checking out, an outstanding history of French Algeria.
Eva, I hardly think "this story (will) please Richard". That seems to me a presumptuous assertion. This kind of crap doesn't make anyone 'happy', even if they belive that it is somehow necessary. You think the police who executed the eviction order were laughing and smiling? I think it far more likely they just did what they were told, and the men who gave them their orders (effectively the judge in this case) never have to hear the piteous weeping and despair. One analogy is bomber pilots who never have to see the results of the indiscriminate destruction (there is no such thing as 'precision bombing', just propaganda for the public) they inflict; they do as they are ordered. Its still a crime to kill innocents if you have your eyes closed when you pull the trigger. My point is that the situation is likely more complex and that no one in the Israeli police unit that had to do the dirty work was 'happy' about it. The colonists on the other hand, were probably happy; they got what they wanted and didn't have to directly take responsibility. That of course absolves none of the police for the crime, and these acts need wide press coverage in America.
I did read about the Dignity (didn't remember that was her name, nor where I read it) and I think regular blockade running by internationals will be very effective. Gaza has no direct commerce with the outside world, and I hope the blockade runners pry open up port access into Gaza for trade. These gutsy folks should try running interference for a freighter. If a commercial ship owner were willing to pay the outrageous insurance fees, or go without, it might work. Yeah, I know, its easy for me to say sitting in my comfortable lazy boy, alas without a glass of brandy. Also, I agree about IHT, I think they rise to mediocrity, and are head and shoulders above most of the rest which are beyond execrable. I've learned (slowly I admit) over the years that most of the press are truly beneath contempt, a bunch of useless frakking empty suits.
Eva was 180 degrees off.
It disgusts me to hear of ill-treatment of Palestinian civilians.
There are better options for Israelis to be safe than to harm civilians.
Also,
On rule of law, which you seem to ridicule. I suggested that EVERY person deserve their day in court before a non-biased process with the right of appeal.
I object to that day in court being denied selectively to either Jews or to Palestinians.
It is still denied to Jews in Arab states, and it is denied to Palestinians in Israel.
It is denied to Palestinians in Arab states as well, sadly who also suffer say in Lebanon from less than peer status, refugees rather than citizens.
If you read the Israeli press since the Obama victory, while there is some worry, there is MORE celebration and relief that the same cloud of fear that the Bush/Cheney administration represented, is lightened throughout the world (including in Israel).
Just for note on Israeli attitude. When Oslo was signed (a very big change from complete annexation), Israelis mostly celebrated.
They celebrated their own "selfish" prospects of safety. But, more importantly they celebrated the lifting of the same cloud. They celebrated hope, that they could relax in their homes, and that their neighbors could relax in their homes.
That status didn't exist before.
On the article's thesis.
There is eminent domain.
I remember a contreversy in White Plains when I was growing up. Now White Plains is a "great corporate exurb", the example of examples.
In 1969, it was an exurb with ghettos. The city determined that it wanted to conduct urban renewal, and evicted 3000 mostly African Americans from homes that were about 7/8 rented, but 1/8 owned.
I was too young to know the legal mechanics of how they were moved, but I'm sure it was not pretty.
The neighborhood in question was horrible. Horrible public health, drugs, 25% unemployment. Good reasons to improve it.
To tear it down for commercial benefit was gross opportunism.
So, when is eminent domain legitimate?
It definitely is in cases.
There are times when the public good overshadows private property or history, and the only means to manifest that public good is by government taking.
For example, in the US, LARGE areas of the US are military reserves. Some were prior public lands (meaning former Indian resided lands taken by force), some were formerly private.
Is THAT forced taking legitimate?
Hard to know.
It is very different than the arbitrary taking of land to expand Zionist jurisdiction.
Richard, I don't agree with Eva most of the time, but I share her distrust for your position in this context. Maybe you could occasionally give me some literature concerning this context. Law – Land – Palestine/Arab countries (Jewish possessions)
This is the money quote: A Jerusalem court in July ruled that the east Jerusalem housing provided to Mohammed al-Kurd and his wife Fawzieh in 1956 by the Jordanian government and a UN refugee agency was built on land to which their title was in doubt and they must vacate the property.
Why do you think we don't hear a whisper about the story of the couple evicted? Did they possibly possess land in Israel and were given this as an exchange? Who built the house? Who exactly owned the land? How is this owner related to the group that now owns it? What were the rules then? Ottoman empire documents. From when exactly? Do you know or do you care? Or are you only satisfied that Eastern Jerusalem land is now legally determined Jewish land?
I would accept your example that evictions happen everywhere. But your selections in the context of this old story are really interesting:
7/8 rented, but 1/8 owned. [...]
Just as the couple did not own the land? What about Israels ownership of Palestinian land?
The neighborhood in question was horrible. Horrible public health, drugs, 25% unemployment. Good reasons to improve it.
Interesting. But is it relevant in our context? Other than the following?:
******************************************
Finally, can I assume that as long as the proceedings keep a legal semblance in this context, all is fine from your point of view?:
The couple's neighbor's gathered Sunday morning outside the closed perimeter set up by the IDF. They have been following the case closely, and believe that the court decision and forced eviction of the family paves the way for the takeover of 27 multi-storey houses in the neighbourhood, threatening to make 500 Palestinians homeless.
"This is only the first. Just you wait and see," one of the neighbors said.
Rafiq Husseini, an aide to Palestiniann President Mahmoud Abbas, has been quoted as warning that the takeover of the Kurds' home was part of a wider drive to change the geography of Jerusalem by forcing out Palestinians and replacing them with Israeli settlers. "Such a development would deal a death blow to already-strained peace negotiations," he wrote in a letter to foreign consulates in Jerusalem
********************************************
What do you think is the relation of power and law?
I don't agree with Eva most of the time
A rather superficial impression, admittedly. No harm meant, Eva! I don't have time to pay closer attention.
If you watched "God on Trial" last night on PBS (US) and paid careful attention to the dialogue, you would realize that the Arabs under the Israeli cudgel have exactly the same philosophical and existential issues as those posed by the Auschwitz inmates – that their horrible fate is an Act of God and their Israeli tormentors are God's agents in this cruel plot, against which it is a divinely-inspired act to resist, i.e. "struggle with God". In Arabic this struggle is "jihad", in ancient Hebrew the word is "israel". How apt.
Eva,
Boy, you must have hit a nerve, because the excruciatingly nauseating spout of diarrhea defense that spewed forth from Witty's keyboard was discernable all the way over here in Taiwan.
PM
The taking of private land for "the public good" via the law of eminent domain has been increasingly contested in the USA as the nature of who benefits versus who loses is scrutinized ever more closely and made subject more and more to sunshine law implementation. Similarly regarding the broad definition by Israel of
its security needs regarding the occupied territories. General James Jones wrote up a scathing report on Israel's policies in the occupied territories. This report was due to be published last July but the Bush regime didn't like what the good general had to say about the facts on the ground regarding the reality of the I-P security arrangements. It has never been published, not even a summary as far as I know. In comparison the good general's similar report on the security situation in Iraq was published for public scrutiny the year before.
It will be interesting to see who replaces Candy Rice, the general's
boss. And if James Jones (retired, US Marines, former commander of NATO forces) keeps his appointed post under Obama, a very
important post since his job is to develop
policy needs to secure the occupied lands as a basis for realistic peace negotiations.
Taxpaying Americans should be able to read the report. The MSM
has not pursued this report at all.
Anon,
Taxpaying Americans should be able to read a lot, like where the $2 trillion of taxpayer money in bank loans are going!!!
PM
In another vein, every civilized legal system has an equitable rule known as the "statute of limitation", which prevents even patently valid claims being made after a defined number of years – no matter how "right" in law. The balance is between social stability and technical "justice". In much of the US claims about land titles are barred from litigation after 20 years, some states even less. However, Israel has no statute of limitations for "Jewish" property claims, which may be forever litigated, or at least for about 2,000 years. Israel does not seek civil stability for its Arab citizens, to the contrary it desires instability so "Jewish" issues may be forever a threat to its Arab citizens. Israel is truly not a nation for all its citizens.
Interesting comment by the Swiss Dino:
18. When the U.S. is siding with the Palestinians…..
….then it is a rather clear indication, that
something has gone terribly wrong here.
They must know (much) more than we do….
As far as the status of title to land, there is no statute of limitations as far as I know.
If land is of contested title, it remains so, until perfected.
Calling my comments "diarhea" is just name-calling.
You can address the points. All points that I make in advocacy, I use the term "I". If "I think" is not there, it is a projection on your part to assume advocacy.
If that causes you some confusion, then work to clear it up in your own mind.
I am sure that there are times that my tortured Jewish approach to events in the Middle East must aggravate readers."
You are right. I don't see the point of arguing Israeli law, or of comparing Israeli land seizures to U.S. eminent domain laws. What's the point? Neither should be more than a squabble in a foreign land to me. Instead, the Jewish approach has made each a national issue within the U.S. that has to be paid for and defended by people who shouldn't be affected or care.
The Jewish approach has made it mandatory to take a favorable stand on Jewish issues wherever they are, and impossible to discuss what would be best for most Americans in ways that would favor the majority even at the local level. That can't last.
Richard Witty about an US case: The neighborhood in question was horrible. Horrible public health, drugs, 25% unemployment. Good reasons to improve it.
Oy Jerusalem's Mayoral race
Comment by Michael: …It’s funny that Porush, Barkat and Gaydamak are all spouting the same (insincere) rhetoric about reversing the neglect of east Jerusalem, at the same time as vowing to keep it ‘united’.
Gaydamek link added.
Richard Witty, lately you have latched on the concept of "perfecting title." Luckily, what you are calling for has already been done. By a unaminous decision in 2004 all 15 judges on the World Court ruled that ALL the Israeli settlements on the West Bank are illegal. Unanimous. No question. Case closed.
Why isn't this court good enough for you? Do you intend to keep trying it until you get a different outcome? And surely you aren't asking for courts with Jewish Zionists sitting on them? But how will we exclude them without being called "antisemitic"?
(BTW when the World Court made its decision, shamefully one judge, while conceding the judgement, withheld his name from the document. He was Thomas Buerghenthal, who is Jewish and active in promoting community interests.)
I do read the Israeli press – and I wouldn't agree with your analysis of the Israeli public, Witty.
Try reading the comments sections in Haartz – the most liberal newspaper in Israel – and you get a feel for the racist, fanatical impulses of the general Israeli population.
And Colin Murry – there are certainly Israelis who don't enjoy carrying out orders – but you'd would be really surprised if you were to delve a little deeper. Quite.
It's ethnically-cleansed Sephardic Jewish community property taken by the Jordanians in '48. I am appalled that Israelis, upon contesting title (and apparently securing it sufficient to evict the inhabitants) did not instead allow the current residents to remain.
Witty,
Do you enjoy "making Israel's case" with anti-semites? That particular building belong to the Sephardic Jewish Community, as a communal organization. Even an Islamic Palestine should theoretically have allowed its dhimmi slaves to retain title and residence in '48. As it was, the Jordanians cleansed the Jews and turned it over to UNRWA. Title is held by the successors to the Council of the Sephardic Jewish Community, which apparently held title to the land in Ottoman times. That is Jewish, Sephardi, "dhimmi" land, a waqf even under the Ottomans, unimpeachable title, having nothing to do for its legitimacy with the "racist, colonialist" State of Israel.
The decent thing to do would be to secure title, and allow the tenants to remain. You can't undo either the conquest by Abdullah in 1948 or that by Omar ibn al-Khattab ca. 1400 years ago, and why should elderly Palestinians pay for Abdullah's sins? Because they came as refugees to an ethnically-cleansed Sephardi compound in East Jerusalem?
"Try reading the comments sections in Haartz – the most liberal newspaper in Israel – and you get a feel for the racist, fanatical impulses of the general Israeli population."
Or just drop in here every morning to get a taste of what's on the mind of the American Jewish community. Somehow it's not the same picture as we get from National Public Radio.
The Jewish will to overpower the universal sense of equality and justice goes on, unfortunately funded by ignorant gentile American
tax payers and young GIs.
Eventually the economically poor i
gnorant (not the less intelligent)
will have their way way.
stevieb: "…you'd would be really surprised if you were to delve a little deeper."
C.M: Maybe so, I've never met an Israeli thus have no first hand data from which to form an assessment. Instead, I have to extrapolate from four things.
1) My experience with American Jews: all I have met are warm and fundamentally decent people. Many, but not all, have been in academic circles, so my 'sample' may be biased. I realize that American and Israel Jewish cultures are not identical, but there has to be a large degree shared values.
2) The numerous articles I have read detailing Israel Jews struggling against the occupation. Their literary, legal and physical engagements with authority are substantial, and make a difference. If not for vital work done by Israeli journalists, we would know next to diddly-squat about what is going on, and news coverage of the occupation in American media would be even worse than at present. Some Israeli lawyers have been stalwart in defending Palestinian rights. I don't think they are terribly successfull. But if you don't even fight, you will never win, and it's important to make a stand if only to show your opponents that not everyone agrees with them. Finally, folks standing watch at checkpoints are vital to curb excesses. Soldiers manning these checkpoints know very well that they have to behave better under observation by people who can't be dismissed as 'biased, untrustworthy, and exaggerating' Arabs. And kudos to the folks handing out video cameras to Palestinians. Apologies to Roosevelt (I think): a chicken in every pot, and a video camera with satellite feed in every hand!
3) The numerous articles I have read detailing crimes by Israeli Jews supporting the occupation. It is very obvious to me that there is substantial variation of opinion within this group, e.g., the worldview and values of your average colonist are substantially different from those of Israeli soldiers hailing from Tel Aviv who have been ordered into the OPT. One abstraction of the 'interest groups' could be identification of the colonists, and rabid American supporters, e.g. Lev Leviev, as criminals, and most of the Israel public as not caring one way or the other as long as they can have peace and normal lives. And of course the resisters mentioned in point 2. I think this broader public (just as in America) shifts its 'collective' or 'average' opinion in response to changes in political and social perceptions that are in large measure shaped by government policy and slants in media coverage. I think it possible for this majority to be brought around with competent leadership actually interested in building a just peace. Their parliamentary system unfortunately gives radicals a lot of power as their small blocs often make the difference in being able to form ruling coalitions.
4) I also rely to some degree on my general experience with human nature. I am keenly aware that there are significant cognitive differences amongst various peoples; not everyone sees what they would call reality in the same way. However, I think there is some portion of everyone's worldview that is universally shared.
I realize that this is a very indirect set of data from which to form an opinion, but when you have to have an answer, you have to work with the data you have, and make appropriate qualifications for uncertainty. And I choose to color my uncertainty with optimism. I'd love to go to Israel one day and explore for myself (and also to go ruins-hopping, I'm a sucker for ancient debris :)
"If not for vital work done by Israeli journalists, we would know next to diddly-squat about what is going on, and news coverage of the occupation in American media would be even worse than at present. Some Israeli lawyers have been stalwart in defending Palestinian rights. I don't think they are terribly successfull. But if you don't even fight, you will never win, and it's important to make a stand if only to show your opponents that not everyone agrees with them. Finally, folks standing watch at checkpoints are vital to curb excesses. Soldiers manning these checkpoints know very well that they have to behave better under observation by people who can't be dismissed as 'biased, untrustworthy, and exaggerating' Arabs. And kudos to the folks handing out video cameras to Palestinians. Apologies to Roosevelt (I think): a chicken in every pot, and a video camera with satellite feed in every hand!"
I absolutely agree with that. There are some very brave Israeli jews doing some heart-warming work.
Heart-warming, however, because they are fighting a losing battle I'm afraid. The racism in Israel is both overt and systemic. I started out as optimistic as you Colin but I have become far less so about a solution emerging from within Israeli society in it's current state. Things could possibly change with a significant military defeat of some sort or some kind – but not without. History has shown Israel to be far more willing to negoiate peace from a position of fear and weakeness. And of course the complete opposite when they are strong.
I also believe that unfortunately zionism has far to strong a hold within Judasim and there still remains alot of confusion amongst well-intentioned jews (Phil being a good example) – far too much to hope for a jewish inspired road to peace, at least at the moment.
Obama has they key – whether he's brave enough to do the right thing for Israel, America and the world remains to be seen.
And i support full sanctions against Israel – it worked against South Africa. It would work against Israel – there is certainly support for that from the world in general.
And it is most certainly warranted – not just for the Palestinians, but because Israel has shown itself to be a very dangerous, aggressive nation indeed.
It is a world problem and it needs to dealt with before we worry about a possibly nuclear armed Iran….