Showing posts with label Nakba. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nakba. Show all posts

Wednesday, 8 May 2013

"Put yourself in their shoes" - Taking Obama seriously for Nakba at 65


Barack Obama in Jerusalem, March 2013

"Put yourself in their shoes", said the President. "Look at the world through their eyes."

Good idea. And easily the best lines in his Jerusalem speech delivered on 21st March. This was Barack Obama turning into Atticus Finch.

Finch, the small town lawyer in 'To Kill a Mockingbird', burdened with the moral conscience of his community, had been transplanted from the Deep South to the Middle East with disenfranchised Black Americans replaced by disenfranchised Palestinians.

Put yourself in their shoes.

It was a direct challenge to Jewish Israelis (and diaspora Jews too).

Look at the world through their eyes.

But how hard is it to step onto the 'Radley porch' of Israel/Palestine to imagine the world of Boo and Tom Robinson, the world of the Palestinian 'other'?

This month (15th May) marks the 65th anniversary of the Palestinian Nakba - 'Catastrophe'. The date follows one day after the anniversary of Israel's Declaration of Independence in 1948. What better moment to take seriously the Obama/Finch shoe-swapping challenge.

I thought I'd try the experiment by revisiting that speech in Jerusalem since it contains a near pitch-perfect rendition of the Zionist telling of Jewish history.

Here are a few key lines that now demanded revisiting.

"For the Jewish people, the journey to the promise of the State of Israel wound through countless generations." said Obama.

So how does that familiar statement seem to me now as I walk around in my borrowed shoes?

Well, I can't help but spot the verbal sleight of hand as God's "promise" gets retrospectively upgraded from a biblical homeland to a modern State.

But then I shouldn't blame Obama for getting confused about this. After all, my fellow Jews from across the globe have also become muddled on the topic. We have happily accepted the fusing together of religious concepts of 'exile' and 'return' with 19th century ethnic nationalism and then happily bolted on our own special take on European colonialism and justified it all through a clumsy reading of our own prayer book liturgy. With my Palestinian outlook, the consequences of all this start to look much clearer.

Then there was this:

 "Through it all, the Jewish people sustained their unique identity and traditions, as well as a longing to return home."

Standing on the Israel/Palestine Radley porch for a few hundred years, I may have been surprised at how little 'return' actually took place during all those centuries of 'longing'. My Jewish learning could give my Palestinian alter-ego the explanation for this historical discrepancy.

Wasn't exile rather more than a geographical condition? Wasn't 'return' a messianic concept that meant even a physical presence in the Holy Land did not guarantee the end of exile. Isn't that what our rabbis taught us over two millennia, until Zionism took hold of our thinking?

Never mind, Barack was on a roll by now:

 "...the dream of true freedom finally found its full expression in the Zionist idea -- to be a free people in your homeland."

With my Palestinian eyes this too might jar with me. I might want to ask the President where he thinks this leaves the six million American Jewish citizens who consider the United States to have fulfilled the "dream of true freedom", giving them self-determination unparallelled in 2,000 years of Jewish history. Why have the vast majority stubbornly stayed there, apparently against their best interests?

After so much flattery about the achievements of the State of Israel (business, cultural and scientific), I would have been pleasantly surprised that Obama finally got around to mentioning the Palestinians.

However, I would have noticed that, unlike the Jewish story, the Palestinians were not accorded the grand sweep of history in the telling of their narrative. And the President's description of the birth of Israel itself made no mention of terror tactics and murder, the forced expulsion of tens of thousands of families, the deliberate destruction of hundreds of Palestinian villages and the blatant grab of Palestinian land - all carried out under the fog of war and the justification of Jewish national liberation.

The story of the 1948 Nakba was easily available to Obama. And if he could not bring himself to accept Palestinian accounts, or preferred to dismiss them as so much Arab propaganda, he could have flicked through the works of numerous Jewish Israeli historians writing over the last thirty years.

If confronting the truth of the 1948 Nakba isn't what 'looking at the world through their eyes' means, then what's the point of the exercise?

So finally, we come to the half-dozen sentences that got me started and that gave the speech some political bite and the President a small degree of credibility as a broker for peace.

"Put yourself in their shoes – look at the world through their eyes. It is not fair that a Palestinian child cannot grow up in a state of her own, and lives with the presence of a foreign army that controls the movements of her parents every single day. It is not just when settler violence against Palestinians goes unpunished. It is not right to prevent Palestinians from farming their lands; to restrict a student's ability to move around the West Bank; or to displace Palestinian families from their home. Neither occupation nor expulsion is the answer."

With my Palestinian eyes and ears I would probably have thought that this list was not even the half of it. What about the cleansing of Palestinian homes in annexed East Jerusalem? What about the continuing confiscation of Palestinian land in the 60% of the West Bank that Israel controls entirely? What about discriminatory planning regulations, house demolitions, the appropriation of water resources, military courts, the unilateral expansion of Jewish settlements in continuing breach of international law?

And then there's Gaza.

No mention of the on-going blockade of land, sea and air that stifles any chance of normal economic development.

And did he mention the rights of Palestinians in Israel itself? Immigration laws, marriage laws, employment discrimination, education policies, town planning?

With Palestinian eyes and Palestinian shoes, all of this is what makes the Nakba not just a moment in time but an on-going catastrophe.

And so it becomes clear, as I put my own shoes back on, why Obama's plea for empathy is such a radical challenge for Jewish Israelis (and certainly for Diaspora Jews as well).

Once you take Obama seriously, and try out the shoe-swapping thought exercise, it becomes clear what is stopping our ethical imagination from understanding Palestinian suffering.

It is the Palestinian story that messes with our sense of identity and the privileged entitlement to what we insist on calling the 'Land of Israel'. Their counter-narrative to Zionism with its language (and experience) of colonialism, dispossession, exile and apartheid is such a fundamental challenge to our story of eternal victimhood and biblical destiny that it cannot be acknowledged without (as I discovered for myself) everything starting to unravel.

Our national renewal, our redeemed homeland, our resurrection from the ashes of Europe, was paid for not with reparations from post-war West Germany, or arms from the Soviet Union, or aid from America. The invoice was sent to the Palestinians.

But none of this can be accepted into Jewish consciousness. For the Jewish narrative to remain intact, every Palestinian must remain a would-be terrorist afflicted with the latest mutation of anti-Semitism. Even non-violent opposition, from economic boycotts to prisoner hunger strikes, are seen as just another form of terror and an existential attack on the Jewish people.

And if, as a Jew, you do choose to take Obama's words seriously you soon find yourself in hot water with your own community and your own family. Such has been the success of the Zionist narrative, that to choose to see the world through Palestinian eyes immediately places you at the dissenting margins of the Jewish community, easily dismissed and easily ignored.

For myself, I refuse to accept that my views have disenfranchised me from Judaism or the Jewish community. My position of solidarity with the Palestinian people is not borne out of enmity to my own people but from a commitment to Jewish values and Jewish well-being.

I care about what the Jewish community says and does when it comes to Israel/Palestine. I care about its pronouncements, I care about its silence, I care about its denial and its indifference.

To 'put yourself in their shoes and see the world through their eyes' is a huge ask. For me it has meant overcoming my own racism and prejudice to allow myself to hear Palestinian voices and accept the validity of their story. It's become an exercise in un-installing the cultural software in my head.

As it turns out, I don't think Obama takes his own words seriously enough. He certainly fails to live up to the standard set by Atticus Finch who could see clearly the power dynamics of his own Maycomb County in Alabama. If Obama wants to take himself seriously, the first thing he would need to do is to re-write his whole speech to tell a more rounded and truthful story about how Jews and Palestinians have faced each other for the last hundred years and more.

I believe the Jewish future is dependent on us upholding what the Jewish Liberation theologian Marc Ellis describes as: Jewish prophetic consciousness. That can only mean hearing and seeing the Palestinian narrative and allowing it to shape a new post-Zionist Jewish self-understanding. That doesn't mean supporting a second Holocaust in Israel but it does mean the country growing beyond an ethnocentric State to a nation that respects the rights and national stories of all of its citizens.

Right now, standing on the Radley porch of Israel/Palestine, that looks like the only way to rescue the Hebrew covenant.

Thursday, 10 May 2012

For Israel and Nakba at 64...Micah meets David Ben-Gurion

[A poke, a tweet and a click-through and @DavidBenGurion, Israel's first Prime Minister and diminutive giant of pre and post Jewish Statehood arrives at Micah's Paradigm Shift. Nakba Day approaches, the Palestinians are commemorating the 64th year of the 'catastrophe' and the 'Old Man' of Israeli politics is in the mood for a robust chat. In his hand he holds a small scroll, it is Israel's Declaration of Independence signed 14th May 1948. The conversation goes like this.]


Micah's Paradigm Shift (MPS): Welcome Prime Minister!

David Ben-Gurion: (DBG): You call this place welcoming!

MPS: Well, I have some helpful navigation tabs to previous posts and you can sign up for email updates.

DBG: I've been here 20 minutes and I can see exactly what you're up to.

MPS: You're not the first to take offence. Nobody has ever turned up in person though.

DBG: You should be defending your own people not undermining one of the great triumphs of Jewish history. You're a disgrace.

MPS: To be a disgrace I'd need more followers. Until then, I'm just an inconvenience.

DBG: The story is simple but your writing makes it all so complicated.

MPS: I like complicated.

DBG: We returned to our homeland, we built a sovereign state, we brought back pride and self-respect to a persecuted people. The Arabs hated us for it. There was a war. We won, they lost. That's how it goes.

MPS: That's not how I see it. That's the paradigm I want to challenge. I'm trying to rescue the Hebrew covenant...one blog post at a time.

DBG: I was never a great one for religion. Socialism and Jewish nationalism were my thing.

MPS: But in the end it was your Jewish nationalism that won out. And nationalism will always drag you to the right. It was socialism, but socialism for Jews only.
DBG: And I don't see much of that anymore!

MPS: Quite. But I'm still not sure what brings you here? I subscribe to a few bloggers who you'd feel much more at home with. I can give you their addresses or you can tweet them direct.

DBG: Don't worry, I've checked them out too. I thought I could be high-handed and arrogant but clearly I still have much to learn.

MPS: I still don't understand why you're bothering with the blogosphere. This site is clearly not for you. You made it happen. Herzl, Weizmann and you...the three giants in the story. You are, without doubt, not my target audience.

DBG: I won't contradict you.

MPS: Don't get me wrong though, I can certainly appreciate your thinking. From the perspective of 19th Century Eastern European Jewry, the whole thing looked like a brilliant idea, the perfect solution.

DBG: Back to the future!

MPS: A grand return!

DBG: Start anew. To build and to be built!

MPS: Livnot L'hibanot!

DBG: Exactly!

MPS: Not very Jewish though.

DBG: Don't be ridiculous! How much more Jewish does it get? A return to our ancient homeland.

MPS: I have serious problems with the whole project.

DBG: I know. That's why I'm here dummy. I don't need a 'yes man'.

MPS: What do you need?

DBG: I've been thinking things over. I've looked around some other spider net things.

MPS: Websites, Prime Minister.

DBG: Palestinian ones.

MPS: Really?

DBG: I'm not entirely comfortable with how things turned out.

MPS: You mean the forced expulsions and denial of return for Palestinian refugees? The land theft, water appropriation, house demolitions, political assassinations, blockades, separation walls, imprisonment without trial, second class citizenship, disregard for international law and now stealing Bedouin land in the Negev. Stuff like that?

DBG: Don't get carried away! Remember who you are speaking to.


MPS: One of the big three, Prime Minister.

DBG: I'm thinking, maybe it's time for Zionism to move on a little. We could be a little more magnanimous in our victory, perhaps.

MPS: I'd love to know who you've been reading!

DBG: I have a few old friends working on this with me. Pioneers from the old days. We've been scouting around looking at where to start, working our way down blogrolls.

MPS: And what do you think I can I do?

DBG: Well to start with, we need a fresh look at the Declaration of Independence.

MPS: I'm surprised you think there's a problem with it. It's a brilliant summary of the whole Zionist mindset.

DBG: Thank you.

MPS: Liberal Zionists love it. It brings a warm glow to the mainstream Jewish heart. Democratic ideals, the protection of civil rights, and our national story over three millennia told in a nutshell.

DBG: I know, I've always liked it too.

MPS: I didn't say I liked it!

DBG: I suspected as much. Anyway, looking back I think maybe it was written in haste, we were a little too close to events in Europe to get a good perspective on things, maybe we did not tell the story right.

MPS: I can't believe you're saying this.

DBG: We got to the third draft and went with that in time for the lifting of the British Mandate.

MPS: You want to re-write the Israeli Declaration of Independence?

DBG: No, I want you to. What would a Micah's Paradigm Shift version look like?

MPS: Well, if you're quite sure...I'd be happy to have a go.

DBG: The beginning is fine of course. I was always pleased with the beginning. It has that grand sweep of history about it and sets out our irrefutable claim to the land.

MPS: It's certainly a tidy telling of the story.

DBG: [Reading from the scroll] "The Land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained to statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books." Now how can you better that?

MPS: A bit partial. A bit distorted. But we can work on it.

DBG: What's to work on?

MPS: Well, if we really want to honour our founding national mythology and recognise what actually happened through our history how about mentioning some other points too. For a start, according to our own tradition, it was in the wilderness, outside the borders of the 'Promised Land', that we first became a nation with a mission to build a just society. It was on a desert mountaintop (Sinai) that we received that mission, our covenant.

DBG: I prefer my version.

MPS: Wait, I'm not finished. We ought to reflect that our understanding of Judaism has as much to do with our time in exile as it does with our time in the land. It was after 70 CE and the destruction of the second Temple that we developed a faith of action and spirituality located in time and independent of place.

DGB: Can't we keep it simple?

MPS: No, simple is the whole problem. It was in Babylonia that the Talmud was written. It was in Spain and north Africa that we wrote much of our great rabbinic commentary. It was in eastern Europe that we deepened our understanding of the mystery of the universe and created a rich culture of joyful prayer, a literature that touched the soul, and music that reached to heaven. Yes we came from the land of Israel, but we are who we are today because of what happened far beyond Israel's borders.

DBG: Okay, I'm hardly going to argue that our exile was not important but in all that time we kept faith with Israel, and, I quote, the Jews "never ceased to pray and hope for their return to it and for the restoration in it of their political freedom."

MPS: For most of our two thousand years in exile that's not quite how we understood things.

DBG: More history?

MPS: And theology. We were taught that our exile was a punishment from God and that our return was conditional on fulfilling God's commandments. Exile was exile from God. It was spiritual as much as physical. Our task in exile was to rebuild the covenant not organise for a political return.

DBG: We never forgot our attachment to Zion.

MPS: But we had to lead a righteous existence that would make us worthy of redemption and so worthy of returning. Seeking 'Political freedom' through a nationalist project was a new, and highly controversial, development that only began to take hold at the end of the19th century. Cue Herzl etc. etc. Redemption was about the Jewish people first, not the Jewish land. Speaking Jewishly, Zionism is a little presumptuous in its dealing with God. We seem to have conveniently forgotten all of this though.

DBG: Spare me the lectures, you think I haven't heard all of this before? I said at the time we should leave God out of it. The whole thing will run to pages and pages the way you're going.

MPS: I just want to reclaim the story of the dispersion and exile as not entirely negative and remind us that the criteria for a 'return' was a little more complex.

DBG: I know where my home should be.

MPS: You make it sound like two thousand years was just an aberration. Like we just popped out for some bagels but now we're back.

DBG: [Reading again] "And we made the deserts bloom bringing the blessings of progress to all of the country's inhabitants."

MPS: You mean buying land from absentee Arab landlords and then allowing only Jewish labour to work it or use it. That wasn't really a blessing for all. Arab Palestinian farmers had been making the desert bloom for one and a half thousand years. Some of them will be descended from the Jews that remained in the land after 70 CE. In fact, you probably share the same ancient Israelite DNA.

DBG: There's no need to bring the Arabs into this.

MPS: There's every need to bring the Arabs into this. It's their story too.

DBG: Alright, alright! But we still have the Balfour declaration of 1917. That was Weizmann good work. And later there was the League of Nations backing up the British Empire's commitment to a national home for the Jewish people.

MPS: One nation promises to another nation the land belonging to a third nation. Not much to admire there. British imperialism at its most inept. Promising everything to everyone but with only it's own interests at heart.

DBG: The Holocaust justified the whole project. You can't argue with that. [Reading from the scroll] "The catastrophe which recently befell the Jewish people - the massacre of millions of Jews in Europe - was another clear demonstration of the urgency of solving the problem of its homelessness by re-establishing in Eretz-Israel the Jewish State, which would open the gates of the homeland wide to every Jew and confer upon the Jewish people the status of a fully privileged member of the comity of nations."

MPS: Are you telling me that being a nation state is what protects a people from discrimination and victimisation?

DBG: Having power is what protects you. We had to make Jews like everyone else.

MPS: Ah, yes. Zionism as the ultimate move to Jewish assimilation.

DBG: You are being absurd!

MPS: No, just trying to re-focus the paradigm.

DBG: It's the Jewish State that protects us from another Holocaust.

MPS: But we have a Jewish State and anti-Semitism remains. And now Netanyahu says the 'Jewish life-boat' is itself the target of a second Holocaust thanks to those new Nazis in Iran. That doesn't sound like a successful normalising of the Jewish condition. If the Holocaust teaches us anything, it must be that something more fundamental was at stake than creating a new nation state. Something concerning the rights and responsibilities of all people towards all other people, at all times.

DBG: You are a hopeless idealist. I deal in reality.

MPS: No, I am a hopeful idealist. I deal in truth and justice.

DBG: I'm not sure this is going very well.

MPS: When it comes to the Holocaust, we learnt the wrong lessons.

DBG: Can we move on? I take it you don't have an issue with the name we chose?

MPS: 'Israel', was a great choice of name.

DBG: At last, something we agree on!

MPS: If I remember right, the name means: 'To wrestle with God', as Jacob did in the wilderness. Jews wrestling with God sums up the whole history of the state building project. I'm not sure who's winning though.

DBG: Can you please stop, just for a moment, finding fault in everything we did. It takes two to tango you know. The Palestinians are not a tribe of saints just as we are not all sinners.

MPS: This is true. Both sides have been violent and stupid plenty of times. But you know as well as anyone that this was never a battle between equals. You must have put yourself in their shoes at some point in 1947-9? The Palestinians were 70% of the population of Mandate Palestine and the Jews owned only 6% of the land. Yet the UN offered the Jews a State made up of 55% of Palestine. In fact, if the plan had gone ahead, the new Jewish State would have had more Arabs than Jews in it. And we expected the Palestinians to accept it as a generous offer and wish us 'mazoltov!'

DBG: After 64 years we are still the only democracy in the Middle East. And we promised as much back in '48. You can't argue with this: "The State of Israel will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations."

MPS: It sounds great but it's full of contradictions. A bit like the Balfour declaration. How do you create a Jewish State with a built-in bias towards one ethnic/religious national group and claim this will not harm the rights of any other ethnic/religious national group? That's not how British democracy works, or French or American. The reality on the ground does not match the high ideals and it never could. A Jewish State will never be fair or just until we come to terms honestly with the meaning of its founding principles. We offer Arabs rights as individuals but no rights as a people.

DBG: I think this is what these days they call 'delegitimising' the Jewish state.

MPS: Israel has been doing a very job of delegitimising itself for decades without the slightest help from me. It could have all been different of course. A homeland did not have to be a Jewish State.

DBG: Buber? Magnes? Even more crazy than you!

MPS: No. Just way ahead of the curve. One day we may catch up with them.

DBG: I suppose at the end we did place our trust in "The Rock of Israel".

MPS: What exactly was that meant to mean?

DBG: It was a compromise, a sop to the religious. God, without actually saying God.

MPS: Well, I agree there are pros and cons with bringing God into the Middle East mix.

DBG: Amen to that!

MPS: When we leave him out we lose all humility. But when we bring him in, it's like a license for eternal arrogance.

DBG: So can you help with the re-write or not?

MPS: I sense we may struggle to reach agreement.

DBG: Look, I can live with two states if that's what you are getting at.

MPS: Well that's certainly a start. Be honest, you must have been delighted when they refused to accept the partition plan in 1947?

DBG: I would have been foolish not to take advantage of their intransigence. We needed a viable state to survive. The UN did not give us that.

MPS: A viable state is exactly what we're denying the Palestinians today. It's good that you know what it feels like to be offered an unworkable solution.

DBG: Like I said before, there was a war. Wars are not nice. We planned well. We were organised and united. We won, they lost.

MPS: And let's all wave a fond farewell to three thousand years of Jewish ethics. You've given me nationalism instead, and boy do I feel short changed!

DBG: Are you taking on the job or not?

MPS: If you are serious about a re-write then we need to start by accepting that this document has to be about two peoples, Jews and Palestinians, whose stories are now irreversibly entwined.

DBG: It won't even sound like a Declaration of Independence by the time you are finished with it!

MPS: It will be independence from the old, worn-out paradigm. Past, present and future, the Palestinians and the Jews are now forever bound together. Like it or not, everything about both peoples now intersects through that small strip of land. Our future and theirs, it's all the same story.

DBG: I should have chosen one of those liberal Zionists, they're less challenging than you.

MPS: You tried to write them out of existence in 1948 and Israel has been trying to make them disappear for good ever since. The Palestinians are the inconvenient truth. It's time to tell ourselves the truth.

DBG: I'm going to have to speak to my colleagues. This is all far more than we had discussed. You push too far and too fast for an old man like me.

MPS: Israel is still young but it's time to start growing up. To build and to be built was a terrific slogan but now let's apply it to everyone in the land.

DBG: We'll see! I'm off. Sweet dreams young man.

MPS: Remember what Theodor Herzl said.

DBG: Remind me.

MPS: If you will it, it is no dream.


[And with that @DavidBenGurion hits the share button and tweets the link to the conversation with his 13 million Jewish followers.]