On extremists, moderates, and us

Friday, October 30th, 2009

...I took up the invitation to participate in a panel of “progressive” Israel/Palestine bloggers/writers/activists Monday . The space for the program was offered by J Street, but the panel itself was not affiliated with them (they did not even include it in the official program of events). Both were independent of one another, an odd relationship which came characterize the session itself. I was unsure what the nature of the session was supposed to be-or for the entire conference for that matter.

(snip)

Half an hour in, I was silent, still wondering what I was doing there. Then Ray Hanania spoke via webcam, in the nauseating meaningless expressions that could be uttered by anyone from Ariel Sharon to Ghandi “we must isolate the extremists on both sides and reach out to the moderates in order ot achieve peace, and we all know that is based on the vision of two-states for two people’s… blahbity blahbity blah…”.

“Ray” one of the moderators confessed, “you make it so easy for Jews to speak to you”.

Ok, I’d had enough. I shook my head, raised my hand and just sort of let it all out: “I’m sorry I really have to say something here. I’ve been quietly listening to what everyone has been saying for 20 minutes now- feeling confused and very much out of place, as I listen to people talking about moderates and achieving peace and …I just have to ask: What is everyone talking about? This is not real. What two states? What ‘peace’? Are we living on different planets? Has anyone seen a map of the West Bank lately? Of the settlements? Do you know what the settlements have done? what the wall looks like? Everyone is speaking about “two states”, about an independent viable palestine as if that’s real. As though it were something just within our reach. And all I can think about is Gaza. My parents. My husband, a refugee, who can’t even go back with me when I was able to go back. The West Bank. Jerusalem. This is not real anymore. I’m really not understanding what we’re doing here, and where I fit in to all of this, and what everyone is talking about.”

The conversation was way behind. Step off the tracks and take a look around, I thought.

“We can’t continue to speak like this, its an illusion people. I really also have to protest this dichotomous notion of there being extremists and moderates-who is the extremist here? Are Ray, and others, suggesting that President Abbas and the PA are the moderates? that they are the ones to reach out to? Let me let you in on a little secret: Most Palestinians don’t’ support Abbas. I certainly don’t consider him my president-his term expired in January. Where are all the other Palestinian voices? I am an observant Muslim; I also support a democratic one state solution; but I’m not Fateh or Hamas or anything else- I’m certainly pro-justice; do you consider me an extremist then? The Palestinian political spectrum is very diverse and pluralistic-its high time we recognized that and include these other voices in the conversation.” But of course, that would not be very convenient, would it....

read on...
http://www.gazamom.com/2009/10/on-extremists-moderates-and-us/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------- <[br />

Leila Haddad writes about herself:


I am a Palestinian from Gaza City. I am a journalist. I am a blogger. I am a mother. I am a Muslim. I am a Media Activist. This blog is about the trials of raising my children between spaces and identities; displacement and occupation; and everything that entails from potty training to border crossings.

Currently, we are based in the United States, unable to return to or even visit Gaza due to the siege. My husband is a Palestinian refugee denied his right of return to Palestine, and thus OUR right to live together as a family in our own land. Together, we endure a lot, and the personal becomes political. This is our story.

i was hoping to get better insights to life under the the PA and then under hamas..but she avoided anything to do with internal politics or the day to day life if she couldn't involve israel.

it was rather obvious that hamas was letting her blog as long as she kept the subject on israel and nothing on their own ineptness. It got to the point where hamas didn't even exist within her world....

that believes every time a Palestinian opens their mouth to speak on the I/P situation the only thing coming out of it should be condemnation of Hamas

it's not even particularly interesting that your post didn't get the flurry of attention you believe it's entitled to. Reading into the lack of posts on your thread is just silly.

I don't agree with *everything* in it, and as Pelsar says there are certain types of things she could not say even if she wanted to. But it is important to hear actual voices from Gaza, and to be reminded of what is happening to real people there.

thanks for reading it!

Pelsar is probably referring to the period '03-'06 where she was employed as a gaza correspondent for al-jazeera. I'm assuming that she lived in Gaza during that time.

on edit:

I notice that she states "I am a Palestinian from Gaza City" in her profile which is not exactly true, her patents are both from Gaza, but she was born in Kuwait and raised in Saudi Arabia.

Regardless of where she lives, she represents an interesting POV on the conflict.

Here's my response (to Laila el-Haddad's personal attack -- the extremists NEVER address the issues, the only attack the person) (Click to read her blog). When you support the one-state "solution" you are condeming Palestinians to generations of despair and suffering, but that suffering and despair enables you to self-focused activism. Anyone who supports "one-state" is either consumed with suffering and tragedy or simply an extremist who rejects compromise, and NOT a moderate. So why waste my time talking to you. Gaza IS NOT the issue. The issue is peace, something the Hamas terrorists (and the settler terrorists) do not want. When we have peace, we will have a safe Gaza and West Bank and Palestine State. but I don't think you want peace at all. You want victory over the Jews and the Israelis and you won't stop fighting until you turn back the clock to 1922. It ain't going to happen. And don't wrap yourself up with the suffering of my people. It's people like you who have enabled the Israeli extremists to achieve what they have. You asked, I answered.

http://hananiacreators.blogspot.com/

but it's always important to read all sides. Having done so, I still don't think 'one state' can work. A recipe for endless civil war IMO.

and basically accused Leila of wanting Israel destroyed??!!

Is he insane??!! "Why waste my time talking to you?" Are you kidding me? And this is someone you admire, LB? Do you really think someone like Leila Haddad should be excluded from the dialogue???

Seriously? Now I"m more depressed than ever.

I meant that I agree with Hanania about the *issues*: two-state solution vs one-state solution. And I like his work in general.

I thought he was rather peevish in the specific quote, and was more preoccupied with the fact that he'd been attacked than with addressing the issues. Common enough, but got in the way of making the real points on that occasion.

I don't want anyone silenced.

yes, she's an extremist. Anyone who seriously pushes the one state solution is an extremist who is actually advocating for eternal war to the death against Israel.

and Palestinians are basically subject to apartheid-like laws, or locked in prison camps.

The real question is, why do you Zionists equate providing equal rights with "eternal war?"

Two-states would have been great. Too bad the people of Israel allowed the settlers to call the shots and create a situation in which two-states will never be possible.

The only way to AVOID eternal war is to treat human beings from the river to the sea as human beings!

There are two peoples, and that is why there needs to be two states. Of course everyone should be treated as human beings, but that doesn't mean that they all have to live in the same country under the same rules. The Palestinians could have, and still can have there own country if they give up trying to deprive the Jews of their country. Blaming the situation all on the settlers is unfair and unrealistic.

Zionists don't equate providing equal rights with "eternal war". The problem is that the single state solution isn't about providing equal rights. It's about denying Jewish national rights so that the Arabs can have exclusive sovereignty over all of Palestine. The Israeli Jews aren't going to give up their sovereignty to live as a minority in an Arab state, nor should they. Israel is here to stay as a Jewish state. If the Palestinians want anything, then they are going to have to accept that.

I agree.. there are 2 peoples. But Israel's actions since 1967 have left the WB a piece of swiss cheese, not capable of being a functioning state.

How do you envision 2 states given this reality?

The bottom line is that people will continue to sing the 2-state song, while settlers rule the day, and Palestians will go on ad infinitum being treated as half-humans.

As a decent human being, how can you possibly be OK with that?

There are many people at fault for the current situation of the Palestinians, and I don't deny that the Israelis have a share of it. But the first place the Palestinians need to look is in the mirror. Their refusal to enter into any realistic compromise in the years before and after 1948 has hurt them more than they are willing to admit. I don't believe that the reality you describe is either completely true, nor the inevitable only result. The Palestinians have been calling for a one state resolution since before 1948. Frankly, the current cant that two states are now impossible looks less like Palestinians waking up to reality and more like just another excuse for not doing what they need to do to reach a settlement: recognize Jewish sovereignty over Israel, and compromise. Sure the state that they would get would not be ideal, but there is still a chance for a workable two state solution. Pretending that now there isn't, and blaming the settlers for that, is just another cop out.

settlements. What else is there to say?

Did they jump through the hoop of ending public incitement of antisemitism and Israel hatred on their government run radio stations? How about in the mosques? Or the schools? How about formally amending the PLO Charter rather than only a letter from Arafat? The truth is that since years before Israel was even created, the Palestinians rejected every compromise that came their way, and were instrumental in causing every Arab/Israeli war until the 1969 War of Attrition. They started the 1947-49 war, and 1956 and 1967 were in large part a response to Palestinian guerrilla and terror attacks which had as their goal the fomenting of war. It wasn't until only a few years ago that the PLO grudgingly entered into peace talks. Too little, perhaps too late.

As far as the settlement freeze, some have pointed out that it is a very recent request. It may have more to do with testing the new American President (seeing how much they could push Obama to push the Israelis). It didn't work, and now the PA is saddled with demanding it. Perhaps the Israelis should freeze settlement construction, but they aren't going to under those circumstances.

In Israel, the centre of the political spectrum is a long way to the right, and moving steadily further right still.

The only people still interested in making the concessions that would give peace any chance are fringe leftists - Meretz, the Arab parties, and a few Labour rebels.

"Working with the moderates against the right-wing extremists" won't do any good at all when the "moderates" are the likes of Barack, Livni and Netanyahu; the only hope would be "work with the left-wing extremists against the moderates".



Without not merely regime change but regime away from any of the possible contenders to replace the current Israeli government, there is no hope for peace.

Kadima, the party that received the most seats in the last Israeli election has firmly spoken out in favor of a two-state solution.

You need a more current news source!

Yes, Kadima speak out in favour of a two state-solution.

However, there is only any chance of a two-state solution working if Israel is willing to make significantly more concessions than Kadima are - most obviously, a putative Palestinian state without East Jerusalem as its capital has no chance of succeeding, and Kadima oppose that.

I have heard this said many times before, but I don't know why it should be. The original Partition Plan did not give the Palestinians sovereignty over E. Jerusalem. Why must Palestine have it now?