A remembered spot from a long-forgotten Syrian place...
"I see my father. He is eighty-five. He is a broken man. He doesn't know what happened, what hit him. You see, he came here in 1911 from Greece. My mother came in 1921 from Lithuania. They say, 'What happened to my dream?' They are both socialists. They came here to build a new society, a just society. They believed it shouldn't be at the expense of the Arabs, they really believed that. And now when they see the turn, what is now the meaning of nationalism, and they can no longer reconcile it with the humanistic values, they are broken."
Meron Benvenisti said this about his Zionist parents and the evolution of the Israeli state in 1986. Say what you will about the socialism bit, the original founders of the modern state of Israel probably would be suffering the same broken dream after seeing what was supposed to be a bastion of morality and good turn into a military occupier. Considering the atrocities of the Second World War, David Ben-Gurion and the other founders of the state certainly wanted a Jewish Israel to be a force for good in the world - not one that seems to be frozen in its role as oppressor. From the Declaration of the State of Israel on May 14, 1948:
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.
Is this the Israel that was envisioned by those who worked so hard for its founding? The stalemate in peace in ancient Palestine cannot be blamed entirely on Israel; Palestinian disorganization, anger, weaknesses inability to sometimes recognize reality has prolonged the struggle. Yet with the recentannouncements of more settlement construction that will inevitably complicate if not kill the peace talks, Israel is hardly presenting itself as a country that exudes morality and good.
Seemingly, Israel's implied rejection of the indirect peace talks will prolong the untenable situation further. As settlements continue to expand and an independent Palestine becomes more unlikely, the Jewish state will have to decide on its future. Without concessions in the near future, Israel risks losing its Jewish character - the main component of its very existence - as voices supporting a two-state solution slowly are swallowed by increasing calls for a binational agreement.
In 1982, after the massacres in the Beirut Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila, the young nation of Israel was forced to do some serious soul-searching to discover where the moral backbone of Israel went. The massacres were, of course, committed by Christian Phalanges, but were done under the watchful eye of Israel. Israel knew it needed to protect itself from further moral corruption. From David Shipler:
A gathering storm of guilt and outrage burst from a large body of Israeli Jews. Enormous numbers ... demonstrated in Tel Aviv to press their demand that the government appoint a formal state commission of inquiry to define the scope of the country's governmental and religious hierarchies, the citizenry itself mobilized into an explosion of conscious unparalleled in the modern history of Western democracy... Suddenly the Palestinian had a human face behind the numbing label "terrorist." Suddenly Arab innocents stood close behind the facade of hostility. Suddenly Israelis doubted their own morality.*
I often focus on the Palestinian need to a peace agreement. The reasons are obvious: Palestinian land is being taken while Palestinian people discriminated against, unjustly imprisoned killed. The list goes on. Rarely do I mention the pressing need for Israel. But the need is there and ever increasing.
Israel was created for two reasons. It was meant to be a Jewish state and - though the Zionist movement is much older - to be a lasting symbol of morality after the atrocities committed against the Jews by Hitler. Today, Israel is in danger of losing both of these important pillars. The country cannot remain Jewish if peace is not made and the continued military occupation - deemed illegal by most of the international community - is allowed to continue slowly eroding the moral fiber of the Jewish state.
In 1982, nearly one of every ten Israelis went to the street to protest their government and to question the morality of its actions. Today, Israel needs another movement of self-criticism in order to save itself. Today, perhaps more than ever, Israel needs to severely question its policies of occupation and discrimination. It needs to demand its leaders to be good and to push for what is right and just. It needs to salvage the present, limit the scars of the soon-to-be past and save the future.
*The Shipler quotation and the opening Benvenisti quotation come from Shipler's book "Arab and Jew," pages 464 and 461. Look for a review soon.
This is cross-posted at Notes From a Medinah
When Joe Biden arrived in Israel yesterday, he was probably expecting to have a nice, calm and relaxing trip during which he would celebrate the announcement of new indirect talks between Israel and Palestine. Little did he know that he would be welcomed by the announcement of over 100 new housing units in the West Bank. I wrote yesterday how the announcement was going to undermine the peace talks that had not yet begun, but little did I know, the Israeli government had more surprises for Joe!
While Biden was still unpacking, Israel announced plans for 1600 new homesto be constructed in East Jerusalem. The decision was made and announced by the interior ministry - led my the extreme-right Shas party - while the Prime Minister's office was apparently in the dark.
Meir Margalit, Meretz's representative to the Jerusalem city council, claimed that the statement was meant to disrupt the Biden visit, saying that he had "no doubt that the timing isn't coincidental," calling the announcement Interior Minister Eli Yishai's "answer to Netanyahu's willingness to renew indirect peace talks with the Palestinians."
"The fact that Eli Yishai couldn't restrain himself for another two-three days until Biden left Israel means his intention was to slap the U.S. administration in the face," Margalit said, adding that the announcement was "a provocation to the U.S. and to the prime minister."
Following a request for a statement by Prime Minister's Office, Yishai said in response that the timing of the announcement had no connection to Biden's visit.
Predictably, the US was rather restrained in response to the initial announcement of further construction in Beitar Illit with the State department saying:
On the one hand, it does not violate the moratorium that the Israelis previously announced. On the other hand, this is the kind of thing that both sides have to be cautious as we move ahead with these parallel talks.
When you are in talks of this kind, you have to recognize the interests and perceptions of the other side, and both sides should be cautious about actions that might be either misperceived within the region or that might be exploited by those who want to create obstacles.
Biden was more direct when reacting to the newest announcement:
I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I’ve had here in Israel. We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them. This announcement underscores the need to get negotiations under way that can resolve all the outstanding issues of the conflict. The United States recognizes that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue for Israelis and Palestinians and for Jews, Muslims and Christians. We believe that through good faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem and safeguards its status for people around the world. Unilateral action taken by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations on permanent status issues. As George Mitchell said in announcing the proximity talks, "we encourage the parties and all concerned to refrain from any statements or actions which may inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of these talks.
Perhaps the Israeli theory here is to lower expectations for the indirect peace talks to a point where simply shuttling George Mitchell back and forth would be a major victory. Or maybe it is time for the US to take off the velvet gloveand stand up to Israel.
This post is cross-posted from Notes From a Medinah
Question 1: Jesse, what in gods name were you doing in the Middle East with a surfboard?
Question 2: How did you go? Give me the means... and let us all know about it and why.
Question 3: What is it like to write a book? What are the phases? What is a book proposal? And why should any of us continue to waste our time with book publishers anymore?
Question 4: What is you're writing schedule like? Are you a werewolf or a rooster?
Question 5: How has the Middle East changed since you surfed through it? Israel, Lebanon Iran, Syria Iraq and more...
Question 6: Do you think there will be another round of fighting between Israel and Lebanon? How will it start and why? What will the consequences be? What is with the rise of the new right in Israel?
Question 7: It's the Sarah Palin question... what do you read? What is your daily news source?
The announcement, as I mentioned, came hours before Biden was supposed to land in Israel as the senior-most official to visit Israel under Obama. The US, like the rest of the international community is opposed to further settlement construction by Israel and views the settlements as a major obstacle to peace. By preempting Biden’s visit with plans to break the limited settlement freeze, Israel seems to be daring the Obama Administration to condemn the move – particularly after Obama said that he would hold the Israelis or Palestinians accountable for holding up negotiations.
Making the announcement even more provocative is that it came one day after the Palestinians hesitantly agreed to a four-month round of US brokered indirect negotiations. The Palestinians agreed to indirect negotiations, but warned that they would not succeed if Israel continued its settlement policy:
The Israeli anti-settlement group Peace Now slammed the new project, saying it would “widen the gap with the Palestinians and the two-state solution, which risks becoming obsolete.”
The new project came to light a day after the Palestinians grudgingly agreed to four months of indirect peace negotiations with Israel but warned that the US-brokered process would collapse if it continued expanding settlements.
It also came as Biden was to make his first visit to the region since assuming office. George Mitchell, the US Middle East envoy, is also in the region on the latest of several visits to meet Israeli and Palestinian leaders.
The Palestinians insist they will only return to direct talks if Israel agrees to a complete freeze on settlement construction in the occupied West Bank, including annexed Arab east Jerusalem.
You really need to wonder what the logic of this announcement is. Not only is Israel showing up Biden, but they are also dooming the indirect talks to failure and showing up Mahmoud Abbas. All said, the announcement is antagonistic and bordering on lunacy. It will be interesting to see what the US response is. More to come as this develops.
This Post is cross-posted from Notes From a Medinah
This post is cross-posted from Notes From a Medinah
Al Arabiya has a great article about the fall of Arabic among Lebanese. Lebanon, which was under French mandate from the 1920's until independence in 1943, teaches students French, English and Arabic from a young age. French and English are seen - and have been seen for years - as the languages of the elite and the educated. Throughout the Middle East, classical Arabic has evolved into various dialects. The Arabic on the streets in Cairo is different than in Damascus and Muscat. And, while the dialects are different than the classical Arabic used in political speeches and the newspaper, some dialects are much closer to ‘real’ Arabic than others. In Lebanon, the dialect has evolved so far from classical Arabic, it is closer to an international hybrid language.
"Arabic is still very much alive as a language, but young people are moving farther and farther away from it," said Suzanne Talhouk, who heads the organization "Fael Ummer" (Imperative) which is running the campaign.
"Some of our youngsters are incapable of writing correctly in Arabic, and many university students we interviewed were not even able to recite the alphabet," Talhouk told AFP.
Urban youths are often unable to hold a conversation in one language, causing amusement but also irking those around them with such home-grown expressions as the popular farewell: "Yalla, bye.”
"At my school it's more cool to speak French. Arabic is looked down upon," said high school student Nathalie.
I was in Lebanon last summer studying classical Arabic (foosha) and the Lebanese dialect (ameeyeh) and found the general population of Beirut to be much more proficient in English and French than foosha. While the inability or unwillingness of Beirutis to speak to me in foosha was frustrating, it did provide a very interesting insight into the collective mindset of the Lebanese people and their preference for French and English.
[tweetmeme] There are obviously many reasons for the fall of Arabic among Lebanese, but a couple really stick out as obvious/interesting. The French colonial legacy and the status of Beirut as the gateway to the Middle East in the 1950’s and 1960’s brought a need for English and French. The integration of English and French greatly influenced the evolution of the Lebanese dialect. Secondly, the conflicted and complex history of Arabs in Lebanon includes an intriguing Phoenician shadow that, to some, made Arabic a tainted language.
Since Lebanon was run by the French, the Lebanese elite used the French language as a way to signify their membership to the upper-class. Similarly, those who provided services were forced to adapt their Arabic in order to understand and be understood by the French and English speaking foreigners and Lebanese. Indeed, even after independence, in wealthy West Beirut cafes were filled with more English and French than Arabic. With them, the French brought the lasting presence of French education – something that was typically available for only the wealthy. This is portrayed in the film “West Beirut,” where the main characters are students in a French school at the outbreak of the civil war, demonstrating the prevalence of French education long after independence.
After independence, Beirut was more or less an international city of escape. Wealthy Europeans would stop at the city during long Mediterranean cruises to enjoy the food, history and beach clubs. The service sector in Beirut was primarily composed of poor Muslims who did not speak English or French. Thus, most Lebanese were forced to adapt their language to fit the international character of the city. Until the outbreak of the civil war, French and English presence in the country was great, while Arabic was seen as the poor man’s language - a phenomenon that is also occurring today in the Emirates.
While I was in Beirut, I distinctly remember a taxi ride I took. The driver spoke fluent foosha (the classical Arabic) and when I mentioned my surprise at his ability he noted that he was Syrian and, thus, knew Arabic. According to the driver (I have not followed this up with more research) the Syrian education system is completely in foosha and, consequently, all educated Syrians can speak the classical language. In Lebanon, noted my driver, this is not the case. Arabic education in Lebanon is conducted in the local dialect.
Furthermore, there was a prominent faction of society that claimed that Lebanese were not Arab, but rather descendents of the Phoenicians – an argument that still exists among a minority of Lebanese. The argument was that, as Phoenicians, the Lebanese should not be learning the Arabic language, but the Phoenician language (Lebanese dialect). Thus – again, according to my driver – formal Arabic education during the Lebanese civil war was passed over by many as a recognized denial of true Lebanese roots. Many Lebanese would study ameeyah and not foosha to show solidarity with their Phoenician history. The validity of this argument is questionable, but it is certainly interesting.
So today, Lebanon is left with a dying language among the future generations. Even though there is an effort to reintroduce formal Arabic to the Lebanese population, “Yalla, bye” is far more common than “Ma saalema.” Interestingly, the gap between foosha and ameeyah is not only a Lebanese problem – though it is most pronounced in Lebanon. I work with someone here in Saudi Arabia who speaks classical Arabic nearly fluently, but no dialectical Arabic. For him, what is spoken on the streets of Jeddah, Cairo and Damascus is not Arabic, but simply Arabic’s uneducated cousin. Nearly every day, I hear him lament that no one here in Jeddah can understand his Arabic because they do not know ‘real’ Arabic. Jeddah, like Beirut, has a large international population – generally from Sudan, the Philippines and Egypt – which forces the evolution of Arabic.
Yet there is a major difference between Beirut and Jeddah, beyond the fact that the Gulf dialect is generally closer to classical Arabic than the Lebanese version. Though my friend uses hyperbole, of course, when he claims that no one understands his Arabic, he also complains that no one can understand English either – a problem not found in Lebanon.
Photo from Al Arabiya
