Illustration by HINGYI KHONG/Daily Bruin Amer is a
third-year political science student and president of the United
Arab Society.
By Fadi Amer
As we idly sit and watch this great tragedy unfold in the Middle
East, the prospects for peace today seem dimmer than ever. There
have been at least 84 Palestinian deaths and more than 2,000
injuries. These figures sharply contrast with four Israeli deaths
(www.alhayat.com).
But do not let the huge lopsidedness surprise you. For guns,
tanks and helicopters are extremely more effective at killing
people than rocks. It therefore should be no surprise that the
Israelis have agreed to everything in Paris except an international
investigation. The excuse it gave was that the world would be
biased against a Jewish State. I wonder why?
Should all of the blame for the violence be placed on Israel?
After all, the Israelis were very diligent at protecting their
actions by blaming the Palestinians, who began protesting and
throwing rocks. Israel claims they were merely protecting their
citizens from the barbaric Palestinians.
Although this may seem plausible on the surface, it is puzzling
how the Israelis are always ready to vehemently assert this point,
but never seem to give a second thought as to why the Palestinians
erupted with such great tenacity and desperation. I hope that this
column would give Israel a hint.
Let us first look at the event that sparked the immediate round
of violence: Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon’s visit
to the holy sites in Jerusalem. It seems very ironic to me that a
murderer like Sharon would actually have the heart to pray. There
is no doubt that Sharon has very well earned the title of war
criminal. The atrocities he committed range from giving direct
orders in 1956 to General Arye Biro to chain and kill Egyptian
prisoners of war, to direct assistance of the massacre of hundreds
of Palestinian refugees in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps
outside of Beirut in 1982.
The very fact that someone like Sharon still holds a very
influential position in both the Israeli government and Israeli
politics is not only astounding, but is greatly resented throughout
the Arab World. Let me try to give you a clearer sense of the
picture here. Although I really hate to use such comparisons,
Sharon to the Arabs (in terms of hatred and abhorrence) is on the
same level that Eichmann, a Nazi war criminal, would be to the
Jews. The level of hatred here is truly indescribable.
Please do yourself a favor, before you get ready to blast me for
making such a comparison. Do some research on Sharon and the
atrocities he committed. (I am more than positive that it will save
you a great deal of embarrassment).
But let us not get ahead of ourselves here, because we will miss
the larger picture if we just focus on Sharon to explain or to
understand this tragic event. The truth of the matter is that his
visit was the spark that ignited the great explosion of Palestinian
frustration. This is not only tied to the failures of the peace
process, but also to the rather greater Palestinian paralysis. This
extends to every aspect of Palestinian life, from education and
economy to technology and sovereignty.
Such paralysis is not just limited to the Palestinians in the
West Bank, but to those also living in Israel. A bit surprised?
Well, why don’t you go and read about the Arabs and their
towns in Israel. If you know anything about the Middle East, this
should not be news to you. Even Prime Minister Ehud Barak publicly
acknowledged that he is “aware of the frustrations among the
Arab citizens in the country” (“Violence Spreads
Between Arabs and Jews in Israel,” L.A. Times, Oct. 3,
2000).
This is a very daring thing for a prime minister to say,
especially if he is referring to a country whose very establishment
was aided and based on ending discrimination and the persecution of
a people.
Have I gone too far? Have I struck a raw nerve here? It is okay,
since the things that I am writing about do not necessarily fit to
what you are used to reading in the newspapers or what you see on
TV. As harsh or as troubling as it may be, the fact remains that
the Palestinians have been under occupation for more than 50 years.
52 years of oppression, of discrimination, and of brutality.
Still confused? Well, maybe during your last trip to the Middle
East you might have forgotten to visit the refugee camps, which
still house hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. Or maybe you
were so enchanted with the beauty of Tel Aviv that you may have
overlooked other cities like Hebron, Jenin or Romallah. Or perhaps
you were a bit scared to venture into the unrefined or
“uncultured” eastern section of the “United
Jerusalem.”
Maybe you were just too busy last week to read accounts of
Mohammed Durra, the 12-year-old boy who was clinging to his father
before he was fatally shot by the Israelis. (The Israelis first
claimed that he was throwing rocks, but quickly changed their story
after they found out it was captured on tape.) What about the
10-year-old boy who apparently was posing so much danger to the
Israeli helicopter pilots that they felt it necessary to kill him?
I can go on with stories about the nine-year-old kid, the
seventeen-year-old or the seventy-year-old man, but fortunately for
the Israelis, there were no cameras to expose the brutality to
public attention (the deaths are therefore reduced to figures).
Even if you don’t understand or agree with anything that I
have said, you at least have a better understanding of why the
Israelis were so resolute in preventing an international
investigation of this tragedy. This is not a call for the
destruction of Israel, but a call for the revelation of truth.
But what does all of this mean? Does it mean that we should
abandon or give up the pursuit for peace? On the contrary, and as
hard as it may sound, peace should now be pursued with more
commitment and more tenacity. After all, isn’t this episode,
as Former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres proclaimed, the
glorious alternative to peace?
But the thing to remember here is that peace needs to be
anchored by truth, justice and respect. The fault lies in our view
that a peace accord is just like a business deal. But real peace is
not about “creative plans” or skillful negotiators;
instead, it is about mutual respect for the other side ““ and,
more importantly, mutual respect for humanity.