Is the peace process inherently flawed by a lack of understanding of Israel?

[Coyote]

Interesting article by Ilan Pappe...


Essay of the week: What drives Israel?

Probably the most bewildering aspect of the Gaza flotilla affair has been the righteous indignation expressed by the Israeli government and people.

The nature of this response is not being fully reported in the UK press, but it includes official parades celebrating the heroism of the commandos who stormed the ship and demonstrations by schoolchildren giving their unequivocal support for the government against the new wave of anti-Semitism.

As someone who was born in Israel and went enthusiastically through the socialisation and indoctrination process until my mid-20s, this reaction is all too familiar. Understanding the root of this furious defensiveness is key to comprehending the principal obstacle for peace in Israel and Palestine. One can best define this barrier as the official and popular Jewish Israeli perception of the political and cultural reality around them.

A number of factors explain this phenomenon, but three are outstanding and they are interconnected. They form the mental infrastructure on which life in Israel as a Jewish Zionist individual is based, and one from which it is almost impossible to depart – as I know too well from personal experience.

The first and most important assumption is that what used to be historical Palestine is by sacred and irrefutable right the political, cultural and religious possession of the Jewish people represented by the Zionist movement and later the state of Israel.

Most of the Israelis, politicians and citizens alike, understand that this right can’t be fully realised. But although successive governments were pragmatic enough to accept the need to enter peace negotiations and strive for some sort of territorial compromise, the dream has not been forsaken. Far more important is the conception and representation of any pragmatic policy as an act of ultimate and unprecedented international generosity.

Any Palestinian, or for that matter international, dissatisfaction with every deal offered by Israel since 1948, has therefore been seen as insulting ingratitude in the face of an accommodating and enlightened policy of the “only democracy in the Middle East”. Now, imagine that the dissatisfaction is translated into an actual, and sometimes violent, struggle and you begin to understand the righteous fury. As schoolchildren, during military service and later as adult Israeli citizens, the only explanation we received for Arab or Palestinian responses was that our civilised behaviour was being met by barbarism and antagonism of the worst kind.

According to the hegemonic narrative in Israel there are two malicious forces at work. The first is the old familiar anti-Semitic impulse of the world at large, an infectious bug that supposedly affects everyone who comes into contact with Jews. According to this narrative, the modern and civilised Jews were rejected by the Palestinians simply because they were Jews; not for instance because they stole land and water up to 1948, expelled half of Palestine’s population in 1948 and imposed a brutal occupation on the West Bank, and lately an inhuman siege on the Gaza Strip. This also explains why military action seems the only resort: since the Palestinians are seen as bent on destroying Israel through some atavistic impulse, the only conceivable way of confronting them is through military might.

The second force is also an old-new phenomenon: an Islamic civilisation bent on destroying the Jews as a faith and a nation. Mainstream Israeli orientalists, supported by new conservative academics in the United States, helped to articulate this phobia as a scholarly truth. These fears, of course, cannot be sustained unless they are constantly nourished and manipulated.

From this stems the second feature relevant to a better understanding of the Israeli Jewish society. Israel is in a state of denial. Even in 2010, with all the alternative and international means of communication and information, most of the Israeli Jews are still fed daily by media that hides from them the realities of occupation, stagnation or discrimination. This is true about the ethnic cleansing that Israel committed in 1948, which made half of Palestine’s population refugees, destroyed half the Palestinian villages and towns, and left 80% of their homeland in Israeli hands. And it’s painfully clear that even before the apartheid walls and fences were built around the occupied territories, the average Israeli did not know, and could not care, about the 40 years of systematic abuses of civil and human rights of millions of people under the direct and indirect rule of their state.

Nor have they had access to honest reports about the suffering in the Gaza Strip over the past four years. In the same way, the information they received on the flotilla fits the image of a state attacked by the combined forces of the old anti-Semitism and the new Islamic Judacidal fanatics coming to destroy the state of Israel. (After all, why would they have sent the best commando elite in the world to face defenceless human rights activists?)

Entire article here: Essay of the week: What drives Israel? - Herald Scotland | Comment | Guest Commentary

 

[Marc39]

As someone who was born in Israel and went enthusiastically through the socialisation and indoctrination process until my mid-20s, this reaction is all too familiar. Understanding the root of this furious defensiveness is key to comprehending the principal obstacle for peace in Israel and Palestine.

The principle obstacle to peace is Islamic doctrine prohibiting Jewish infidels from existing in a sovereign state.

 

[Coyote]

As someone who was born in Israel and went enthusiastically through the socialisation and indoctrination process until my mid-20s, this reaction is all too familiar. Understanding the root of this furious defensiveness is key to comprehending the principal obstacle for peace in Israel and Palestine.

The principle obstacle to peace is Islamic doctrine prohibiting Jewish infidels from existing in a sovereign state.

Thank you for proving the author's point

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Every nation has its historical narrative.

What much of europe sees as foolish intransigence is seen by Israel as an imperative for preservation of the nation. European attitudes are much of the source of Israeli intransigence.

 

[Marc39]

Every nation has its historical narrative.

What much of europe sees as foolish intransigence is seen by Israel as an imperative for preservation of the nation. European attitudes are much of the source of Israeli intransigence.

Israeli intransigence to what? Genocide?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Every nation has its historical narrative.

What much of europe sees as foolish intransigence is seen by Israel as an imperative for preservation of the nation. European attitudes are much of the source of Israeli intransigence.

Israeli intransigence to what? Genocide?

This guy who was born in Israel, went thru the Army, and yet wrote such an obscene article is obviously a traitor--like Benedict Arnold.

 

[Coyote]

Every nation has its historical narrative.

What much of europe sees as foolish intransigence is seen by Israel as an imperative for preservation of the nation. European attitudes are much of the source of Israeli intransigence.

Israeli intransigence to what? Genocide?

This guy who was born in Israel, went thru the Army, and yet wrote such an obscene article is obviously a traitor--like Benedict Arnold.

...or, maybe he has a more realistic perspective on the situation than you do.

 

[pans trogladyta]

Every nation has its historical narrative.

What much of europe sees as foolish intransigence is seen by Israel as an imperative for preservation of the nation. European attitudes are much of the source of Israeli intransigence.

Israeli intransigence to what? Genocide?

Seeing as how the jews seem to be much better equipped to commit genocide, your babbling is obtuse.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The so called peace process is structured to fail. That is why it always has and that is why it always will.

 

[Marc39]

Interesting article by Ilan Pappe...

The same Ilan Pappe who tends to make shit up?

 

[Marc39]

Every nation has its historical narrative.

What much of europe sees as foolish intransigence is seen by Israel as an imperative for preservation of the nation. European attitudes are much of the source of Israeli intransigence.

Israeli intransigence to what? Genocide?

Seeing as how the jews seem to be much better equipped to commit genocide, your babbling is obtuse.

5 million Jews committing genocide of 400 million Arabs, shit-for-brains?

 

[Coyote]

The so called peace process is structured to fail. That is why it always has and that is why it always will.

That seems to be the point this author is making....

 

[Marc39]

The so called peace process is structured to fail. That is why it always has and that is why it always will.

That seems to be the point this author is making....

Pallies will not accept Israel's existence because Islamic doctrine forbids it.

It's not a Pallie-Israeli conflict. It''s essentially a Muslim-Jew conflict.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The so called peace process is structured to fail. That is why it always has and that is why it always will.

That seems to be the point this author is making....

Pallies will not accept Israel's existence because Islamic doctrine forbids it.

It's not a Pallie-Israeli conflict. It''s essentially a Muslim-Jew conflict.

Some of the staunchest supporters of Palestine are Palestinian Christians.

 

[Marc39]

That seems to be the point this author is making....

Pallies will not accept Israel's existence because Islamic doctrine forbids it.

It's not a Pallie-Israeli conflict. It''s essentially a Muslim-Jew conflict.

Some of the staunchest supporters of Palestine are Palestinian Christians.

Less than 5 percent of Pallies are Christian, dummy.

 

[Marc39]

That seems to be the point this author is making....

Pallies will not accept Israel's existence because Islamic doctrine forbids it.

It's not a Pallie-Israeli conflict. It''s essentially a Muslim-Jew conflict.

Some of the staunchest supporters of Palestine are Palestinian Christians.

You see Palestine listed as a state, dummy?
List of sovereign states - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Answer: No)

 

[P F Tinmore]

Pallies will not accept Israel's existence because Islamic doctrine forbids it.

It's not a Pallie-Israeli conflict. It''s essentially a Muslim-Jew conflict.

Some of the staunchest supporters of Palestine are Palestinian Christians.

You see Palestine listed as a state, dummy?
List of sovereign states - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Answer: No)

So, Wikipedia can be written by anyone. It is not a definitive source. Palestine is recognized by the Arab League and over 100 countries. It is merely an opinion that it is not a state.

Israel has political recognition in the "west" but it has no legal standing.

 

[Marc39]

Some of the staunchest supporters of Palestine are Palestinian Christians.

You see Palestine listed as a state, dummy?
List of sovereign states - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Answer: No)

So, Wikipedia can be written by anyone. It is not a definitive source. Palestine is recognized by the Arab League and over 100 countries. It is merely an opinion that it is not a state.

Israel has political recognition in the "west" but it has no legal standing.

Wikipedia is sufficient for mental midgets like you.

Israel is one of very few countries in the Middle East with legal standing, dummy.

 

[P F Tinmore]

You see Palestine listed as a state, dummy?
List of sovereign states - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Answer: No)

So, Wikipedia can be written by anyone. It is not a definitive source. Palestine is recognized by the Arab League and over 100 countries. It is merely an opinion that it is not a state.

Israel has political recognition in the "west" but it has no legal standing.

Wikipedia is sufficient for mental midgets like you.

Israel is one of very few countries in the Middle East with legal standing, dummy.

Even the recognition by the UN is strictly political. A legitimate state must have defined borders. Israel does not have any borders. The UN uses the 1949 armistice lines as Israel's borders. All the politically motivated maps have the armistice line as Israel's borders.

The 1949 armistice agreement specifically stated that the armistice lines are not to be used as national or political borders.

Palestine has defined and recognized borders. Israel does not. Israel is inside Palestine. Whatever is called Israel is inside Palestine.

 

[Marc39]

So, Wikipedia can be written by anyone. It is not a definitive source. Palestine is recognized by the Arab League and over 100 countries. It is merely an opinion that it is not a state.

Israel has political recognition in the "west" but it has no legal standing.

Wikipedia is sufficient for mental midgets like you.

Israel is one of very few countries in the Middle East with legal standing, dummy.

Even the recognition by the UN is strictly political. A legitimate state must have defined borders. Israel does not have any borders. The UN uses the 1949 armistice lines as Israel's borders. All the politically motivated maps have the armistice line as Israel's borders.

The 1949 armistice agreement specifically stated that the armistice lines are not to be used as national or political borders.

Palestine has defined and recognized borders. Israel does not. Israel is inside Palestine. Whatever is called Israel is inside Palestine.

Dummy, the binding San Remo Resolution and League of Nations Palestine Mandate legally establish Palestine as the Jewish homeland. The League's original coordinates extended from Eastern Palestine, now Jordan, to the Med. Sea.

The UN merely provided international legitimacy to Israeli statehood.

In fact, Israel is the only country in the world with both League of Nations and UN endorsements.

Now, you know, dummy.