Palestine & Israel-Part One: Debunking Two Narratives

 



From our Living Room:

What is Going on Between Palestinians and Israelis?

The article, which includes parts two and three in the blog, describes the struggle or the situation at its current phase and tries at the same time to remain faithful to the truth from a Palestinian perspective. Living in the occupied Palestinian Territories, I try to simplify the issue and minimize the use of history as much as possible but without watering it down. Furthermore, I organized the information in the article like an inverted pyramid, where it first posits the main questions as a basis or strong foundation for the reader. The information narrows down gradually, and specific details are presented in the final part. So as the reader progresses, the reader gets informed on the central issues and can stop reading at any point and hopefully still get a good foundation of what the struggle is about. The reader is also invited to click on the personal accounts icon in this blog, where I have written personal stories about living and growing up under occupation in the harsh circumstances mentioned below.

Debunking Two Narratives

Whenever I introduce myself as a Palestinian woman, I am haunted by two narratives deeply rooted in my interlocutor’s psyche. These narratives are falsely spun by western media. But before I explore these narratives further, I would like to epitomize the word ‘Palestinian’ in this context to represent a symbolic condition any group of people can find themselves in when life isn’t fair. As random as life is, people can find themselves in war and flee their homes. These refugees who are paperless and homeless would need immediate aid. Still, after that, they would be left alone and forgotten in a world characterized by a massive imbalance of power. So I write about my own experience as a Palestinian, but this state of existence is symbolic of many other identities where conflict around beliefs or interests creates refugees and misery, which continues for generations. The only hope for an end is to pay attention, understand, take heed, and hopefully apply morality in distinction. This article is an invitation for precisely this.

The image depicting Palestinians is an aversive one. The two narratives delineating us are probably well known: Palestinians are terrorists, or the modified version is that the society harbors terrorism. The second narrative, which according to my experience, is worse and more demeaning, is the nonexistent narrative. On the collective level, some believe that our history doesn’t exist. The narrative indicates that 'this land is for Jews and has been for Jews for thousands of years perpetuating the myth of "a land without people for people without a land."  On a personal level, I met people I had a small talk with and then, after revealing my identity, behaved as if I didn't exist, who looked past me or through me.

The first narrative is addressed frequently: are we terrorists or freedom fighters? The answer, of course, depends on the perspective you align with. However, in real life, and as history attests, any struggle against oppression, occupation, or apartheid usually witnesses both; nonviolent demonstrations and action alongside armed resistance. This is precisely what is happening here in Palestine. The cases of nonviolent resistance are plentiful in the Palestinian struggle, such as the First Intifada[1], and more recently, the case of Mount Sbeih, or in Arabic Jabal Sbeih[2] in Nablus. But sadly, the western narrative, in line with the imbalance of power, chooses to emphasize one narrative over the other. This is shown in their vocabulary usage, choice of stories, and deciding when to cover the news, reporting only when one side is attacked but not when Palestinians are attacked, and Palestinians are constantly under aggression.

Also, in principle, international law does allow people to fight against an occupying power. The examples in history are plenty: when colonized countries in Africa and the Middle East fought for their independence. In India and South Africa, where the fight in its final phase did become a nonviolent movement against a cruel form of governance, a large part of their fight in previous stages was armed. And World War II, when the French, British, and the Americans fought Nazi Germany.

I find the second narrative, which tries to erase history, more baffling. Glancing over history will not only debunk the first narrative even further but will also reveal the oddness of both narratives. First of all, any history book or article before 1948 would have the name Palestine in it. The region was inextricably linked to both World War I and II. Jews in the 1930s and 1940s fled racism in Europe, came to Palestine, and ironically used armed resistance to fight the British Mandate. The names of these Jewish military groups are Irgun, Lehi, and the Hagana forces. A quick search on Wikipedia about these groups will explain the history and show pictures of their violent operations. And in 1948, the Hagana took by force all of coastal Palestine. I’ve always wondered why the history of World War II stops at the shores of Europe in the West? I’ve always held my breath hoping they would continue the story after D-Day, "but read the next chapter," I would say in my head.

Going back in time, this part of history is also not emphasized. There were Jews in the Islamic countries of North Africa and the Middle East during the Middle Ages, especially after Jews fled Spain during the Spanish Inquisition and continued to live in the Arab world until Israel was established.   Going back thousands of years, there was never a denial of Jewish presence in this part of the world.  In the Quran, Jewish existence was never denied, although the narrative is different from the Old or New Testament. There were Jewish tribes similar to many other tribes scattered around this holy land around historical cities. Jewish presence across the geography and the history of this region only testifies to co-existence between different religions, so the denial or the overriding of such a history seems counterintuitive. Jews and Muslims have a shared history!

Why these narratives, then? In my opinion, both narratives are cunningly created to hide the very basis of any struggle. Most conflicts are about exploitation or, let's call it as it is: ‘stealing’ resources like land, oil, gas, metals, and even history and culture as in our case. Affluence and exploitation are linked. So under the name of ‘national interests, wars are begun, troops are deployed, and oppression is used to stop resistance.

The second basis for any struggle is a sense of superiority of one group over the other. Yes, it is all too common; humanity is still suffering from a superiority complex and thus the need for an enemy, for an inferior group. According to the narrative, the inferior group can't govern themselves, need training and counseling, who are savage enough to ‘use terror’ for no reason but to kill. Therefore, the underlying tone of many struggles is that one side is claiming to be better, more civilized, less evil, and richer in everything. In contrast, the weaker side is envious or simply hates. So racism and discrimination is a significant undercurrent in the Palestinian Israeli struggle, and therefore it typifies many previous and ongoing conflicts.

Similar to other previous and ongoing racial or ethnic conflicts, discrimination against Arabs, Palestinians, and Muslims, sometimes erroneously lumped as one entity, is an integral part of the struggle. An Arab or a Palestinian doesn’t have just one color. We have all colors among us; white, black, brown, even Asian looking since this region was occupied by all nationalities in the past. Arabs of the Middle East and North Africa have a Mediterranean look similar to the Greeks, Italians, and Spanish. Arabs are of various religions: Muslims, Christians, and ironically Jews. The region is so diverse in ethnicity, history, and culture that it cannot be reduced to one image. Yet, western media managed to create one that is inferior to Israelis. It is crazy.

Ultimately, at the heart of all racism and discrimination is fear. There is the fear of sharing affluence and power. Why would anyone want to share privileges and power? Imagine Palestinians as equal to Israelis; the thought would cause many to shake like a leaf! Some powerful countries like Israel believe that sharing affluence and power could be an existential threat. However, committing constant aggression is not a safe choice either. History proves that power dynamics change over time, even if it takes a relatively long time, and that sharing and admitting equality is a safer choice for the powerful.

And more importantly, hovering together in a more equalizing plane is fearful because one side will need to admit to aggression and atrocities committed. Fearing equality among races and ethnicities exists because true equality encompasses confession and apology. The aggressor will need to face the ‘evilness’ committed, the same charge they accuse the weaker side of. Standing in front of a victim and admitting aggression is tough on the human psyche. The aggressor usually glosses over the racial issue or the aggression as nonexistent or belonging to the past. This admission process has a great deal of internal confrontation regarding cognitive, historical, psychological, and circumstantial false narratives. A cycle takes place: The aggressor needs to escape the admission. As the aggressor seeks to be more powerful to escape the confession and the confrontation with one’s ‘violent actions’ that the process of equality entails, false narratives and committing atrocities are inevitable. The aggressor tries to stop the natural resistance to any oppression or cover what is happening, embodying violence or the state they accuse the inferior side of. 

This process also reflects the paradox of unity and separation. To be more powerful, the aggressor needs to unite with a higher Being or God, and thus the religious part of the narrative exists. Unity with God or something higher than human is an attempt to separate from the inferior other. The aggressor’s rhetoric and narrative pursue closeness to God or goodness. They seek a higher ground that is pure, or in many cases –but not always- their whiteness. By trying to unite with higher values, they commit the thing the aggressor is trying to escape; his separation from God because God is one.  

Occupation is messy for both sides. Therefore, similarly, Palestinians need to own their actions as well. Both sides will need to help each other heal, unite with a ‘higher myth or ideal’ or, even better, join each other on a higher platform of reality.

"O Mankind! We created you from a male and a female, and made you races and tribes that you may know one another."  The Quran, Verse 13, 49 The Chambers (Al-Hujurat) 

Uniformity is not nature’s way; diversity is nature’s way” Vandana Shiva

 



[1] A good and funny movie to watch on Netflix about nonviolent resistance in the First Intifada is The Wanted 18.

[2] Since May 2021, in Beita, a Palestinian village, villagers have been protesting daily using creative nonviolent methods to stop a handful of settlers from forcibly building a nucleus settlement on Jabal Sbeih. The mountain has belonged for generations to the villagers. If the settlement is built, it will incur boundless ramifications on their daily lives ranging from checkpoints to constant threat of attacks from settlers. The issue of settlers and settlements is addressed in part two of the article.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sumud: Each Gen Has Its Gem

The Sacrifice: Two Fronts. The Trojan Horse of Gaza: A Red Heifer?

Gaza Has Fragmented Me