I'm considered by my friends to be rather right wing in my views concerning Israel?s relations with our Arab neighbors. I tend to agree with my friends on this point and I think that I have acquired the credentials to prove it. I introduce myself in such a fashion because what I am about to say is rather astonishing: I hold no claims against the Palestinian people, I don't oppose Palestinian nationalism and I recognize the need for painful compromises along the road to real peace.
How can I possibly oppose the idea of a Palestinian peoplehood, when the self-coined Palestinians' grasp of who they are is as slippery as a greased pig at a country fair? One minute they are the descendants of the ancient Canaanites, who were haplessly displaced by Joshua and the marauding Israelites. Another moment they are the sons of the Jebusites, ready to retake the city of their national heritage, Jerusalem, that was stolen from them by the conquering David. Yet another claim is that they are the descendants of the original Christians (hey, wouldn't that make them the descendants of the original Jews?). Lastly, they are the reconstituted armies of the Moslem prophet, as led by the new Salah a Din (hey, wasn't he a Kurd?), in the person of Arafat (hey, isn't he an Egyptian?). At once they are both flesh and blood brothers of the greater Arab nation and yet rejected by the brothers who's "struggle" they claim to spearhead. After all, their Arab brethren refuse to take them in, forcing them to live as refugees, wherever they are, with the lone exception of course, of Jordan (more on that later). One thing is for certain, the Palestinian people didn't appear on the scene until after 1967, they have no language, literature, art, folklore or history (the nascent cult of the deification of death, aside) that distinguishes them from the Arab nation. Again, how can I judge the authenticity of the Palestinain claim to peoplehood, when they can't even keep their own stories straight?
I am equally stymied when it comes to the issue of Palestinian nationalism. The Palestinians, as represented by the PA, do not practice, or even profess, nationalism. Not only do they make no attempt to build a nation, along the logically accepted conventions, such as creating an economy (they prefer sending their "citizens" to Israel for employment); creating an infrastructure (their electricity and other energy resources, as well as their telephone service, is supplied by Israel); a judicial system (mob justice, with a nod to Arafat's approval, is the law); their political system includes all of one man (guess who); or a unified national army (Arafat makes it a point to maintain over a dozen rival militias). What is most remarkable, and most revealing, is that the Palestinians' primary strategy is to internationalize the conflict at every opportunity. Nearly two years of deadly violence has been dedicated to the cause of introducing foreign soldiers into the PA controlled areas. This is nationalism? This expresses a desire for self rule? Independence? Palestinian nationalism, in short, does not exist.
All proposed solutions to Palestinian violence that are built on the assumptions that the Palestinians are a people, and therefore entitled to self rule (a subject itself worthy of argument), and that the PA represents their national interest, are nothing but castles made of sand, containing not a grain of reality. There is however a political reality that exists today that does provide a possible way out. It sounds fantastic, but it goes like this: There is a country not far from here, that has a fairly stable society and system of government. It is run by an elected parliament and a king. The king, the fourth in the line, who seems to have inherited his predecessors' practical bent, happens to be the direct descendent of the prophet of Islam, Mohammed. The queen happens to be a blue-blooded Palestinan, whose family hails from the Samarian town of Tulkarm. Their young son is half Bedouin descendant of the prophet and half Palestinian. Someday he will rule from the throne. But here's the beautiful part: more than 75% of the people who populate this mythical kingdom are Palestinians. An ingathering of Palestinians to this country would create a reality where over 90% of the population would be Palestinian. Within one generation they could be ruled by a king who is the scion of a well established ?West Bank? Palestinian family. Within two generations, just imagine.
Now here comes the painful compromise part of my proposal: this make believe kingdom is, of course, Jordan, which itself was established, with absolutely no historical justification, on the eastern territories of mandatory Palestine. Yes, the land east of the Jordan river also historically belongs to the Jewish nation. This may be reckless, wishful thinking on my part, but I would be willing to see a single Palestinian state established east of the river Jordan, despite the implications it has for the Jewish dream of a greater Israel in all the historical territory of our ancient kingdom. If it works, great. If not, back to the drawing board.
If any of my brothers, to the right or to the left of me, can propose a better compromise plan, that bears witness to the self evident truths enumerated above, I would be grateful to hear it.
----------------------------------
Yitshak Reuveni is a web designer and part-time guitar maker, living in Maalei Adumim. He can be reached at richdeb@netvision.net.il.
How can I possibly oppose the idea of a Palestinian peoplehood, when the self-coined Palestinians' grasp of who they are is as slippery as a greased pig at a country fair? One minute they are the descendants of the ancient Canaanites, who were haplessly displaced by Joshua and the marauding Israelites. Another moment they are the sons of the Jebusites, ready to retake the city of their national heritage, Jerusalem, that was stolen from them by the conquering David. Yet another claim is that they are the descendants of the original Christians (hey, wouldn't that make them the descendants of the original Jews?). Lastly, they are the reconstituted armies of the Moslem prophet, as led by the new Salah a Din (hey, wasn't he a Kurd?), in the person of Arafat (hey, isn't he an Egyptian?). At once they are both flesh and blood brothers of the greater Arab nation and yet rejected by the brothers who's "struggle" they claim to spearhead. After all, their Arab brethren refuse to take them in, forcing them to live as refugees, wherever they are, with the lone exception of course, of Jordan (more on that later). One thing is for certain, the Palestinian people didn't appear on the scene until after 1967, they have no language, literature, art, folklore or history (the nascent cult of the deification of death, aside) that distinguishes them from the Arab nation. Again, how can I judge the authenticity of the Palestinain claim to peoplehood, when they can't even keep their own stories straight?
I am equally stymied when it comes to the issue of Palestinian nationalism. The Palestinians, as represented by the PA, do not practice, or even profess, nationalism. Not only do they make no attempt to build a nation, along the logically accepted conventions, such as creating an economy (they prefer sending their "citizens" to Israel for employment); creating an infrastructure (their electricity and other energy resources, as well as their telephone service, is supplied by Israel); a judicial system (mob justice, with a nod to Arafat's approval, is the law); their political system includes all of one man (guess who); or a unified national army (Arafat makes it a point to maintain over a dozen rival militias). What is most remarkable, and most revealing, is that the Palestinians' primary strategy is to internationalize the conflict at every opportunity. Nearly two years of deadly violence has been dedicated to the cause of introducing foreign soldiers into the PA controlled areas. This is nationalism? This expresses a desire for self rule? Independence? Palestinian nationalism, in short, does not exist.
All proposed solutions to Palestinian violence that are built on the assumptions that the Palestinians are a people, and therefore entitled to self rule (a subject itself worthy of argument), and that the PA represents their national interest, are nothing but castles made of sand, containing not a grain of reality. There is however a political reality that exists today that does provide a possible way out. It sounds fantastic, but it goes like this: There is a country not far from here, that has a fairly stable society and system of government. It is run by an elected parliament and a king. The king, the fourth in the line, who seems to have inherited his predecessors' practical bent, happens to be the direct descendent of the prophet of Islam, Mohammed. The queen happens to be a blue-blooded Palestinan, whose family hails from the Samarian town of Tulkarm. Their young son is half Bedouin descendant of the prophet and half Palestinian. Someday he will rule from the throne. But here's the beautiful part: more than 75% of the people who populate this mythical kingdom are Palestinians. An ingathering of Palestinians to this country would create a reality where over 90% of the population would be Palestinian. Within one generation they could be ruled by a king who is the scion of a well established ?West Bank? Palestinian family. Within two generations, just imagine.
Now here comes the painful compromise part of my proposal: this make believe kingdom is, of course, Jordan, which itself was established, with absolutely no historical justification, on the eastern territories of mandatory Palestine. Yes, the land east of the Jordan river also historically belongs to the Jewish nation. This may be reckless, wishful thinking on my part, but I would be willing to see a single Palestinian state established east of the river Jordan, despite the implications it has for the Jewish dream of a greater Israel in all the historical territory of our ancient kingdom. If it works, great. If not, back to the drawing board.
If any of my brothers, to the right or to the left of me, can propose a better compromise plan, that bears witness to the self evident truths enumerated above, I would be grateful to hear it.
----------------------------------
Yitshak Reuveni is a web designer and part-time guitar maker, living in Maalei Adumim. He can be reached at richdeb@netvision.net.il.