Israeli Intellectuals Justify Current, Past Ethnic Cleansing:

Forwarded Message:
Subj: [IAP NEWS] COMMENTARY: Amos Oz Joins Benny Morris and A.B. Yehoshu'a In Justifying Ethnic Cleansing
Date: 3/3/02 1:36:25 PM Mountain Standard Time
From: iapinfo [at] yahoo.com
Reply-to: iapinfo-owner [at] yahoogroups.com
To: iapinfo [at] yahoogroups.com
Sent from the Internet (Details) ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

AMOS OZ JOINS BENNY MORRIS AND A.B. YEHOSHU'A IN JUSTIFYING ETHNIC CLEANSING

by Nizar Sakhnini, 3 March 2002

In an interview with Ari Shavit, published in Ha'aretz on 12 April 2001,
Ariel Sharon stated that he would not give the Palestinians more than 42% of
the areas occupied in 1967 excluding Jerusalem; that he would not evacuate
the settlements, which had been established for security purposes; that he
would not withdraw from the Golan Heights; that he would not make any
concessions in Jerusalem; and that "The War of Independence has not ended".
For him, "1948 was just one chapter." In other words, Sharon is insinuating
to a replication of the ethnic cleansing of 1948 in order to solve the
"demographic and security problems" of Israel.

Benny Morris gave an interview that was published in Hebrew in Yediot
Aharonot on 23 November 2001 and published an article in The Guardian
(London) on February 21, 2002 both of which revealed racist attitudes and
convictions, on the one hand, and reflected his explicit and implicit
support for ethnic cleansing and the iron wall strategy against the
Palestinian people. (see footnote)

The following excerpts from Morris' interview with Yediot Aharonot, leave no
doubt that he was supporting Sharon's strategies in his open war against the
Palestinian people:

"What happened in '48 was inevitable. If the Jews wanted to establish a
state in Eretz Israel, which would be a bit larger than Tel-Aviv, moving
population was necessary. I don't see it as morally wrong."

"We cannot acknowledge the Right of Return."

With respect to the massive use of violence following Sharon's notorious
visit to Haram al Sharif in late September 2000, Morris said, "Maybe not
each and every shot was justified [...] but I understand the feeling of the
security forces."

As for possible solutions to the conflict, Morris is reported to see two
options: "Either annexation of blocks of Arab townships to the Palestinian
or to neighbouring Arab states; or that the Arabs would wish to leave the
country." According to Morris, ".the Arabs leave - may occur [...] it all
depends on the level of hostility that Arabs show towards the Jews and
Israel. If terrorist attacks and civil uprising continues, like in that day
when 13 people were killed, this may be a strategic problem for the security
forces. Not just a tactic one."

Morris' justification of ethnic cleansing was reminiscent of what A. B.
Yehoshu'a had said in the mid-eighties when the Israeli Knesset passed a law
that affirmed the definition of Israel as the "State of the Jewish people"
and rejected a proposal to define Israel as a "Jewish State and the country
of all its citizens". A public debate followed the passing of this law
between Yehoshu'a and Anton Shammas a Palestinian Arab with an Israeli
citizenship. Shammas argued that Zionism had completed its mission in 1948
with the establishment of Israel. The Law of Return, which confers on Jews
a favored status and denies Palestinian aspirations, is blatant
discrimination and should be replaced by Western-style immigration laws.
Israeli Jews should come to terms with the reality of a multi-cultural and
bi-national Israeli society in which Israeli-Palestinians would be accepted
as full, equal citizens; and that a single civil identity common to all
those living within the borders of the State of Israel should be created.

In contrast, Yehoshu'a views the Law of Return as the legal embodiment of
the Zionist-Jewish character of the state, and for whom Israeli identity is
essentially the consummate expression of Jewish identity. He rebuked those
who did not repudiate Shammas' vision of a "non-sectarian state for all its
citizens". He added, "The Law of Return is the moral basis of Zionism."
Accordingly, Yehoshu'a concluded, "if you accept the morality of the whole
Zionist process in this sense, then with a clear conscience you can come to
Anton Shammas and say: You, the Israeli Arab, or the Palestinian with
Israeli citizenship, you are a minority here.... If you want your full
identity, if you want to live in a state with an independent Palestinian
personality, with an authentic Palestinian culture, get up, take your
belongings and move yourself one hundred meters to the east, to the
Palestinian state which will be established alongside Israel."

Amos Oz joined Yehoshu'a and Morris in defending the morality of ethnic
cleansing and supporting Sharon's open war against the Palestinian people.
This was revealed in an interview Oz gave to Ari Shavit and published in
Ha'aretz Weekly on March 1, 2002. The interview was about his new book in
which Oz tells about his recollections as a boy in Jerusalem and why he is a
Zionist.

In his interview, Oz pointed out that the trouble did not start in 1967,
which is correct, "These days, when you read all kinds of things written by
all kinds of talking heads, you are left with the premise that all the
trouble began in 1967, that all the problems started one morning that summer
when Levi Eshkol woke up and said, 'Guys, we've been a small state long
enough. Let's go occupy the territories so we can enslave the Arabs a little
and screw them and abuse them at checkpoints. It'll be great'.

"In the book, I don't set out to refute this. Oppression is oppression and
injustice is injustice and degradation is degradation. My views about the
territories and the settlements haven't changed. But when I see the hawkish
history on the one side, and the 'anti-colonialist' history on the other,
and when I sense the tectonic shift going on below the earth that I am
standing on, I go back to the beginning. When I was a boy under siege in
Jerusalem."

"As I wrote this book, it became horribly clear to me how much our backs are
against the wall, in a profound way. But it's the same for the Palestinians.
What makes it so hard is that, in this place, you have two peoples with
their backs against the wall. To me, personally, I discovered that what
happened to my Uncle David and Aunt Malka, and to my cousin Daniel in Vilna,
was very close to happening to us in Jerusalem. It was a hairsbreadth away,
very close."

Here comes the deceitful twisting of historical facts and playing on
irrelevant deep emotions abusing the memories of a brutal crime to justify
another crime against an innocent people that have nothing to do with the
first crime.

The Palestinian people did not commit the crime that took place in Vilna.
The starting point of the conflict with the Palestinians was neither 1967
nor 1948. The conflict started much earlier. It started before the Nazi
atrocities and to insinuate that the situation and the conflict in Palestine
are correlated with the crimes committed in Vilna is disgusting, horrendous
and preposterous.

The conflict started with the first wave of Jewish immigrants to Palestine
in the 1st Aliya in 1882. The new immigrants did not come to live in peace
and harmony with the native people of Palestine. They came as colonialist
settlers who provoked antagonism through their arrogant behavior and efforts
to dispossess the Arab Fellahin of the lands that provided their lifeline.
Amos Oz might not be a historian, but there is no doubt that he should have
an idea about how the conflict started. If he doesn't know, he could
consult with a historian like Benny Morris, who is supposed to know. He
could go back to what honest people like Ahad Ha'am, Martin Buber, Judah L.
Magnes, Moshe Smilansky, Reb Binyamin and many others have written in this
respect.

In his interview, Oz added, "My Zionism begins and ends in that no person
deserves to go through what my parents and their parents and their parents'
parents went through. That's why, in my view, the Jewish people have a right
to be a majority in one place and this right is unimpeachable. This right
must not be placed in doubt by either Islamic conquest or talk of a
multinational state in which it doesn't matter who's in the majority. The
Jews have a right to be a majority in one place in the world and this right
is anchored in the humiliation entailed in being a perpetual minority
everywhere." Accordingly, for Oz, "The war in 1947- 48 was an all-out
life-and-death war between two populations.. It's a war of life or death",
which Oz uses to justify the brutality used against the Palestinian people.
He said, "And if it comes down to: I'm uprooted from my house and you take
it from me, or you are uprooted from your house and I take it from you, then
it's preferable for me to remain and for you to be uprooted. And if it's
going to be that you live and I die, or I live and you die, then it's better
that you die. Because, like I said, our backs are to the wall. In such a
war, backs are really up against the wall."

Oz, accordingly, is like Morris and Yehoshu'a before him, is trying to
justify ethnic cleansing through the barbaric killing and/or transfer of the
Palestinian people that started in 1948 under Ben-Gurion's leadership and is
still going on in 2002 under Sharon's leadership.

Oz is taking us back to the same logic used by Theodor Herzl in his Der
Judenstaat in 1896 to justify the creation of an exclusive Jewish State that
would " form a portion of the rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of
civilisation as opposed to barbarism".

And if it is a matter of either "us" or "them" what kind of a future they
expect for the exclusive, racist, intolerant State after ridding the country
of its indigenous population, a goal they know very well that it is an
absurd goal anyway in spite of all their might?

The road for real peace and prosperity for both peoples starts with a
serious effort by the Israeli Jews to reject the racist and colonialist
myths inculcated by the mainstream Zionist and Israeli leaderships. Real
peace, prosperity and security come as a natural result of accepting the
reality of the Palestinian people as equal human beings with equal human
rights. Real peace and security come as a natural result of serving justice
through restoration of usurped rights and stolen lands.

By invading the refugee camps and sending a loud message that the refugees
have no hope for justice through denial of their right to return and live in
peace and harmony within an environment of tolerance and a peaceful
multi-religious, bi-national and multi-cultural co-existence, Sharon is
pushing the Palestinians into despair and killing all hopes for peace. The
irony is that intellectuals like Yehoshu'a, Morris and Amos Oz find the
audacity to support genocide and war crimes.
-----------
Footnote: see Morris's Guardian article at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/iapinfo/message/2814
and Avi Shlaim's responce at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/iapinfo/message/2816
=====
Send us a letter to the editor at: iapinfo [at] yahoo.com
_________________________________
Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP)
10661 South Roberts Rd, Suite 202 Palos Hills, IL 60465
Tel: 708 974 3380 / Fax: 708 974 3389 /Pager: 1 800 916 8286
http://www.iap.org E-mails: iapinfo [at] iap.org OR iapinfo [at] yahoo.c

To subscribe to IAP NEWS, send a blank message to:
iapinfo-subscribe [at] yahoogroups.com