<!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

To the Reader:

I wrote this piece a few weeks ago, and it has recently been brought to my attention that it had some flaws. Based on the intellectual and much-appreciated feedback I have received (thanks Grandma), I have edited this post to address these concerns. Namely, that by not mentioning or condemning Hamas, I am complicit in viewing the conflict from albeit a new, but one-sided, point of view. I want to make clear that I do not sympathize with Hamas, and I only did not mention their immorality and horrific tactics because I thought it was evident; erroneous, I now realize, so I have changed the piece accordingly. Lastly, it was observed that my original post lacked historical perspective, which I have now tried to inject, using examples of Israel’s strategies toward both Hizbollah and Hamas in recent years. I hope this edited version represents a more balanced and supported approach for my arguments, and I encourage any and all questions, comments, criticisms etc. Thanks for reading.

Ceci

I have been watching Israelis and Palestinians fight for years, and in those years, I have seen endless footage of carnage and bloodshed: the charred skeleton of an Israeli Dan bus after an attack by a suicide bomber, fragile Palestinian villages decimated by an Israeli airstrike, and images of both Israeli and Palestinian children and civilians dead or grieving for loved ones. I thought I was used to these heartbreaking stories, or at least as much as one could be, until the latest round of Israeli-Palestinian violence broke out about 3 weeks ago. Something has felt different this time around, and this is my attempt to pinpoint what that something is.

The first is obvious: perspective. One of my major motivations for accepting the Watson Fellowship and traveling around the Middle East and North Africa for a full year was exactly that—a more balanced point of view. My entire life I was surrounded by Zionists, infused with Zionist principles, and even living in the USA, a pro-Israel country. I myself am certainly a Zionist, but one who believes that Zionism will never be completely realized until Israel exists peacefully and securely, as a Jewish homeland. I have spent my academic career educating myself in ways that will make me equipped to achieve peace for the country I love, and in my opinion, without true understanding of both sides and perspectives of a conflict, one can never be a just arbiter for peace.

So here I was, five months into my journey to learn “how the other side feels and lives,” when yet another Israeli-Palestinian conflict began. Living in Cairo, the heart of the Arab world, I have been exposed through its media and residents to the “Arab perspective,” and it has been utterly enlightening. This is the first time I am experiencing this conflict in an environment that is evidently and tangibly pro-Palestinian. People on the street, in shops, and in taxis have made this the topic of conversation by asking me, “What do you think about all the people dying in Gaza?” I am a member of an ex-patriot email list server where anti-Israeli articles, announcements for rallies and demonstrations, and discussions have pervaded. I receive the Al-Jazeera channel in English in my apartment and have watched, for the first time ever, news reports with a pro-Palestinian slant. The effects have been massive; I have been more emotionally connected and upset by the humanitarian atrocities I have witnessed over the last three weeks, than at any other point in my life.

However, is it possible that the amount of sadness I have felt is solely the result of my new perspective on how the Arabs react to this violence? While this new point of view is a factor, I believe the true source of my discontent is my personal realization that this war represents Israel’s final break from the moral, Judaic, and peace-loving principles that characterized its founding as a country.

Let me be clear: I am a Zionist who loves Israel as much as, if not more than, my own home country of America. However, I am fed up with those people who label anyone that is even remotely critical of Israeli policy “anti-Semitic” and conjure up Holocaust images in an attempt to negate such criticisms through fear of a recurrence of the genocide. This manipulation of Holocaust lessons is not only appalling, but detrimental to the future of Israel, as we are currently witnessing. As Jews and as Zionists it is our communal duty, based on our Jewish and democratic tradition, to think critically about the actions of the Israeli government, and hold it accountable to the morals and values that are supposed to characterize the nation.

In my opinion, an Israeli military, with some of the most advanced intelligence in the world, which bombed countless United Nations buildings, schools and hospitals “by accident,” is NOT representative of the Jewish and Israeli traditions I know and love. According to the Torah, if you were to learn only one lesson in order to lead a Jewish life it would be the following: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.( Particularly after the Exodus from Egypt, statements in the Bible specifically speak to learning from one’s own negative experiences. Laws pertaining to the peaceful coexistence with strangers who live in your midst, even though not believing in your God, are mentioned as early as the story of Noah. All that was expected was the observance of all humanitarian laws. Unfortunately, this idiom has evaporated from the psyche of the Israeli leadership, as they spent the last 3 weeks treating Palestinian civilians as Hamas had been treating Israeli civilians. Perhaps, this is the reason for my melancholy; Israel, the country I held on a pedestal for its morality as a refuge for a people persecuted for thousands of years, has fallen from greatness in my eyes, and that devastates me.

The most unfortunate aspect of Israel’s succumbing to this inhumane strategy is that it happened in vain. Israel’s stated objectives for the most recent incursion was to end Hamas rocket attacks into southern Israel, an understandable and justifiable reason for action. Hamas, a notorious terrorist organization that has absolutely no regard for human life, neither Israeli nor Palestinian, has been terrorizing southern Israeli cities since the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. By concealing their rocket fire under the cover of civilians, Hamas deliberately and inhumanely endangers the lives of “its” citizens.

In trying to secure southern Israel from this nearly impossible conundrum- protect Israeli civilians or target Hamas’ fighters hiding amongst Palestinian civilians- Israeli leaders have managed to forget the purpose and principles of Israel’s founding fathers, and have preserved the same archaic military means past leaders used to achieve those principles. In the Six Day War and the most recent war on Gaza, the Israeli military targeted the sources of potential aggression toward Israel: the Egyptian air force and structures covering rocket launchers, respectively. The only problem is that in the 21st century, 20th century strategies do not apply. The enemy has changed- Israel is no longer fighting state actors that make decisions based on rational self-interest (i.e. 5 Arab countries in 1948, Egypt in 1956, Egypt and Syria in 1967, Egypt in 1973). The new enemy is terrorism, and, if anything, defined by its irrationality; therefore, former military tactics simply do not bear the same fruit of success.

A closer examination of the Bush administration’s “War on Terror” proves that terrorists cannot be fought solely physically; the use of a single-faceted, military approach in the American invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq has only perpetuated the cycle of violence and created even more terrorists in the wake of their destruction of civilian lives. The recent improvements in the fight against Al Qaeda in Iraq only further demonstrate this argument; Al Qaeda operatives in Iraq have been almost completely eradicated as a result of the Iraqis own decision or determination. When faced with a choice between Al Qaeda members marrying into and terrorizing their families, or living under an American occupation, they chose the latter. However, in many parts of the world, particularly in the Gaza Strip, Waziristan and the mountainous border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan, the choice is much less clear. Fundamentalist madrassas are currently the only source of welfare, education, and religious connection in these regions, as was the case in Gaza before Hamas defeated Fatah in Gaza elections in 2007. Their appeal is obvious since people’s decisions are easy when motivated by the humanistic and Darwinian desire to provide basic needs, like food and shelter, for one’s family.

After the 2006 Israeli attacks on Hizballah in southern Lebanon, the latter’s popularity in the Arab world soared with every Arab death. Palestinian refugees’ perception of Hizballah as their protector and provider of services, enhanced all the more by the Israeli retreat and Hizballah’s declared victory, legitimized the terrorist organization, increased its appeal to future terrorists, and enabled its election to the Lebanese Parliament. Hamas mimicked Hizballah’s strategy of civilian-shields for rocket fire because in their irrational calculations, a Palestinian civilian death garners increasing support for their cause, the true source of their power, strength and appeal. With each deat, Gazans, Arabs and even Iran increase support, recruitment and sympathy for Hamas, empowering Israel’s greatest enemies and tipping the regional balance-of-power and public-relations scales in their favor.

Greg Mortenson founded the Central Asia Institute in 1996, a non-profit organization devoted to promoting and supporting community-based educational facilities in remote regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan. In his New York Times Best-selling book Three Cups of Tea: One Man’s Mission to Promote Peace, One School At A Time he describes his experiences observing the rise of the Islamist movement in these regions. He argues that the rise and spread of this extremist movement was the result of the population’s lack of resources, education, food and welfare services. As the CAI began to sponsor and organize the building of schools by local populations, he witnessed the decline of the appeal of such madrassas; unfortunately, the CAI could not keep up with the millions of dollars pumped into this movement from state and non-state actors. The takeaway lesson, however, is that the improvement of the daily lives of those who are underprivileged and vulnerable to extremist movements, through the provision of welfare and education, is the most effective way not only to stem the tide of terrorism, but also to prevent the recruitment of terrorists in the future. Finally, this lesson must be learned and internalized by Western governments and Israeli leaders, so they can begin to combat the sources and root causes of the “War on Terror” successfully.

In Israel and the West’s dealings with Hamas, bombs and mortar attacks only exacerbate the appeal of extremism because every Palestinian death plays into Hamas’ hands. After Palestinian reconstruction and rearming after this recent round of violence in a few years (and do not be fooled by the US-Israel agreement to halt weapons smuggling into the Strip), Hamas will emerge stronger than ever because as the anger and defiance of Palestinians, Arabs, and less moderate Arab states grow, Hamas’ recruitment and popularity and the Arab states’ support will increase to all-new levels.

Therefore, I propose coupling military with economic and social strategies that tangibly demonstrate to the Palestinians that an alliance with Israel, the West and Fatah will improve their daily lives. What if Israel and the West, via Fatah, built infrastructure rather than destroy it, preparing it for economic integration and mutually beneficial economic trade agreements, rather than siege and devastation? I hypothesize that those Darwinian instincts would emerge again, and Gazans will choose the method that tangibly provides the most security and services to their families. If Hamas were to prevent these activities inside Gaza, the Western alliance will win its first battle for the “hearts and minds” of the Palestinians, finally weakening Hamas’ position. However, economic reconstruction is only the first step; restoring schools and providing a free and universal neutral education, achieving an ideological reunion of Gazans with Fatah, institutionalizing rules of law and order and distribution of aid and welfare, and the creation of a free press are all necessary to achieve a unified and legitimate Palestinian negotiating partner for peace.

Iran, one of the greatest threats of this era, has forged an alliance of convenience, based on common enemies, with these Islamic Fundamentalist organizations, providing them funding in a bid for regional leadership. However, by identifying the root causes of extremism and counteracting them as outlined above, the Western alliance will be able to figuratively kill multiple birds with one stone; as an alliance with the West demonstrates tangible benefits and Gazan lives improve, Hamas’ and Iranian appeal and strength will wane, and empower Fatah as the Palestinian voice and Israeli partner for peace.

If anyone were to ask me now if I am pro-Israel or pro-Palestine my answer would be this: I fall in the pro-people, pro-peace camp because only from here can we start to benefit the lives of both sides.