I've been absent the Dkos community for the past few weeks, for many reasons and none in particular. The flood of information and horror some times becomes just too much to take in and process on an intellectual level, and you just need sit back and contemplate for a bit.
But then reality comes right back at you, in some pretty horrible forms. In a previous post, I talked about the homes of my friends in the village of Qawawis which were destroyed. Since then, groups such as the ISM Taayush bought the materials needed for rebuilding (on credit) and began reconstructing their homes. Last month, however, the army came back with shocking brutality and destroyed the homes again.
Here are a few other pictures from there, all provided by the ISM Hebron team
and here are exerpts of the article on the demolition by Ghassan Bannoura of the IMEMC, as linked to by the ISM
In Qawawis village the Israeli army troops, along with several bulldozers, stormed the village and demolished six farmers’ homes and one animal shed. Soldiers even handed out a demolition order to families that are still living in a tent since their home was demolished several months ago by the Israeli army.
The Israeli military, in alliance with illegal Israeli settlers, has been trying to force the Palestinian residents of the south Hebron hills to leave their homes for years. Due to harassment from the nearby Israeli outposts several of the young families of Qawawis moved to a nearby town; when the Israeli army then forcibly evacuated the remaining families, a court ordered that the families could return to their homes.
There's your Beautiful Israel, demolishing homes and trying to erase the presence of Palestinians from Palestine, one home at a time. Now it is not at all unusual for homes to be destroyed successive times, but I was shocked to see it happen so soon, before the new homes were even finished; it was a pretty clear message to the families of that area that they are not wanted and that the settlers and the IOF are on the same page when it comes to their resistance. I mentioned this to Jeff Halper, the founder of the Israel Committee Against House Demolitions, when he was in town for the Jewish Voice for Peace award ceremony last week, and he too was shocked at the swiftness and violence of the demolition. Fortunately, his organization has volunteered to help the rebuilding effort, and as much as the violence directed at the families from Israel is clear, so is their will to resist and stay rooted on their land.
The JVP conference was pretty good, but as I live here, I do know many of the participants and organizers. That said, it was great listening to Phyllis Bennis, Jeff Halper, and Anat Biletzki, a board member of Btselem, a prominent Israeli Human Rights Organization. If you are at all interested, go to the radio station KALWfor their archive of a radio show they did after the confernece, the host Rose Aguilar had both Jeff and Anat on, and it was an excellent and informative hour of discussion.
So, what else has been going on? Well here are a few articles I found interesting; First, I have the permission from As'ad Abu-Kahlil, better known as the Angry Arab, to reprint his review of Efraim Karsh's book, Islamic Imperialism. Aside from Khalil's very funny and ascerbic wit in his posts & intellectual comand of so much of Middle Eastern politics and history, I have many reasons for enjoying a debunking of Karsh. Karsh is one of the all too many far-right wing cheerleaders for Israel, and is deeply racist towards Arabs and Muslims as well. He has made a name for himself by "debunking" the Israeli New historians, despite the fact that the new historians, as well as many others, have fundamentally altered the academic consensus concerning the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. No more do we ask whether the Palestinians were expelled, but the methods and plans of their explusion, as well as their legal right to return (see Norman Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpah for more info on this discussion).
In addition, there is a personal element to this. I used to have frequent discussions of I/P with a friend back in the 90's, when we could still talk about it in a somewhat civil manner. I was discovering the work of Walid Khalidi, Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said, Noam Chomsky, and the Israeli new historians & sociologists, which led me in part to a fundamental shift in my thinking on the conflict. I shared this with my friend, and despite resistance, was able to get him to see certain things for the first time in a new light; the Nakba, Plan Dalet, the settlements, and more. But, come the 2nd Intifada and 9/11, and the two of us have travelled very different paths; even worse, he is convinced that Efraim Karsh's work had debunked and discredited Benny Morris and the other New histrians. Of course, I checked on this and looked through his books at the time, and it was clear that that was not the case, and that Karsh was, aside from a poor historian and a partisan hack, somewhat racist as well.
So, when Efram's book on Islamic Imperialism came out, I resisted the urge to spend money on it and read his latest work; but now with the Angry Arab and his review, I feel like that was a good choice. Enough about me, here's the review;
Thursday, May 03, 2007
I regularly read books by authors who adhere to an ideology of hostility against Arabs and Muslims. Efraim Karsh is an example. When I saw his Islamic Imperialism: A History book, I thought that it could be interesting. I finished it on the plane yesterday. What a failed project: an interesting idea but so badly executed by our author. What promised to be an original argument in favor of Islamic imperialism thesis, turned out to be a regular blow-by-blow account of Islamic history. Nothing new: nothing new at all. The author, of course, relies not on the entire sweep of existing scholarly literature and primary early sources on Islam, but he selectively quotes from them hoping to paint the most negative image. But he did not know that by that he was undermining his own case. Obsessed with finding negative and unfavorable stories and anecdotes, he relished telling you about drunken caliphs, and internecine warfare in the body of the Ummah. But that clashes with the thesis of the overarching goal of Islamic Empire that those caliphs were seeking. But what is rather comical is that the way Karsh (who has an obsession with Edward Said bordering on the malady) defines (or not defines) the goal of Islamic imperialism. So for him, Nasser, Muhammad, all the caliphs, concubines, Aflaq, Arafat, Husayn, Faysal, Edward Said, Bin Laden, Saddam Husayn, Hasan Banna, Sayyid Qutb among others were ALL seeking the same goal of establishing "Allah's Empire" as he later calls it. So intent is he on superficially making his case, that he mistranslates any usage of the word dawlah (state) as "empire."(p. 64) Even the 1967 war which was launched by Israel and led to expansion of the Zionist state is treated as an attempt by Nasser to--you guessed it right--establish "Allah's Empire." So if Arabs defend their lands from Israeli invasions and attacks, they are no more than trying to establish an Islamic Empire. The part of the book that reaches the Ottoman Empire is based on the established literature, and is written chronologically--with an eye for the bizarre and the unusual: I mean why is it important for him to tell us about the Umayyad Caliph Yazid's attachment to his pet monkey? Is the attachment to a pet monkey another evidence for Karsh of the existence of "an Islamic Empire"? But the later part is the most confused and incoherent hodge podge that I have seen: he would talk about Nasser, and then go back to Churchill, and then go back to Sharif Husayn, and on and on. He does not understand the meaning of `Ayyarun in Islamic history (p. 48): he lists the one meaning of it, but it has different (opposite) meanings. Ibn Mandhur said that `Ayyar can be used to praise or to blame. And his book is so tied to his hostile agenda, that he can't get himself to admit what even classical Orientalists have admitted: the clear contributions of the Arab-Islamic civilization in the various fields. For him, all the contributions were mere reflections Hellenistic culture and science. Even Arabic literature is based on Hellenistic "motifs and themes."(p. 68) His main nemesis is Nasser: he even claimed that Nasser never ventured outside of Egypt when Nasser fought in the 1948 war, and that Nasser never cared about the Arabs (he comically quotes King Husayn on Nasser and tells us that Nasser used to "confide" in him). But this is the season for a book like this: anybody who has a hostile agenda toward Muslims and Arabs is now in high demand, and will be published with enthusiasm in the US. At least classical Orientalists had qualities of erudition, knowledge, rigor, meticulousness, and vast language skills. The present-day imitators are but a caricature of classical Orientalists.
Great stuff, thanks As'ad!
The next article, is by Gideon Levy, and is a run-down on the recent protests against Olmert and the rest of the bunch, mostly having to do with the assault on Lebanon last summer- wonder if there's gonna be a sequel?
Enough confusion
By Gideon Levy
The demonstrators testified as 100,000 witnesses: Israeli society is continuing to look for the lost coin under the lantern, and not in the right place. "We are a flock seeking a shepherd," said the moderator of the event, Osnat Vishinsky, whose son was killed in the Gaza Strip, aptly defining the shepherdless flock of demonstrators that until only yesterday wrapped itself in the silence of the lambs or in cries of "hooray for the war," and was now applauding her words.
This protest is just as hollow as the leadership against which it is aimed. Bereaved parents mourned their children from the stage, but no one suggested how to prevent the next war. A mass demonstration that had called for conducting peace talks with Syria, ending the occupation or responding positively to the Saudi initiative is what could have really prevented killing, but this is not on the agenda of this shallow protest. Courage is needed for that, and the masses won't come. "Steaks for the air force but no water, weaponry and ammunition for the infantry," read one placard, expressing the sentiment that was felt here more than anything else: The last war was not managed properly. Had it only been managed properly, had we only killed and not been killed, there would have been no demonstration.
Why, for example, is there no protest against the Israel Defense Forces? After all, the Winograd report, which was cheered here, determined that the chief of staff and the IDF led the government by the nose with false promises about the war. But the IDF stands above any protest. Why? And why is there no protest against the use of war as the first means in Israel's arsenal of responses? Why is there no protest against the destruction and killing we sowed in Lebanon? Or against the image of Israel as a warmongering state that lives by its sword?
Ok, here's one more related article, regarding the war, and it is just classic;
Nasrallah praises Winograd report; Siniora: No mention of destruction in Lebanon
By Haaretz Service and News Agencies
Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on Wednesday praised the Winograd report for its description of Israel's failures during the Second Lebanon War, but the Lebanese government criticized the findings, saying the report did not address the massive destruction caused by Israel to his country.
"I will not gloat," Nasrallah told an audience at the opening of a book fair in a south Beirut neighborhood complex, rebuilt after being leveled by Israel Air Force warplanes during the summer fighting.
The guerilla leader also said the committee of inquiry had vindicated his claim that Israel had been defeated.
He [Siniora] criticized the Winograd report for failing to address the destruction, estimated at more than $5 billion caused by the IDF air and naval bombardment as well as the ground incursion during the war.
"The report on the unjust war... did not make a single mention of the massive material, human losses and destruction Israel inflicted on Lebanon," Siniora said.
The sad part is that this will probably only reinforce amongst Israelis that the solution is another war, so their vaunted "detterance" can be re-established. I fear Lebanon and Gaza will have a dangerous summer to get through, and Iran as well.
Finally, last but not least, an article from EI that was first run in the LA times, bu non other than Azmi Bishara, facing either exile or prison for the rest of his life, all for that thing called democracy; I urge you to read the whole thing.
Why Israel is after me
Azmi Bishara, Los Angeles Times, 3 May 2007
Israeli police apparently suspect me of passing information to a foreign agent and of receiving money in return. Under Israeli law, anyone -- a journalist or a personal friend -- can be defined as a "foreign agent" by the Israeli security apparatus. Such charges can lead to life imprisonment or even the death penalty.
The allegations are ridiculous. Needless to say, Hezbollah -- Israel's enemy in Lebanon -- has independently gathered more security information about Israel than any Arab Knesset member could possibly provide. What's more, unlike those in Israel's parliament who have been involved in acts of violence, I have never used violence or participated in wars. My instruments of persuasion, in contrast, are simply words in books, articles and speeches.
During my years in the Knesset, the attorney general indicted me for voicing my political opinions (the charges were dropped), lobbied to have my parliamentary immunity revoked and sought unsuccessfully to disqualify my political party from participating in elections -- all because I believe Israel should be a state for all its citizens and because I have spoken out against Israeli military occupation. Last year, Cabinet member Avigdor Lieberman -- an immigrant from Moldova -- declared that Palestinian citizens of Israel "have no place here," that we should "take our bundles and get lost." After I met with a leader of the Palestinian Authority from Hamas, Lieberman called for my execution.
The Israeli authorities are trying to intimidate not just me but all Palestinian citizens of Israel. But we will not be intimidated. We will not bow to permanent servitude in the land of our ancestors or to being severed from our natural connections to the Arab world... Why then does the U.S. government continue to fully support a country whose very identity and institutions are based on ethnic and religious discrimination that victimize its own citizens?
Indeed, why do we support such Apartheid and oppression?