JERUSALEM: EYE OF THE STORM
[2-24-06]

Corinne Whitlatch, of Churches for Middle East Peace, provides a clear survey of the situation in Israel/Palestine in the wake of the Hamas victory in the Palestinian election.  She looks at the complexities and ambiguities in both Palestine and Israel, and concludes with these bits of policy advice for Presbyterian advocates for peace and justice to share with their legislators:

Toward the goal of peace, we ask you to 1) reject unilateral actions by Israel that would prejudge final status negotiations on borders and the status of Jerusalem, 2) urge the Palestinian government to commit to nonviolence, to recognize Israel and to accept previous agreements, 3) continue to engage the moderate Palestinian leadership and help the Palestinian people, 4) provide assurances that Jerusalem will be shared, and 5) promote religious freedom in the Holy Land and recognize the important role of the Christian community.

[February 2006] On a clear day, a sharp-eyed person standing on the heights of Jerusalem has a wide overview of Israel and the West Bank. Jerusalem is in the minds and hearts of millions of people; and on every day, from everywhere there are Jews, Christians and Muslims. In prayers, in songs and in religious art, the holy city is present, a living symbol of profound and timeless significance.

Palestinians in the Maelstrom

As Palestinians maneuver to form their new government, which may take weeks, Israel is in full campaign mode, preparing for its national election on March 28. Tom Friedman, the widely syndicated columnist, wrote about the dovish sentiment of the voters. The Likud party launched their campaign with accusations that the new Kadima party plans to pull Israel back to the 1967 borders. Likud quickly backed off that line, Friedman surmises, because Likud realized that many Israeli voters like that idea.

The huge political question is whether the soon-to-be elected Israeli government and the new Palestinian government will be willing and able to negotiate with each other. With Hamas defeating Fatah as lead party of the Palestinian Authority, the distinction between the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and the PA gains new significance. It is the PLO, and not the PA, which has negotiated with and signed agreements with Israel, and Mahmoud Abbas is both President of the PA and Chairman of the PLO.

If a cease-fire holds, the weary public and wary politicians on both sides may prefer a continued stalemate. Israel may choose to act unilaterally, severing physical and diplomatic contact with the Palestinians while the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority sticks to the domestic focus of the campaign, cleaning up corruption and delivering improved living conditions in the West Bank and Gaza.

The Bush Administration is continuing to refer to the Road Map peace plan and final status negotiations. Some analysts think the Road Map is history and that a front-ended approach might be less vulnerable to sabotage. This tactic would begin with some variation of the Clinton-Taba-Geneva two-state solution plan, with the Israelis and Palestinians responsible for negotiating how to get there. One version has a draft peace-treaty put to a referendum by both Israelis and Palestinians. Caution is necessary, because another final-status push that fails cannot be risked at this time.

We need to recognize that the victory of Hamas changes the relationship of the U.S. government and the Palestinian Authority. There is a difference between appropriate legislation intended to moderate the new Palestinian government and efforts to collectively punish the Palestinians, bringing them and aspirations of freedom to utter defeat.

Advocates for peace and justice will urge lawmakers to keep in mind that the objective still is a secure Israel that is recognized by its neighbors, and an economically viable state of Palestine, that is recognized as legitimate at home and abroad. And, central to the two-state solution of the Clinton/Taba/Geneva plans is a sharing of the sovereignty and landscape of Jerusalem.

This groundbreaking study from a mainstream Israeli think-tank urges the Israeli public to rethink their traditional opposition to 3rd party monitoring and settling disputes. Alternative options include territorial division of the Old City Basin (the Old City and historical sites near it) with international supervision; joint-management and distribution of powers in the basin, with international backing; and authority over the historical basin entrusted with an international body. The options of full Israeli sovereignty and full Palestinian sovereignty are deemed likely to be rejected by one side or the other.

Include the following points in your letter:

* We write to urge your active, sustained leadership in promoting Israeli-Palestinian peace.

* Our churches have long-standing policy supporting a negotiated two-state solution to the conflict that leads to a secure Israel alongside a viable state of Palestine.

* We embrace the vision of Jerusalem as the heritage, home and hope of two peoples and three faiths, with Jerusalem as the capital of both Israel and the future state of Palestine.

Toward the goal of peace, we ask you to 1) reject unilateral actions by Israel that would prejudge final status negotiations on borders and the status of Jerusalem, 2) urge the Palestinian government to commit to nonviolence, to recognize Israel and to accept previous agreements, 3) continue to engage the moderate Palestinian leadership and help the Palestinian people, 4) provide assurances that Jerusalem will be shared, and 5) promote religious freedom in the Holy Land and recognize the important role of the Christian community.

--Written by Corinne Whitlatch, Churches for Middle East Peace

Father Iyad Twal writes:

Dear all,

Hamas’s stunning victory in the PLC elections was a shock to us all. For many Palestinian Christians the results have triggered many serious worries and questions about the future. Here’s my personal analysis and answers to my parishioners and friends outside Palestine:

· First of all, we should not be afraid. We should always have faith and trust in God’s providence and His will for our lives. The Christians in Palestine are the "living stones" of the Holy Land, living our mission by being the salt and light in this country and in the world.

· The election results revealed that the Palestinian population is tired of their continual life under occupation; they are depressed by the stalled peace process, and are looking for a serious change. Palestinians desire freedom, justice, and dignity as a nation. Palestinians hope for a government that will work to: create jobs, stop the separation wall, halt settlement construction, stop land confiscation and house demolitions, and decrease our alarming poverty rate.

· Hamas does not represent the total Palestinian population. There are more than six million Palestinians scattered around the globe, but less than a million were allowed to cast ballots for this election. The current election results represent less than twenty percent of Palestinians, and only the population living under the boot of occupation; therefore it is impossible to generalize attitudes for all Palestinians based on this election as they are becoming fanatic Muslims. However, the low number of Palestinians eligible to vote does raise serious issues. In the recent Iraqi elections, Iraqis living abroad were not only allowed to vote, but an aggressive ad campaign pushed their involvement. Why was this same opportunity and effort not offered to the global Palestinian community?

· The Palestinians are one of the most educated people in the Middle East. I guess Hamas leaders differ from other Islamic leaders in Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia or Iraq. In contrast to these countries, I don’t see the Palestinian Islamic movement becoming as conservative or fanatical. I think Hamas is smart enough to push the morality, justice, and human rights of our cause to gain more sympathy from the international community, rather than pushing extremism creating more fear and distrust around the globe. Hamas knows the challenges to building and fighting for a free and independent Palestine state. We need the support of the international community and surrounding Arab states, all whom have accepted the UN resolutions about the existence of Israel. I think Hamas is too smart to alienate this support. Elections are full of slogans and propaganda, and Hamas used them effectively to capture the hearts and minds of Palestinian voters. However, Hamas faces serious issues in governing Palestine and will have to change some of these ideas to effectively build a strong country. The critical question is how fast Hamas can change and build a strong government to work on our most urgent need: Peace based on international rights and resolutions. The result was shocking to us all, even Hamas, who did not desire to be the majority government so quickly. Tens of thousands of people (even Fatah members) voted against Fatah as punishment for the corruption and misadministration in the Palestinian authority. However, Hamas must be given time to change and adjust, and not be isolated and shunned from Palestinians or the international community.

· Any anger or fear the international community feels toward the results of this election should not be directed at Hamas, nor the voters who gave them power. Hamas’s victory can be traced to the dismal U.S. negotiated peace process with Israel. For over a decade this peace process has brought no freedom or life to Palestine; in fact conditions in Palestine have seriously worsened over this time. For ten years the Palestinians waited on the peace process, while Israel dramatically increased their settlement building in Palestinian territory, built a separation wall deep into the West Bank, isolating towns, confiscating land, destroying homes and farms. Ten years after the peace process began we have almost nothing. However, we have a democracy and we were able to vote for change. If Hamas gains our freedom and we are able to build a state, we will support them in the next election; if not we will change again.

· Attacking Hamas for being a fanatical movement is unfair in the context of the Israeli/Palestinian struggle. The Keneset has produced very fanatical movements that did not draw nearly the international condemnation Hamas’s victory created. However, a fanatical movement in power does not automatically produce chaos in the peace process. In fact, often these fanatical movements produce some of the most dramatic achievement towards peace. The Israeli Likud party at one point publicly declared that Palestinians don’t exist, but they started peace talks in Madrid with many Arab countries. In 1979 Begin, a militia chief famous for massacring hundreds of Palestinians, was elected Israeli prime minister and later signed the peace treaty with Egypt. We hope that Hamas’s time in government will produce similar results in the peace process.

· In conclusion, the points above do not minimize the dramatic changes in our lives as Hamas takes power in Palestine. Our history is full of pain and our situation is not easy to govern. We ask our brothers and sisters in Christ to continue praying for the "living stones" Christian communities among their Muslim and Jewish neighbors. We hope that the future brings peace, prosperity, and freedom, and that any fears we have about the future never become reality. Yesterday all the Christian Patriarchs and bishops in Jerusalem have sent a public letter of greeting to Hamas where they expressed their hopes for better future and that this election won’t worsen the current crisis, and quoting the Beatitudes: "Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called sons of God!"

Chris Cowperthwaite, Bethlehem, Feb. 18, 2006   [2-22-06]

The 30 people gathered on the fourth floor of the Bethlehem Hotel did not look like ‘revolutionaries’ in training. These men and women were armed only with pens and paper. However, in a century that has seen ‘People Power’ revolutions spring up around the globe- from the Ukraine to Chile to the Philippines - the caliber of this type of gathering is not to be underestimated.

On Monday, participants from around the West Bank gathered in Bethlehem for nonviolent resistance training coordinated by Holy Land Trust’s Empowering Citizen Peacebuilding program. The program is supported by the European Union and the American Friends Service Committee. Palestinian applicants were interviewed and chosen to participate in two five-day "train the trainer" sessions, designed to equip Palestinian civilians with the skills necessary to conduct nonviolent resistance training workshops.

Husam Jubran, the Program Manager, explained that the goal of Empowering Citizen Peacebuilding is to support the emergence of broad-based Palestinian nonviolent resistance to the Israeli occupation. He said the program "works on parallel levels, both struggling against Israeli occupation and building the social infrastructure that will lead to the creation of a healthy society."

During the first week of training, modules included: conflict, violence, nonviolence, communication, and nonviolent direct action. A PNN reporter arrived on Thursday afternoon, just in time for an afternoon session on effective communication. The participants were full of energy and became engaged in a lively discussion about the elements of effective verbal and non-verbal communication; about the distinction between hearing and active listening; and about ways of constructive disagreement.

A wide range of goals have motivated participants from cities across the West Bank to take part in this training. Wesal Salem explained that she took time off from work at a women’s center in Tulkarm to improve her understanding of nonviolence and popular resistance. Salem hopes to translate the ideas and lessons she learns to her coworkers. Fadi Salim, who currently lives in Ramallah, explained that he heard about the training through a local newspaper advertisement. When asked how he planned to apply the training in his daily life, he replied, "I believe it is important to use this training in daily social life. I want to make sure I have a good understanding of the concepts. Maybe in the future I will apply it more politically."

Nonviolent theorist Dr. Gene Sharp has dedicated his career to the study of nonviolent direct action. He maintains that nonviolent resistance requires not only a rejection of violence, but steadfast discipline and deliberate strategies. Dr. Sharp was a featured speaker at the International Nonviolence Conference, co-hosted by Holy Land Trust and Nonviolence International in December. In an interview on applications of nonviolent direct action within a Palestinian context, Sharp explained:

"People need to study [the methods of nonviolent struggle], to evaluate it, to try to develop viable strategies to meet their situations… Attention needs to be given to how nonviolent struggle might serve Palestinians as an alternative to violent means to improve the lot of their people living under very difficult circumstances."

Iman Jado, a nurse at a neonatal intensive care unit in Bethlehem, explained that her understanding of nonviolence and nonviolent action had developed throughout the Holy Land Trust training. Before attending the training, she believed that nonviolence was a purely political form of resistance.  However, she explained that through the workshops she began to see the social applications of nonviolent resistance. Jado plans to teach women in her home community about conflict resolution in their daily lives.

Several other participants agreed that the lessons and approaches conveyed through the training were equally applicable to interactions with coworkers, to relationships with family members and friends, and to efforts to resist Israeli occupation. When nonviolent resistance is used to work against social and political structures predicated on violence and dominance, it can be a truly revolutionary force.

Talk given to Association of International Development Agencies (AIDA) in Palestine on February 1, 2006

Sam Bahour, a Palestinian-American businessman living in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian city of El-Bireh, offers a thoughtful look at some of the emerging realities after the election victory of Hamas in Palestine.

He points to "3 ironies" of the situation: That this may be the world’s first democratic election held under an occupation; that Mahmoud Abbas forced an election that led to his own defeat; and that Israel's strategy of 'Unilateral Disengagement' from Gaza contributed to the Hamas victory.

Then he warns of "3 potential failures": to underestimate Hamas' pragmatism and ability to change; to overestimate Fatah’s ability to recover from its disastrous defeat; and to ignore the effects of the decades-long Israeli occupation as a political factor in Palestine.

Finally, he sees 3 challenges: to give Hamas time to change; to deal somehow with "Israeli unilateralism"; and to create "alternative political paths within the Palestinian (and Israeli) society."

Last week, in Jerusalem, a journalist heard about a wise old Jewish man who had been going to the Wailing Wall to pray, twice a day, everyday, for a long, long time. So she went to check it out.

She went to the Wailing Wall and there he was! She watched him pray and after about 45 minutes, when he turned to leave, she approached him for an interview.

"I'm Rebecca Smith from DNN. Sir, how long have you been coming to the Wall and praying?"

"60 years! That's amazing! What do you pray for?"

"Amazing. Sir, how do you feel after doing this for 60 years?"

On a more serious note, welcome to the third Palestinian intifada. The first was with stones, the second a mix between non-violent and more violent means, and this one via a ballot box.

With Hamas' landslide victory in the Palestinian elections breaking years of political stagnation, we are witnessing, right before our eyes, a chapter of history being made. All of us directly touched by this conflict are not only witnesses, but rather, actors who will define the path that this chapter will take. A key centerpiece in the coming global debate of when, if, and how the world will acknowledge the results of the Palestinians’ internationally-observed, free and democratic elections is still at its climax. Every involved person's, organization's and country's moves are being calculated very carefully based on this new reality.

In an attempt to make sense of the rapidly moving situation following the elections, I pose the following for consideration.

The first irony of the situation is that the Palestinians practiced a form of democracy under occupation - possibly the first in world history. George Orwell would have had a ball with this. In a nutshell, Palestinians simply voted for their reality: a reality of a failed peace process, a road map that led into a Separation Wall, and a corrupt government that remained propped up by those same funds that are now being threatened to be cut off. Palestinians were fully aware that real democracy cannot be implemented under their difficult condition, but that did not stop them from holding elections for the third of their people that live under Israeli military occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Palestinians are also fully aware that elections are only part of the trappings of democracy and without the other elements -- freedom of organizing, speech, assembly, press, etc -- the elections will have been a wasted effort. Furthermore, after over a decade of live political interactions, or lack thereof, with Israelis, Palestinians have no illusions that better governing themselves will necessarily lead to the dismantling of the colonial occupation that suffocates their existence.

Secondly, Fatah, Yaser Arafat's party, led itself, under Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, to a self-made defeat. President Abbas steamrolled Palestinians through a process that brought about his own party's downfall. This is definitely a first in this part of the world. Despite one's political biases, it is apparent that President Abbas is attempting, through elections and other actions, to construct a state-building institution that has the potential to serve Palestinians long after his own rule. Whether this was an intended outcome or a by-product of a plan to bring Hamas into the political framework and break the historic monopoly Fatah has come to enjoy is yet to be learned, but regardless, the process is a healthy one. It may be true that President Abbas has done too little, too late, but we cannot forget the colossal mess that he inherited (and contributed to for so many years), both internally and with the unrelenting Israeli aggression breathing down his back.

The third irony of the times is that Israel's strategy of 'Unilateral Disengagement' from Gaza failed and thus contributed to bringing Hamas to power. Even U.S. President Bush's declaring Sharon "a man of peace" was not enough to cover the thin veneer on the disengagement's death grip on Gaza. Such historic mistakes by Israel are not new. For example, when Israel withdrew from Southern Lebanon after an occupation of more than 20 years it left under its control, until today, the Lebanese Shabba Farms, which remain a flashpoint. Likewise, the Gaza Disengagement still left Israel in violation of international law. To disengage settlements from Gaza and leave the occupation fully engaged was a strategy that even Hamas would have had a hard time designing as part of their election's campaign. Israel is well known for making partial gestures, ones that serve a public relation agenda more than a peace agenda. This Israeli blunder is only outdone by the infamous "generous offer" scam that Israel made following the failed Camp David II talks, in essence, making "generous offers" among themselves and portraying to the world that the Palestinian side refused a feasible solution.

3 Potential Failures

The first potential failure would be to underestimate Hamas' pragmatism and ability to change. The group's past history of suicide bombings came initially as impetuous responses to the Hebron attack in February 1994 by Baruch Goldstein. Goldstein was a Jewish American-Israeli physician who killed 29 Muslims and injured 125 in cold blood in a shooting attack in the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron as they were praying. Hamas pulled back from this deplorable activity, with occasional revenge attacks in response to particular attacks by the Israelis. The group was basically responsive to Arafat's efforts to keep them from such acts until, in early 1996, a Hamas military leader, Yahya Ayyash, who had actually been responsible for a long-term cease-fire on the part of Hamas, was murdered by the Israeli Shin Bet (clearly with the approval of Acting Prime Minister Shimon Peres), for rather cheap motives (simply to show the Israeli intelligence organization, Shin Bet, as capable of some kind of action after they had failed to protect Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin from assassination by a Jewish extremist). Hamas then set off a series of suicide bombs that were a principle reason that Shimon Peres lost the election that year to Netanyahu. That's the pattern: Hamas attacking, often in outrageous ways, but basically in response to Israeli attacks that are at least just as outrageous.

The second potential failure would be to overestimate Fatah's ability to superglue itself back together after this election’s defeat. Just as Hamas today is not the Hamas of last week, the same applies to Fatah, but only in clearer terms. Fatah has failed terribly -- politically, diplomatically, organizationally, financially, and socially. Fatah not being able to implement succession of government after sobering up to a succession of colossal failures is a huge potential for short-term catastrophe.

Thirdly, it would be a failure to ignore that the 39 year old Israeli military occupation and 58 year old dispossession of Palestinians remain the sources of this conflict. Palestinians do not undertake intifadas for a hobby. It is now absolutely imperative to remove the source of contention, and then hold Palestinians to international standards of governance, until then, we will only be writing a chapter of history instead of the last chapter of a conflict.

The first challenge is that of time. Hamas must be given time to change - create a government, assume power, and state its current positions. Even if you want them to fail, one must let them redefine themselves to justify attacking them now that they have been elected – unless, that is, your goal is the total collapse of what is left of Palestinian society.

The second challenge is that of Israeli unilateralism. It is time for Israel to see that unilateralism, the Israeli definition of such, is part of why Hamas won. By taking actions outside of any negotiated process, Israel undermined the most moderate Palestinian leadership ever. Israel must realize that negotiations with an enemy are the only negotiations that end conflicts. Insincere negotiations and negotiating with an ally, as Israel has done with the U.S. on Palestinian issues, will only sustain the conflict.

The third challenge of our time is the creation of alternative political paths within the Palestinian (and Israeli) society. As Palestinians we should not take Hamas' coming to power lightly. Secular Palestinians need to get up and get to work. Resisting occupation and state-building are not spectator sports. The initiative and devotion to our just cause, which the Oslo process and 10 years of a corrupt government took away, must be returned, and quickly. I would also add that the time may be ripe that the political movements of both sides of this conflict stop being looked at in a polar fashion. The future of Palestinians and Israelis are too intertwined to accept separation, be it by way of a physical wall or political actions.

Given the unique wedlock between the U.S. and Israel, it is paramount to keep a close eye on how the U.S. deals with our new reality. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was quoted in the Washington Post on Sunday, 29/1/2006, giving the initial U.S. reaction. Secretary Rice acknowledged that U.S. officials were surprised by the extent of the Hamas victory. She said,

She added,

So easy. So simple. Just a poor pulse reading!

No mention that the body under review, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, has had its arteries blocked for 5 years stopping the free movement of 3.5 million Palestinians.

No mention that the heart of this body, Jerusalem, has been amputated, not with the outbreak of the second intifada, but for nearly 20 years now, prohibiting Palestinian access to religious sites, and our political, cultural and economic center.

No mention that for 10 years the blood of this body -- donor funds -- was contaminated by the same coffers that are now threatening to siphon the body dry.

No, none of this, just a poor pulse reading!

If the world's superpower is so blind as to not see the potential for real change following this new development, regardless if it was unable to be predicted, then we must all make our voices heard to bring the U.S. to its senses. The "you are either for us or against us" mindset that drives U.S. executive thinking will fail in Palestine where the average citizen is politically astute and has been on the receiving end of a decades old Israeli-made tsunami which has been fully supported by Washington.

Let that wise old Jewish man know that the wall has cracked - not the Wall he prays to, but the illegal and unholy Wall that separates our two peoples.

Len Bjorkman, Witherspoon member and active leader in the Presbyterian Peace Fellowship, has recommended this essay, having met Bahour and his family when they were living in the U.S.  Bjorkman has himself visited Palestine a number of times, most recently in 2001, which he calls "almost ancient history now, given all the changes." He notes that Bahour is "often quoted in newscasts that are serious about getting Palestinian points of view. He also has a degree from Hebrew University."