|
|||||||||
Posted November 17, 2001
Occupation
Having read ... [Ran HaCohen's column of November 13], "Say No to a Palestinian State," I was struck by your articulate ability to lay out clearly the Palestinian position.
As an American Jew, it wasn't until recently that I even learned that it might be possible that Israel might bear some of the blame for the problem (it appears you think all the blame). I am curious to know from your perspective, what if any culpability the Palestinians bear....
...Prior to 1967, there was no "occupation"; why weren't the Egyptians in Gaza or the Jordanians in the West Bank called occupiers? If all this is about occupation and settlements, then why was the problem not resolved in the 20 years from 1948 to 1967 when there were no settlements or occupation?
It ... seems to me that if someone is truly knowledgeable about a subject, he should be able to clearly state the arguments of the other side (even if you don't agree with them). From my perspective, your article gives the appearance that you either don't know much about the other side or simply choose to ignore it.
Ran HaCohen replies:
Thank you for so many good questions, which I'll try to answer very briefly.
-
Indeed, I give most of the blame to the Israeli leadership. There is no moral "balance" between occupiers and occupied.
-
I do differentiate, however, between Israel and Israelis. A stable majority of Israelis opposes the occupation. E.g., when asked in a poll whether "all settlements in the Gaza Strip should be evacuated" -- stress on "all" -- 60% said "yes," 36% said "no" (Yeditoh Achronot, 19.10.2001). All Israeli governments, however, consistently refuse to evacuate even one single settlement.
-
As for the arguments "of the other side," you'd find much of what official Israel would "say in response" in my earlier column, "The Ideology of Occupation."
-
Settlements and occupation have indeed been a major problem, since 1967; the other one is the Palestinian refugees, which started earlier, in 1948.
-
You can call the Egyptians in Gaza or the Jordanians in the West Bank prior to 1967 "occupiers." But note that neither of them tried to resettle its own population on the Palestinians' land; that Jordan granted West Bank inhabitants full citizenship; and that the Palestinian refugees had their homes in Israel, not in Jordan or Egypt. This makes a difference, I guess.
Civilization
With all this talk about defending "civilization" from the "barbarians" has no one thought to point out that "civil" means "peace," and therefore any nation at war is not "civilized"?
Demonstrations
I had heard that there were to be demonstrations against the war across Europe on 18 November. Do you know anything about this? ...We would most definitely want to join in.
The "Backtalk" editor replies:
From
a quick look at
Protest.net,
it seems that
a big demonstration
is planned in
London this
Sunday. Protest.net's
page can be accessed
by clicking the
icon on the left
side Antiwar.com's
main page.
Smarter Than They Look
I am a longtime philosophical Libertarian, but I haven't been politically vocal or active for some time. Having recently discovered ... [Justin Raimondo's] column, I have been reading it (archived articles as well) voraciously lately. You are an excellent writer and extremely well-informed. I agree with much of what you have to say, but have you ever considered the possibility that the government was aware of the impending attack? It makes a very nice parallel to the Pearl Harbor attack which galvanized the nation into a blood thirsty mood.
I'm afraid it really isn't in the interest of the War Party to catch any terrorists in this country since the American public will enthusiastically support a war as long as people are dying here. I don't think the government needs to concern itself with Americans questioning our foreign policy in any real sense. Either they will support war or they won't. The only real difference I can see is that the attack on Pearl Harbor was followed by large numbers of enlistments into the armed forces. This attack has been greeted by a collective yawn by our smarter-than-they-look 19-year-olds. A draft might change things, but if the war gets that big, then God help us all.
Operation
Keep it up boys! I'm an in-debt student, otherwise I'd fund your whole operation.
Miraculous Recovery
Thanks so much for your excellent coverage of the dreadful situation in which we find ourselves. Mr. Raimondo, in today's piece, writes:
"A war fought against this ominous backdrop would soon take on the character of a global cataclysm. The most farseeing advisors to the President surely see this: God help us if they fail to convince Bush. For in that case, we are all screwed, and nothing short of a miracle can save us."
Well, the miraculous recovery from our "fine mess" will also include our paying heed to the old saw, "God helps those who help themselves."
Let me know what I can do to help.
Definitions
I commend your site for this example of your sound, evenhanded, and objective reporting:
"Israeli death-squads now kill a Palestinian freedom fighter almost every day. On the other hand, police claim to have 'no clue' as to the identity of a Jewish terrorist group that has murdered at least six Palestinians during the past months."
Pretty objective for a bunch of anti-Semitic Nazis!
Ran HaCohen replies:
I do apologize for my poor English. By "death squad" I simply mean a small military unit that targets and kills specific persons extra-judicially. "Freedom fighter" is for me a person who fights against an oppressive regime. "Terrorist" is a person who intimidates, injures or kills innocent people. I do wonder, however, what the you mean by "anti-Semitic" and "Nazi."