Hebrew University
Hebrew University -
Bashir Bashir (Dept of Political Science) explains how he sees
Israeli Society
http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2009/02/2567
I am surprised at the TRIBALISM &
PATHOLOGICAL NARCISSION practised in Israel
Mehru Jaffer Vienna
February 2009
Just in case the world has forgotten
what the Arab-Israel conflict is about, Professor Bashir Bashir, 32,
is quick to remind that it is about half-a-century of forcible
occupation of Palestinian homes by Israel. It is also about the
daily humiliation and brutalisation of the Palestinian people who
are forced to live in the biggest open air prison on the face of the
earth. The Palestinian professor is an alumni of the London School
of Economics and Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is an Israeli
citizen and a research fellow in the Gilo Centre for Citizenship,
Democracy and Civic Education at the Hebrew University and the Van
Leer Jerusalem Institute. Bashir is co-editor of ‘The Politics of
Reconciliation in Multicultural Societies', (Oxford University
Press, 2008). Hardnews caught up with the professor mid-January in
Vienna at the Bruno Kreisky Forum for International Dialogue where
Bashir spoke passionately about the Palestinian cause.
Excerpts from the exclusive
interview:
Q: How do you apply the theory of
the politics of reconciliation to practice?
A: If we are really serious about
reconciliation then we have to first come to terms with historical
injustices. To do this, courage is required to acknowledge the
suffering of the Palestinian people. Next, we have to look at the
Palestinian problem in a different way. The study of the politics of
reconciliation gives us an opportunity to look anew and differently
at solutions that have not worked in the past. The so-called peace
process of the past is grounded more on conflict management rather
than reconciliation. I admit that reconciliation is a much more
demanding and profound form of settling historical disputes.
Reconciliation demands a shift from a state of hostility, injustice
and exclusion to a state of cooperation, justice and inclusivity.
There are two questions which
require consideration. The first concerns Israel and its
relationship to the Palestinian minority within the Jewish state.
Today, Palestinians are 20 per cent of the Israeli population, and
they are not treated as equal citizens. The second concerns the
Palestinian national movement outside of Israel. These two concerns
are intimately linked. Let me give you my opinion of the most
discussed solutions.
Israel claims to be a ‘Jewish
democratic state'. This is accepted by the international community.
In my opinion, this view of Israel, both in terms of philosophical
grounds of democracy and Judaism and in terms of the reality on the
ground, is inconsistent. The truth is the practice by Israel of the
inherent exclusion of the Palestinian minority. The most celebrated
solution in terms of the Palestinian-Israel conflict is the
‘two-state' solution. I argue that the two-state solution is
impractical and irrelevant, especially if seen in the context of the
reality on the ground concerning Israeli settlements, the walls and
Jerusalem. The two-state solution as discussed within the terms and
limits offered by Israel is not viable.
Q: What do the Palestinians want?
A: Palestinians today are not after
a viable state as is often discussed in the international media. The
Palestinians want an ‘independent sovereign state' that answers
their minimal aspirations. Today, Palestinians are realistic enough
to concede that Israel exists on 78 per cent of their historic
homeland. The demand is not for claim, revenge or for the return of
this land. The demand is for a sovereign state on the 22 per cent of
the land which including the Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Even Hamas is prepared to accept this proposal.
Instead, what is proposed now is
only about 70 per cent of this 22 per cent.
This is not acceptable to the
Palestinian people. If Jerusalem cannot be divided and the two state
solution is not working - primarily if not exclusively due to
Israel's lack of sincere intent - then I say, let us look at other
ways of settling the conflict.
The other possible and innovative
solution that comes to mind is a ‘bi-national state'. I propose one
state for Arabs and Jews with equal rights. This proposal inspires
me despite the fact that I am accused of being Utopian, an escapist,
a dreamer, idealist and an unrealist.
Q: What would you call this state?
A: This is a matter of semantics. I
am not interested in this type of a question. You can call it what
you will. The point is that 20 per cent of Palestinians already live
in Israel as a minority and all Palestinians are being made to pay
the price of crimes committed against European Jews which they did
not commit. It was Europeans who persecuted the Jews in Europe
during the Holocaust - not us.
By supporting the bi-national state
solution Palestinians are now saying that they are willing to share
their homeland with the Jews. This solution is more inclusive and
based on ideas of justice and equality. The reality is that a bi-
national state already exists in Israel. From a bird's eye view you
can see how Arabs and Jewish populations intermingle in Israel
despite the practice of oppression and the politics of exclusion
practised by the Jewish democratic state for 60 years.
Q: What is the reaction to the
bi-national state solution in Israel and among Palestinians?
A: At the moment it is very
unpopular on both sides. However, a few more Palestinians are
showing interest in it. This is natural as the solution poses a very
serious challenge to people to change their attitude and
consciousness.
But whether its dismissal can
prevent it from being realised one day is not so certain. In fact,
there is evidence which gives me hope: I don't want to stop
advocating a more humane, just and inclusive society. My source of
optimism is based on contingent historical events. Even a few years
ago, who would have imagined that an African-American will be sworn
in as the president of America?
This event fuels my hope. America,
of course, is not Israel. America is a very established democracy
with all its structural and historical problems of racism and
politics of exclusion. Despite that there is huge room in America to
accommodate change. Democracy in America is flexible and elastic and
able to adapt itself to the demands of the time. But Israel is not.
I know because I live there. It is even doubtful whether Israel is a
democracy or not.
I know that my proposal is risky and
there is no security that it will happen. But I am inspired by
history, by morals and by my concern for justice.
Q: How would you describe the role
of Hamas in the last big conflict with Israel only a few weeks ago
that cost the Palestinian people in Gaza nearly 1,500 lives and
massive ruination, injuries and suffering?
A: It is unprecedented that a
Palestinian Islamist group is playing a leading role in the people's
fight against Israel. It is not Yasser Arafat but Hamas who is
leading the Palestinian people's struggle today for a homeland. What
we are witnessing here could lead to disastrous consequences for the
Palestinians in the long run. The Palestinian people are divided in
their opinion as they watch Hamas become the most powerful political
party.
The sad reality is that the
Palestinian Authority failed miserably to seize a golden opportunity
to connect better with the concerns and needs of the people. It is
busy buying into their way of thinking and making alliances with
certain western and Arab regimes. In doing so, the main loser has
been the Fatah. It is alarming that for the first time since the
Nakba, (Palestinian catastrophe) when people were expelled from
their homes in 1948, the leadership has looked outside for
legitimacy. In the past, mainstream politicians relied on legitimacy
exclusively from the Palestinian people. Palestinian politicians
were most powerful when they enjoyed the support of the Palestinian
people. What we are witnessing today is a leadership that is not up
to the expectation of the Palestinian people and has been made
impotent by concerns imposed upon it by Israel and other external
forces.
Another development is that the
Palestinian cause and territory is turned into a battlefield by
regional powers to visit and to play their own internal games.
Part of the brilliance of Arafat,
despite all my criticism of him, was that he embodied Palestinian
unity. Arafat was able to prevent Palestinian territory from being
used by powers in the region and he seized the right moments in the
regional and Palestinian conflict to achieve benefits for the
Palestinian people. I don't see that happening today.
Q: What is your worst criticism of
Arafat?
A: Arafat failed to build
institutions and he personalised politics. As a result, we are in
the midst of disastrous consequences today.
Q: Does it surprise you that both
peaceniks and warmongers within Israel supported the recent air
raids over Gaza?
A: This is a very important question
which leads me to talk about the fiction and illusion of the Israeli
Left. There is an image of a powerful Zionist Left in Israel. I want
to make it clear that within the Israeli society there are few
people who believe in peace, inclusivity and justice. Israel is a
very divided society and it has its own dynamics but when it comes
to the Palestinian cause it orchestrates the same symphony. Israel
responds like a tribe. It plays tribal politics and it has no room
to accommodate different opinions. I am surprised at the tribalism
and pathological narcissism practised in Israel.
I feel seriously disappointed as an
academic and scholar that within the Israeli intellectual landscape
there are few voices talking of justice. It is often heard that they
want to live in peace like normal human beings. Then why deprive the
right of others to also live in peace? They say that they want their
children to be safe and not terrorised by violence. Then for God's
sake, why do they terrorise the children of others? Where are the
principles of reciprocity?
If this so-called Zionist Left
continues to use the same logic, then I see little progress towards
any kind of peace. The Zionist left argues and advocates for the two
states solution not on the basis of justice and democracy BUT on the
basis of demography and maintaining Jewish character/ majority.
According to this view, they are willing to keep the Palestinian
minority in Israel, but as second class citizens subject to the
hegemony of the Jews in Israel. By withdrawing from the West Bank
and Gaza they get rid of more than three million Palestinians that
endanger the Jewish character of the state.
|