‘There is a life behind every statistic’
Sara Roy
Gaza appears sporadically as front-page news in the context of violence and terrorism, as it has with the murder on Friday, 1 June, of Razan Ashraf al-Najjar, a 21-year-old paramedic who was fatally shot by Israeli snipers as she was treating wounded protesters along the fence that separates Gaza from Israel. After a day or two of attention, usually marked by the disproportionate deaths of Palestinians, Gaza recedes from view until the next assault. Israel is part of the story but all too often cast as responding to Hamas aggression, acting in self-defence. Without excusing Hamas for its misdeeds, Gaza's misery, isolation and hopelessness are primarily a product of Israeli policy. The form of occupation may have changed since Israel’s ‘disengagement’ in 2005, but the fact of occupation has not. One result is the dehumanisation of the men, women and children who live in Gaza, the denial of their innocence and the resultant loss of their rights.
I spoke to a friend in Gaza after Israel killed 60 Palestinians on 14 May. He was uncharacteristically subdued, almost inaudible. There were many silences, unusual for our conversations; some of them seemed interminable but I spoke only when spoken to. I had many questions and most remained unasked. The only time my friend became animate was when he told stories about some of the people who had been killed, people he either distantly knew or who were close friends. ‘There is a life behind every statistic,’ he said. He didn’t want to talk about politics; he only spoke about people.
One of the people killed on 14 May was the father of a boy whose birthday it was. Another was a 14-year-old boy, whose mother had long suffered with infertility and finally became pregnant with him after nine years of trying. The birth of their son seemed miraculous to his parents. My friend did not say so directly, and I did not ask, but he implied and I inferred that the boy was their only child. ‘He was shot in the head and died instantly. The father collapsed on him. Can you imagine these parents now, having lost their precious boy?’
I cannot imagine enduring the loss of a child, especially in such a monstrous way (because he wasn’t Jewish). But the story also speaks to my parent’s story. My mother had a miscarriage in the ghettos of Poland (because she was Jewish) and spent years after the Holocaust trying to get pregnant. My parents always told me that they survived in order to have me.
Yet for many Israelis there are ‘no innocents in Gaza’, as the defence minister, Avigdor Lieberman, said in response to the Great March of Return. His colleague Eli Hazan, a spokesman for Netanyahu’s Likud Party, said that all 30,000 men, women and children who gathered at the Gaza border to protest (the overwhelming majority, non-violently) ‘are legitimate targets’. For too many Israelis and Jews, there are no fathers or mothers or children in Gaza; no homes or nursery schools or playgrounds; no hospitals, museums or parks; no restaurants or hotels. Rather, Gaza is where the grass grows wild and must be ‘mown’ from time to time, as some Israeli analysts have put it.
How is the rest of the world to think about Gaza, about Palestinians? I ask because the deliberate ruination of Palestine – seen most painfully in Gaza – has been well documented. Yet Israel’s actions have been met, more often than not, with serene indifference and lack of remorse, reflecting, in the historian Gabriel Kolko’s words, the ‘absence of a greater sense of abhorrence’ – or, I would say after 14 May, with little if any abhorrence at all. One need only look at the language used in the American media to describe Palestinians and their deaths. Israeli propaganda dehumanising Palestinians has been enormously successful.
Why are so many among us unmoved by the contamination of a water supply that will soon lead to life-threatening epidemics among a population of nearly two million people; by the shattering of a once functioning economy through closure and blockade, depriving at least 45 per cent of the labour force (and more than 60 per cent of young workers) of the right to work – forcing most of them into dependence on food handouts and desperate young women into prostitution? The deprivation is deliberate. What purpose does Gaza’s suffering serve?
The real threat to Israel lies not in acts of Palestinian violence, but in understanding that those acts are a response to occupation and oppression, to injustice and dehumanisation. As an Israeli friend of mine once said, the threat to Israel lies ‘in making Palestinians intimate, in seeing the world through their eyes’. Why are we so afraid of humanising Palestinians?
The decision to relocate the US embassy to Jerusalem, which was driven by Israel and its supporters, should be understood as an attempt to maintain and enforce what Israel sees as its historical right to deny rights to Palestinians. The right to demand rights, which is, fundamentally, what the Palestinians at the Gaza border were claiming, is more threatening than any particular right because it speaks to the agency that makes Palestinians present and irreducible, which Israel has worked so long to regulate and annul. It is the inability to unthink rightlessness among Palestinians that must be maintained as a form of control. The ascription of rightlessness to the other is – and must remain – uncontestable, a clearly established rule that is not restrained by justice. Declaring Jerusalem to be Israel’s capital not only purges Palestinians from the political equation and disendows them of any claims based on justice, but also ensures their continued absence in Israeli eyes.
In the immediate aftermath of 14 May, with 117 dead (the number has since risen to 123) and more than 13,000 injured, my friend in Gaza told me that shopkeepers went online to invite people to take whatever goods they wanted for free. Banks announced that they would forgive certain loans.
Gaza will not disappear. It will not ‘sink into the sea’, as the late Yitzhak Rabin once wished it would. Gaza is a human rights catastrophe and an ecologic disaster. ‘In a few years,’ Thomas Friedman wrote recently in the New York Times, ‘the next protest from Gaza will not be organised by Hamas, but by mothers because typhoid and cholera will have spread through the fetid water and Gazans will all have had to stop drinking it.’
Will Gaza’s mothers then be shot dead for protesting, or will they simply be allowed to die, together with their children, from typhoid and cholera? Or will their protests be heard? The answer will determine our humanity, not theirs.
Comments
To be clear, lest you level some unfounded accusation, I find Hamas's terrorism to be repugnant. I find your perspective also to be repugnant.
I strongly suspect you'll reply to this; I also strongly suspect you'll have nothing substantive to add. So I think the record is clear -- if anybody else is still reading at this point. I'll take my leave.
That is ironic.
When I accessed the LRB Blog a few minutes back and found this post at the top, I thought to myself - Gee, what are the chances "Fred Skolnik" hasn't seen this post just yet ? Or hasn't responded to it, for once ? How utterly silly of me.
Now I will sit back and wait for "Fred Skolnik"'s next invective to be hurled at me. I am sure "Fred" will not disappoint.
I have to admit that when I started reading Sara Roy's blog, I did find myself thinking, "I wonder what Fred will say"?
Incidentally of the 60 deaths mentioned, how many died on the Gaza side of the security fence and how many on the Israeli side ?
I see that you also don't understand the interaction between a government and an army at the operational level. Rules of engagement are universal and very simple and not a subject of political debate. When there is a terrorist attack, the army responds in a prescribed way under the orders of its commanders. There is no such thing as carte blanche. When large-scale responses are called for General Headquarters presents an operational plan and the government will almost always approve it.
At least we are agreed that the IDF is a law unto intself. The only outstanding item is how many of the 60 dead were killed on the Gaza side of the security fence and how many on the Israeli side?
Scenario 1
The well regulated IDF goes to the Israeli government and says words to the effect that Hamas are going to hold a demo at the security fence and that this is a good opportunity to do some targeted assassinations so let's detail some snipers and the government approves. 53 activists are killed. No one talks about the 7 non activists who are killed, but hey, who cares ?
Scenario 2
The IDF turns up at the fence and takes it upon themselves to fire live amunition into the huge crowd 90% of whom, statistically speaking, turn out to be Hamas activists.
Who knows where the truth lies.
The thing is that you should not mistake this party as someone who sympathises with terrorism. Few on this side of the water shed a tear about the 3 IRA persons killed in Gibraltar or the hunger strikers for that matter. What has shocked people, though we have got used to it by now, is the level of collateral damage Israel is willing to inflict in its counter terror measures. In short your country is using collective punishment as a means of fighting terrorism. Your choice and I won't condemn you for it, but don't expect it to win you friends and admiration.
I’m sure the next entry by Sara Roy on this site will be on “De-humanisation of the Jew in the Arab society from Khaybar to Gaza”…
On the other hand, maybe not.
It is unambiguously clear what she feels about anti-Semitism and that is not diluted by her assertion that the Palestinians currently occupying Gaza have a right to rights.
It is however fortunate, and safe to say I think, that with single exception of the gentleman whose forbears hail from Stettin, no reader of this blog and of the LRB - to say nothing of thoughtful people in the world beyond the arted ghetto that is contemporary Israel - takes seriously anything he or his kind has to say nowadays.
http://www.michaellevinmusic.com/peace-and-justice-palestine/9-hasbara.html
Another word for the day worth exploring:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-shasha/what-is-pilpul-and-why-on_b_507522.html
Mr Skolnik's, alas,is not such a voice, though here I see we must agree to differ. Bien pensant we may all well be, but those of us in the mob you speak of find him to be shrill, embittered and short-fused, much given to personal insult. A great patriot he is, no doubt, but he does himself no favours in assigning the motive of hatred to people outraged, with good reason, at Israel’s criminal behaviour and inhumane policies. This behaviour, and these policies, are there for all to see – only the blind fail to recognise them for what they are - and though he congratulates himself on his debating skill Mr Skolnik’s diligent efforts to extenuate them are ultimately a disservice to his adopted country.
I don't believe for a second that you are "outraged." By all means, with all your humanity and concern for victims, what other countries have you gone after on other people's blogs? None? Just Israel? Don't give a crap about the genocides and massacres and human rights abuses all over the world? Show us what you've had to say about Darfur, Bosnia, Rwanda, Nigeria, China, Saddam's Iraq, Assad's Syria and all the others. And show us what you had to say when Israeli women and children were being blown to pieces in buses and restaurants by barbaric Arab terrorists. Nothing? Not outraged? Didn't feel compelled to open your mouth? Give us a few of your outraged quotes.
If such demonstration is not feasible (its absence by definition revealing you to be a liar and a hater), you are allowed, on planet Fred, to register your dismay at Israel’s conduct on condition that, simultaneously, that is to say in the same breath, and not one whit less passionately, you criticise Darfur, Bosnia, China et al. The list is long but you have yourself only to blame if you haven’t covered it first before speaking of Palestine, thereby proving your honesty and your eligibility to speak at all.
Anything less or other than this, on planet Fred, and you’ve shown your true colours as a hypocrite. Anything less, or other, and you’re duty bound to remain silent about Israel’s actions. Anything less, or other, and your reservations about what it does are without merit.
Just common sense, this. And perfectly rational….
In a recent interview in Telerama (French culture/media/listings weekly) with the former Jerusalem correspondent for the Le Monde group (1981-2015), Charles Enderlin, still resident in Jerusalem and obviously very au fait with all things Israeli, probably more so than Fred, states that the possibility of an independent Palestine state disappeared in 1996 when Netanyahu first came to power and relaunched colonisation which has continued ever since. European diplomats in post in Jerusalem know this very well. The Israeli government is about to put a budget of 2 billion shekels to 'Judae-ise' East Jerusalem! Netanyahu has the intention of transforming the state of Israel to make a 'Nation State of the Jewish people', meaning that the Arab minority will lose any collective rights (they already cannot live where they want, and that will be reduced further) moving even more towards apartheid (which already exists on the West Bank in essence). Netanyahu needs the appalling Hamas, which indirectly he helped to bring to power, to keep 70% of Israelis voting for him.
Enderlin finishes by saying his children and grandchildren will have to decide whether to stay or leave as the political situation becomes even more oppressive. He comments that when the Dutch install solar panels so villagers in the West Bank can run fridges to keep the goats cheese cool, which they sell to make a meagre living, the Israeli army comes and seizes them.
I feel sorry for the American diplomats moved to Jerusalem. There is really nothing joyful there. You can get a good lunchtime snack from one of the street traders in the Old City - that is about it, and the New City is sterile and dull - 'entertainment' is not in the vocab. You have to go to Tel Aviv, lively 24 hour city. I see a stream of taxis and diplomatic cars running down the mountain early evening and weekends to enjoy the bars, restaurants, clubs, cinemas, theatres, opera - and of course the splendid beach and seafood restaurants in Jaffa. Think on any other country wanting to move up the mountain!
No surprises there for readers of the LRB blog.
Rage? Are you joking? You're the hater here, not me.
Your understanding of the barriers to a settlement is distorted by your biases. The greatest barrier at present is simply the fact that Abu Mazen lacks the will and support to negotiate a settlement and Hamas doesn’t want to.
I enjoy the LRB blog and value posts such as Sara Roy's. I can easily read the text of Netanyahu's speeches, or the statements of groups to the right of Likud, without seeing them reproduced verbatim by their champion here.
On Facebook: Gazan protestors ‘bring a knife, dagger, handgun,’ kidnap Israelis, murder soldiers
https://www.jns.org/bring-a-knife-dagger-or-handgun-kidnap-israeli-civilians-and-murder-soldiers-and-settlers-instructions-on-facebook-to-gazans-for-march-of-return/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-calls-gaza-riots-unprecedented-insists-it-followed-rules-as-dozens-killed/