Tweet
When will it ever end?
Published: Friday | January 9, 2009
The most influential regional clash of the last century into this one must be the conflict between the Arabs and the Israelis.
Both sets of combatants operate with the ethic of the 'Talion', which is expressed in Exodus 21:23-25 as 'life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe'. Mahatma Gandhi famously said that such an ethic would result in a world of blind people, and we might add lame, crippled, toothless, wounded, scarred or dead people.
Resolution of this crisis is not going to come when rockets are no longer fired into Israel from Gaza. There are profound and long-standing grievances, which have been festering for decades, and the global ramifications affect us all. The bombings in Madrid, London and Bali are rounds in this bout, and the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon has affected air travel and security worldwide. Neither side seems prepared to back down and their fight to the death might be the death of us all. We all have an interest in resolving the Middle East crisis before someone plays the nuclear card.
Sending rockets into the cities and towns of Israel by Hamas is a breach of the Geneva Convention, as is the bombing of civilian areas by Israel. Both parties are wrong and neither holds the moral high ground. Hamas rockets the civilian population of Israel because, they say, every Israeli is a soldier and the Israeli settlements are themselves an act of war. Israel bombs private homes, schools and mosques because, they say, Hamas hides weapons there and that regular soldiers hide behind civilians.
Safety zones
Article 14 guarantees protection within mutually agreed safety zones. Earlier this week, Israel bombed a United Nations school compound, which was an officially designated safety zone because, they said, a rocket had been fired into Israel from there. Can you just ignore the Geneva Convention like that? Using this logic, anywhere can then be bombed, as long as you claim that a rocket came from there.
Hamas is in the habit of sending suicide bombers into crowded Israeli streets to inflict dozens of civilian casualties. In retaliation, Israel bombs the home of the suicide bomber, killing any relatives who might be at home, and then sends in bulldozers to level the dwelling.
Historical grievances
In this conflict, everybody has a case - both a suite of immediate complaints (what happened this week and last week) and a full set of historical grievances going back decades. A just settlement requires that everyone's case be addressed, going as far back as is necessary. One might choose to go back to the Yom Kippur War of 1973, when Arab countries simultaneously attacked Israel on their high holy day; or one might choose to go back to Israel's pre-emptive strike on several Arab countries (the Six Day War of 1967); or you might choose to go back to the eviction of Palestinians from their land and homes by the Jews in 1948; or to the mass migration of Jews into Palestine from the early 20th Century and Britain's Balfour Doctrine which supported it.
Behind all of this is the religious view that Palestine was given to the Jews by God and that they have the right to evict anyone they find trespassing there.
However far back one goes, the present situation is untenable. Many Palestinians living in refugee camps should be allowed to return to their lands from which they were evicted. That is the source of the problem. In my view, the blame for this conflict lies with the great powers which recognised the state of Israel without ensuring that the rights of the resident Palestinians were guaranteed.
In more modern times, Christian fundamentalism in the United States of America has supported Israel against the Palestinians, not to mention the strong (and wealthy) Jewish lobby. The question before the house is whether Barack Obama has the political capital to turn this situation around.
Peter Espeut is a sociologist and a Roman Catholic deacon.
Published: Friday | January 9, 2009
The most influential regional clash of the last century into this one must be the conflict between the Arabs and the Israelis.
Both sets of combatants operate with the ethic of the 'Talion', which is expressed in Exodus 21:23-25 as 'life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe'. Mahatma Gandhi famously said that such an ethic would result in a world of blind people, and we might add lame, crippled, toothless, wounded, scarred or dead people.
Resolution of this crisis is not going to come when rockets are no longer fired into Israel from Gaza. There are profound and long-standing grievances, which have been festering for decades, and the global ramifications affect us all. The bombings in Madrid, London and Bali are rounds in this bout, and the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon has affected air travel and security worldwide. Neither side seems prepared to back down and their fight to the death might be the death of us all. We all have an interest in resolving the Middle East crisis before someone plays the nuclear card.
Sending rockets into the cities and towns of Israel by Hamas is a breach of the Geneva Convention, as is the bombing of civilian areas by Israel. Both parties are wrong and neither holds the moral high ground. Hamas rockets the civilian population of Israel because, they say, every Israeli is a soldier and the Israeli settlements are themselves an act of war. Israel bombs private homes, schools and mosques because, they say, Hamas hides weapons there and that regular soldiers hide behind civilians.
Safety zones
Article 14 guarantees protection within mutually agreed safety zones. Earlier this week, Israel bombed a United Nations school compound, which was an officially designated safety zone because, they said, a rocket had been fired into Israel from there. Can you just ignore the Geneva Convention like that? Using this logic, anywhere can then be bombed, as long as you claim that a rocket came from there.
Hamas is in the habit of sending suicide bombers into crowded Israeli streets to inflict dozens of civilian casualties. In retaliation, Israel bombs the home of the suicide bomber, killing any relatives who might be at home, and then sends in bulldozers to level the dwelling.
Historical grievances
In this conflict, everybody has a case - both a suite of immediate complaints (what happened this week and last week) and a full set of historical grievances going back decades. A just settlement requires that everyone's case be addressed, going as far back as is necessary. One might choose to go back to the Yom Kippur War of 1973, when Arab countries simultaneously attacked Israel on their high holy day; or one might choose to go back to Israel's pre-emptive strike on several Arab countries (the Six Day War of 1967); or you might choose to go back to the eviction of Palestinians from their land and homes by the Jews in 1948; or to the mass migration of Jews into Palestine from the early 20th Century and Britain's Balfour Doctrine which supported it.
Behind all of this is the religious view that Palestine was given to the Jews by God and that they have the right to evict anyone they find trespassing there.
However far back one goes, the present situation is untenable. Many Palestinians living in refugee camps should be allowed to return to their lands from which they were evicted. That is the source of the problem. In my view, the blame for this conflict lies with the great powers which recognised the state of Israel without ensuring that the rights of the resident Palestinians were guaranteed.
In more modern times, Christian fundamentalism in the United States of America has supported Israel against the Palestinians, not to mention the strong (and wealthy) Jewish lobby. The question before the house is whether Barack Obama has the political capital to turn this situation around.
Peter Espeut is a sociologist and a Roman Catholic deacon.