|
MUDDLE EAST TALES:
The Righteousness of the Powerful Victims
S P Singh
I was a sophomore
when India's state-controlled TV channel Doordarshan started
telecast of Bhisham Sahni's Tamas. There was a widespread
national furore. Tamas divided the families along age lines, and
the young ones turned towards their parents askance: “Did you
too do this?” Hurt parents, new to the feeling of being
questioned by their own offspring, had a readymade defence: “We
were the victims. They were killing us, or would have.”
The righteousness of the weak has been an
argument for inflicting untold misery upon the enemy; so no
matter how strong you are, it helps if you rush to occupy the
slot of righteousness of the weak. Israel now has dual
righteousness. It has the ownership on both the righteousness of
being victims and on the total powerfulness.
Naturally, the Palestinians have been left
with no choice but to do the same. And we must remember what
happens in such a situation. When both sides take ownership on
both righteousness and powerfulness, there is no space left for
compassion.
When rockets fall on the northern and
southern parts of Israel, the Israeli Jewish people shrink back
into their primary sense of victimhood: We are a small people,
threatened by many external forces that should be confronted
with determinism and powerfulness.
This primary sense of victimhood is based
on righteousness of the weak. If someone tries to kill you, kill
him first. Victimhood is now almost a second nature to Israelis.
It gives a feeling of togetherness and authorizes the Israeli
government in the name of the Israeli people to shoot at the
enemy, including their civilians, as they shoot at Israeli
civilians; as in war, like in war.
Entire consciousness of most Israelis now
revolves around this righteousness of the victim. An average
Israeli is much less aware of the negative effects of such power
on the others who suffer from his country’s powerful acts.
See it this way.
Once a people see themselves as victims –
no matter how powerful they are, just as Israelis – they have an
advantage over the perpetrators. They do not have to take
responsibility for their own actions, as these are only a
reaction to the evil acts of the others.
Israeli needs to be reminded in these harsh
days of bombs and fighting in Gaza and Lebanon, that it was the
power-oriented behavior in Lebanon and in the occupied
territories that contributed to the creation of both Hezbollah
in Lebanon and the Hamas in the territories.
Besides, Israelis are making one more
mistake. They are, at least for the benefit of their own people,
putting all their enemies in one basket at a time when it was
all the more crucial to draw a clear line differentiating the
Hezbollah and the Hamas.
Hezbollah is a terrorist organization,
acting violently against Israel in the face of international
law, and also endangering the Lebanese government and people.
But the Hamas government is an elected regime, elected via a
democratic balloting by the Palestinian people. Also, Hamas
itself is undergoing a bitter inner struggle. One one side,
pressured by the Europeans, Abu Mazen, and delegates from Egypt
and Jordan, between the moderate part of the Hamas, led by
Ismail Haniya, and the military part, led by Haled Mashal.
Israel is refusing to talk to Hamas. It is
thus the only people in the world, engaged in an intractable
conflict with another people, who refuse to realize that only
and only dialogue can lead to a compromise.
And is there a child in the Israeli or
Palestinian territories who does not know or understand the
basic contours of such a compromise? Return to the borders of
1967 (of course with slight changes), two states with their
capitals in Jerusalem, and a systematic step-wise solution to
the resettlement of the Palestinian refugees, including Israel’s
recognition of its share in the creation of the intractable
issue.
They agreed upon this formula in Taba in
2001.
(Here is an excerpt from the joint
Israeli-Palestine statement of January 2001: “The Taba talks
conclude an extensive phase in the Israeli-Palestinian permanent
status negotiations with a sense of having succeeded in
rebuilding trust between the sides and with the notion that they
were never closer in reaching an agreement between them than
today.
We leave Taba in a spirit of hope and
mutual achievement, acknowledging that the foundations have been
laid both in reestablishing mutual confidence and in having
progressed in a substantive engagement on all core issues.”)
This was the compromise suggested by the
Arab League in 2002.
This was the basis for the prisoners’
document.
By reaching a compromise, the Palestinians
will be pulled out from the threatening balance of power in the
region, as they are not an essential part of that balance but
rather suffer from it just like the Israelis.
In Israeli media, the dominant phrase is
“restore our deterrent”. It is a battle cry of the hawks.
Unfortunately, neither the Hezbollah nor the Hamas are deterred
by such actions; and thus the actions damage the deterrent
further.
Also (and this is important) actions that
may be “justifiable” may not necessarily be wise.
Israeli Defence Minister was quoted as
having said that Israel will make the Hezbollah regret the
kidnappings. That is very unlikely. Thus far, Israeli actions
have caused suffering among Palestinians and Lebanese, but they
have helped the Hezbollah and the Hamas achieve the ends they
desired.
Israel is getting bogged down in a two
front low intensity conflict. The world in now engaged by the
daily rocket attacks, destruction of Lebanon’s infrastructure,
scenes of warships docking to accommodate evacuees, and decoding
of Bush-Rice-Blairspeak about how to delay a ceasefire.
But those in search of a permanent solution
have to look far ahead.
Be clear on this point. Once the military
operations are over in the north and the south, Israel will be
faced with a Palestinian government that will be ready to enter
negotiations with the Israeli government based on exactly the
kind of compromise I have outlined above.
But by then, there will be a new question
hanging: Will there be, then, an Israeli government capable of
entering such a process of negotiations?
Israel moved out of Lebanon and Gaza, thus
retrieving an internal consensus of righteousness. The long
occupation of lands of the other people was a national
discomfort. Israel was perhaps trying to be more comfortable by
applying similar treatment to the West Bank too.
But in this search for comfort of the
heart, preparing it for a battle of the mind, Israel forgot an
important part. There were others in the region with similar
problems – with of course the feelings of righteousness and
powerfulness, and of being wronged historically at Israeli
hands.
The Qassam missiles on Sderot and Ashkelon
were unpleasant reminder of this other people. Whoever does not
want to talk with them will get missiles and abducted soldiers.
Because they too have the dual pedestal of victimhood and
righteousness pinned to their chests.
So what must Israel do? Here is our
recommendation. Do not get bogged down by Hezbollah. And do not
disengage from the roadmap. Start talking to the Palestinians on
the painful compromise (Yes, it IS painful, but to BOTH sides).
It is a solution both Israel and Palestine need so badly.
A compromise is not based on either
absolute righteousness or absolute powerfulness. It is based on
compassion: Compassion for the people who suffer, who were
killed, compassion for their family members, and compassion for
a public that is tired of just and successful wars.
Just because a war is just, it is not
successful. Just because a war is successful, it is not just.
Just because it can be both is no reason that it must be fought.
Compassion is a bigger end game. Act in ways such that a mere TV
serial should not enable the younger generations to embarrass
you. Ask those of us in India and Pakistan who have shed each
others blood merely to cross lines drawn on a map.
July 25, 2006
Print this article
|
