Tuesday, August 3, 2010 - 4:59 AM
A few days ago my group went to Ramallah to meet with some leading figures in Fatah and the Palestinian Authority - including Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. Here are my impressions from that seven-hour visit:
1) As much as the Israeli economy is booming, Ramallah is in the middle of the mother of all construction booms. Practically every block has a crane with construction going on - and not an empt6y crane either, but one with actual work going on. While the city is poorer than a comparable Israeli village, I should note that an awful lot of those new buildings look like the Palestinian version of McMansions.
2) For all the talk about Fatah being a secular movement, most of the people we saw outside of the Palestinian Authority (PA) buildings looked a bit more religious. Except for those women working for the PA, every woman I saw on the street was wearing the hijab.
3) The one Palestinian all of our Israeli interlocutors praised was Fayyad, so it was quite interesting to meet him. He's not a Fatah member, and has all the charisma of an economist. That said, he has one thing that few people on either side possessed - a healthy dollop of optimism. Fayyad has been hard at work trying to build the Palestinian state from the ground up, focusing on both the mundane (garbage collection) and the not-so-mundane (security). The general consensus is that the West Bank is far safer and far better run than it was five years ago. Fayyad's goal seems to be to get the Israelis to realize that the Palestinians are competent at statebuilding. So far, the Israelis appear to concede that progress has been made. That said, both the PA and the Israelis fear a reversal if further progress is not made during the peace talks.
4) There is a wide disagreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians about the explanation behind the disappearance of terrorist attacks emanating from the West Bank - and, more generally, the lack of violence during Operation Cast Lead or even the recent flotilla incident. The Israelis credit Operation Defensive Shield, the security barrier, and the Israeli Defense Forces (a joke repeated by many Israelis we met was that Abu Mazen has the best security force in the word - the IDF). PA officials credited improved Palestinian security forces and the conscious self-restraint of the Palestinian people. One PA official claimed - and an former Israeli official confirmed - that 25,000 Palestinians cross the barrier undetected for economic reasons, and should the PA want to cause trouble, the barrier would be only a minor impediment. This official later claimed that the PA could launch missiles onto Tel Aviv if they so decided.
5) There is also a wide divergence of preferences about the status quo. As noted previously, the Israelis are pretty happy. Fatah is less happy - they feel like they're doing the dirty work to enhance Israeli security without realizing any benefits in terms of peace negotiations. They worry that unless progress is made on final status negotiation soon, they will lose power to Hamas. I have every confidence that fair-minded FP readers can evaluate these claims.
6) About the border crossing and the security barrier. Getting into Ramallah was pretty easy - the Israelis don't care who goes through, and the PA had no checkpoints. Once inside, it's impossible to look at the concrete barrier and not think of the Berlin Wall. Same concrete, same distribution of graffiti (no graffiti on the Israeli side, plenty on the Palestinian) and similar message content (though an awful lot of it was in English, which I found convenient ). Getting back into Israel was much more onerous. The lines were long, and the wait was interminable. The Palestinians were pretty unfazed by the wait - for them, this was standard operating procedure. On the other hand, Dalia Rabin, the head of the Rabin Institute and daughter of the late prime minister, had to be detained because she couldn't walk through the metal detector for health reasons.
7) I have something very controversial to say, so let's just get this out in the open: the hummus at the Mirador Hotel in Ramallah is better than the hummus at the King David in Jerusalem [Way to inflame tensions!!-ed. I call them as I see them.]
UPDATE: Yes, I meant seven thoughts, not six. My counting skills are the first thing to go when I'm jet-lagged.
"2) For all the talk about Fatah being a secular movement, most of the people we saw outside of the Palestinian Authority (PA) buildings looked a bit more religious. Except for those women working for the PA, every woman I saw on the street was wearing the hajib."
It was always my understanding that Fatah wasn't actually 'secular,' per se. I thought that was just the way they were portrayed in American media as a basis of comparison to Hamas. That's not some ringing endorsement of the poor plight of Hamas or anything, I just mean that the media intends to paint the 'good guy' as secular. Instead, I feel like they're not necessarily any less religious, just not fundamentalist and psychotic about it.
The US media likes to exaggerate and paint in everything in white vs black.
RACIST
Just kidding. But seriously, I think its fair to say that ALL media tend to oversimplify things... and American media (who do you mean? Fox News? The New York Times? C-Span? Mother Jones? The Indypendent? National Review? The News Hour on PBS? Foreign Policy Magazine??) is no different, in truth.
I mean, compared to Pakistani media?...Russian? Iranian? French? Nigerian? I dont think you could find any bastion of nuance and fairmindedness anywhere in the world to contrast very differently against the range of things you find in American media. All have their jingoistic, simplistic side in some cases, and perhaps more thoughtful outlets in others. But there's no broad difference with American media; if anything, its much more diverse, so resists generalization.
I say this as someone who has spurned cable TV my whole life, BTW. Also as someone who recently decided that the NYT is sort of a waste of time (unless you are a bourgeois liberal who needs constant confirmation of your pre-existing worldview). I admit to preferring FT as a broadsheet, and The Economist as the best weekly news analysis. (Damn you brits and your superior journalism!) But The News Hour still kills BBC news (which to me is really no different than any other cable news, albeit with more poncy accents).
My point is that if all you look at is USA Today, The NY Post, Fox News, yes, then American media is pretty dumb and oversimplified. And yes, these outlets do in some cases have pretty high market share; but that would be like saying McDonalds is widely representative of American cuisine, just because they are the single largest chain. Any American looking for different stuff doesn't have to go very far. (Taco Bell is across the street... har har)
I think your point might be more correct if you said, "Many Americans WANT a simplified, black & white version of things". Its not that people are force-fed it, per se. I dislike people who blame the media for certain misconceptions, and not the consumers who demand them or want them reinforced.
That said, I've never heard Fatah specifically described as a 'secular' party; rather, I think the impression is given because Hamas is often referred to as an 'islamist' party.
Its not all that different in how the left-leaning media will refer to congressperson so-and-so as "Conservative Republican X", while you NEVER EVER EVER hear anyone refer to, say, any congressperson from California, as "Screaming Liberal Democrat". No major news outlet ever refers to anyone as 'liberal'. Its more like, in their universe, 'there's Conservatives, and then everyone else' (i.e. 'normal people')
My favorite case of Black & White reporting has been the glut of "How Racist Is The Tea Party?" articles in the NYT. Of course, they've never actually had any reporting where they actually interview or examine actual tea party members (actually, I think they did *one*, and generalized from that sample); no, they'll get a psychologist from Berkley to do an editorial on "Irrational Rage Often Driven By Latent Racism", or something.
Why is Fatah followers wearing Burkas somehow exclusive to Fatah being secular? For one, Burkas are just as much a cultural thing as a religious one. Second, in Western democracies there are plenty of religious folks who believe in secular government, so isn't it at least possible some of this has rubbed off onto the Middle East? Nasser was certainly a religious individual who pushed for secular government. (Although obviously not a model of Western democracy.)
they are actually not as moderate as the media needs them to be.
Fatah's armed resistance wing has actually killed more Israelis then Hamas.
Their charter is almost identitcal to that of Hamas, neither recognize Israel.
Fatah is in no way moderate, they are simply better at PR then Hamas.
And they are smarter at attacking Israel. Theyre armed brigade is not called Fatah like Hamas's is also called Hamas.
Fatah is in no way moderate.
Seriously? This is no place to eat and assess the quality of Israeli hummus.
Who goes to King David for Hummus?
You go to Abu Gosh, the village at the entrance to the corridor leading to Jerusalem. It's also an example of co-existence, including music festivals and, in case I didn't stress this enough, the best hummus in the world
Inflamed by Chumus? No. Here's what gets the temprature up
During the past week we have seen the following:
.
1: A rocket attack from Gaza hitting the major Israeli city of Ashkelon
.
2: A rocket barrage from the Sinai penninsula aimed at Eilat.
.
3: A Lebanese assault on Israeli forces doing planned maintenance work (including the notification of such work with UNIFIL) on its northern border fence resulting in the injury and death of IDF soldiers.
.
4. Silence from the world on all three occassions.
What insenses me most are the intellectually dishonest and downright moronic comparisons made by members of the media these days. Comparing the Berlin Wall to the Israeli security barrier beecause both have graffiti on one side and are made of concrete is akin to saying the US military is no different from Hezbollah - both have guns, both have uniforms.
One wall was build to keep people as hostages and to prevent contact with the outside world. It split by force and against the will of the people, a sovereign country that has been around for several generations. A wall build by a totalitarian regime not to protect its own people, but to enslave them.
The other wall was voluntarily build by people of one country to keep out suicide bombers targeting the civilians of another. A wall build with the consent of the majority of its own citizens by a democratic government.
But hey, both the US and USSR wore green uniforms back in the day, so I suppose they had identical intentions.
If you want to talk about whether the wall was the best way to keep out homicidal maniacs out of Israel, or if you want to take issue with the route only covering 97% of the pre-1967 borders and not 100%, that would be a different story. But to compare the two walls is moronic and it serves no purpose than to demonize Israel by comparing it to a totalitarian, evil regime.
When the Berlin wall fell, people on both sides were German and they embraced one another. When this wall goes down, there will not be one group of people on both sides of the wall and they will not be embracing, but killing one another.
That wall with grafitti on it is no different than the wall between Mexico and the United States, which while not covering the entire span of the border, is nonetheless a lot larger than the wall in Israel - and its only keeping out people who are willing to do back breaking labor for minimum wage or less that the rest of Americans do not want to do. Perhaps Mr. Drezner wants to write about that wall instead.
... which is what 90% of the above comment is.
" if you want to take issue with the route only covering 97% of the pre-1967 borders and not 100%, that would be a different story.""
Agreed.
But regarding the 3% in question: ""In its current route the Wall is annexing 9.5% of the total area of the West Bank to the Israeli side of the barrier.[48]""
http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_barrier_report_july_2009_english_low_res.pdf
You make it seem like "it's a niggling point". I doubt if we unilaterally annexed 10% of Mexico it would be quite the same thing. I am not a major critic of Israel, as some are in a knee-jerk fashion, and I think much of the Palestinian's problems they've heaped upon themselves, but I still think the issue of the wall is not something so simply written off as being perfectly reasonable and justifiable. Most especially not the parts where it swings deeply into the west bank to encompass settlements of dubious legitimacy. But then, I suppose that was not Drezner's specific point either. He seemed to simply be speaking of a qualitative impression, not a nuanced analysis of the political context. I myself saw the berlin wall before it fell, and I was left shaken, not so much by the specific socio-political situation, but by its physical reality, as a manifestation of human folly. I have not yet seen the wall with Mexico. I suppose I might find it funny, by contrast. :) Or maybe just another manifestation of incredible stupidity.
Hummous Siad in Acco...
mmm...
Well, last week I saw a quote from Abbas saying that after there's a country, he will not allow any Israelis to live there...
Quite a moderate. Really. Great guy. I wonder how this wonderful Fayyad would respond if one asked him if he'd allow any Israelis to live in his country... Too bad that you didn't have this information and thus the time to ask him, 'eh?
And let's remember the subject of his PhD dissertation
The Zionist-Nazi conspiracy during the 30's and 40's
Arguing about "Whose Hummus is better" - which I realize is extremely politicized - seems to me about as interesting as whether Tang or Sunny Delight are more 'fake-orangey'.
I mean, its mush. Mush made from chick peas. We're not talking vintage-Bordeaux nuance here. ("Ummmm! This mush is just so much more...mushy! And you can really savor the complexity of the peas contrasting with...the other peas."") I mean, dry rub barbecue in North Carolina is perhaps deserving of international debate (long term religious war even!), but pea-dip in the Middle East...? Come the @9*!$ on already. East vs. West Coast Rap is more interesting. And 90% of the stuff is CRAP anyway.
If I were Israeli, I'd be like, "Ok, second stage of negotiations: you concede east Jerusalem, and you can have Falafel AND Hummus back. Yep. You invented it. All yours. Ours is but a poor, second-rate ripoff of your highly original cuisine. We'll rename all the shops "Palesntinan-Style"... Seriously. You win. Oh, but we'll keep the Golan too. You want Challa for it? No? How about Gfilte fish? No? Actually just take it. No really, please. Take it, and you can have the Golan back. You want WHAT?? Bagels?? WITH LOX?? Unacceptable. Negotiations over, we're bombing Gaza again."
Yes, I am aware the Golan has nothing to do with Palestinians really. It was just something to riff on.
That said, I think there's nothing wrong comparing the Israeli security barrier to the Berlin wall, just as I think any comparison of the American border fence would be equally OK. It wasn't a comparison of the political contexts; its a comparison of the physical presence of a barrier as a symbolic manifestation of people's failure to reconcile with each other.
One might say, "Good fences make good neighbors"; but they would forget the point of the poem:
"" “Before I built a wall I'd ask to know:
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offense"
Given that the wall goes through a number of occupied territories, its more than just 'protection', as well. It becomes unilateral annexation of occupied territory. Or at least something additional to negotiate away in the future, which is certainly bad faith behavior. It may indeed have helped create better security for Israel. But I'm not sure such a one-sided calculus really provides all the needed justification. Would a Palestinian counter-party ever take seriously the claim that Israel simply wants to return to 1967 borders? It seems to give that position the lie. It may make Israel temporarily safer, but it makes the problem of long term reconciliation all the more difficult. Of course, that is their prerogative. I am not personally involved in the issue, and generally think the US should simply ignore both groups (and stop aiding both). Our attempts to mediate have never won us any allies; to the contrary, has made us enemies around the Muslim world, who see our involvement as being in equally bad-faith. It was one thing to support Israel when they were being threatened by Egypt, Syria, Jordan, etc. But militarily I think they can take care of themselves now, and we shouldn't be their political apologists forever. Nor should we be bashing them (like many in the UN do); just stay out of the debate and mind our own business as much as possible. But maybe I'm completely naive.
As to the issue about differences in Palestinian and Israeli beliefs about what caused the drop-off in terrorist attacks; I'd say, "they're probably both right". People have long tried to explain why NYC dropped to the lowest crime rate in 40 years - was it Giuliani & Bratton, and their 'Broken Windows' policing strategy? Or demographic shifts? Or simply a psychological burnout after 30 years of crime increases? All of the above I say. Same is probably true with Israel/Palestine, however both resist admitting it because they want to think they still have respective bargaining chips; Israel can claim that removing the wall is 'impossible' without assurances that Palestinians can 'control terror' - and since they will claim the wall was 100% the cause of the drop, they will claim that they in fact can't control it. Catch-22. Palestinians are in the weaker position, both claiming that it was a willful decision to stop the suicide bombings, while hinting that they could resume - as the interviewee did -, which seems rather hideous. One would think that referring to acts of violence as your only political negotiating tool Either way, it becomes a moot debate, as the wall is real, and Israel will have little incentive to ever concede anything (or return annexed property) even should the West Bank become a peaceful haven. All in all, not exactly a problem I'd want to be tasked with mediating.
I don't intend to distract the ongoing discussions away from hummus and security issues, but I am surprised that no one has commented yet on the use of "Hajib" instead of "Hijab". A typographical error, almost certainly, yet considering that it was italicized and presented as a significant point it stands out like a sore thumb.
Additionally, while my personal time in Ramallah was limited, I noticed far fewer women wearing hijabs or nikabs than in places such as Hebron (obviously) or even in most areas surrounding Bethlehem. In the Christian parts of Bethlehem, of course very few women wear it. Compared with Amman, which is easily the closest thing to an Arab cosmopolitan environment in the immediate area, it was my personal observation than women in Ramallah are less likely to wear hijabs or nikabs than in other Palestinian or most other Arab cities.
That said, every secularists that I met and talked with in my year living in the West Bank was a secularists politically, but not privately. In private, each was Muslim with the usual differences in their expression of it.
These "public secularists" did consider FATAH to be essentially secularist politically, yet their explanations of why they did so revealed their view of FATAH as political realists (a distinct difference from secularism), when compared to HAMAS, PFLP, etc... who are all considered to adhere strictly to their respective ideaologies (even if to their detriment). FATAH is certainly quick and willing to flex its influence in the religious field, simple examples being the fact that religious sermons held on Fridays have to be submited and approved by the (FATAH dominated) PA before they are allowed to be given (according to the Imam of Bethlehem). Religious positions, such as Imams, are also government jobs.
FATAH's long history through has seen it survive through many cycles of the Palestinian resistance and popular social trends, including the rise and fall of Socialism/Communism as an example. The reason for FATAH's continued position at the pinncale of political power in Palestinian politics is the party's willingness to adapt and recast itself to match up against rivals and upstarts.
Without exception, it was the perception of FATAH's as possessing of a machiavellian obsession with retaining power that is both misrepresented as secularism and serves as the root of the wide-spread public disgust regarding FATAH, in favor of its "non-secularist" rivals.
HAMAS engendered, and still retains, legitimate support from voters in the West Bank not because it's Islamist idealogy appeals so strongly to the masses. It appeals so much because one of the most prevalent views amongst West Bank Palestinians is that FATAH is far more concerned with defeating its Palestinian rivals than it is with contesting the key issues with Israel.
In-fighting within Palestinian groups is a tradition, so the perception of HAMAS as something different is largely a result of a new vs. old establishment battle, made possible by collective, selective memory loss. There's a preference for fiery, idealogical rhetoric targeted at the Israel occupation, as long as the war remains a losing one and tangible success remains unseen.
"The one Palestinian all of our Israeli interlocutors praised was Fayyad, so it was quite interesting to meet him. He's not a Fatah member, and has all the charisma of an economist. That said, he has one thing that few people on either side possessed - a healthy dollop of optimism."
Two points to make about this absolute fishwrap of an article:
1. Face it, if the Israelis praise Fayyad, he's suspect now, because every clown the Palestinians have had as leader has been the leader they don't need. If the Israelis like him, it's because he's a patsy ready to sell out his people like every last one that has come before. Remember, they elected Hamas and then got stiffed by the west because they were going to be tough negotiators.
2. Optimism, especially of the baseless kind, is exactly what the Palestinians don't need more of because it's been killing them in droves since 'the troubles' began. They need realism, as in all of their negotiations with the Israelis have been a bust and it's time to demand something concrete. Israel continually says 'no preconditions' and then sets a whole slate of same.
The Palestinians need to find a third party mediator they can trust, set up talks, and if the Israelis say 'no', then send their delegates to the table each and every day until they show up. Let the cameras roll on the empty chairs....
"For all the talk about Fatah being a secular movement, most of the people we saw outside of the Palestinian Authority (PA) buildings looked a bit more religious. Except for those women working for the PA, every woman I saw on the street was wearing the hijab."
From my time spent in Ramallah, my experience has been that the younger generation is less likely to wear the hijab and is generally in school during the day. It was only after hours that I began seeing more (especially young) women on the street without a hijab. That said, walking the streets of Ramallah at night is one giant sausage fest, the male/female ratio seems upwards of 9:1
Secondly, Palestinian hummus is definitely the best I've ever had, I don't think that's too controversial of a point to the impartial observer.
I saw too but didn't want to be that guy...along the same lines...
When you are speaking about the Chinese currency (yuan), it should rhyme with "pen", or sound like "UN" said quickly. This is only important bc if you are talking about China/Korea trade etc. sometimes it sounds like you are referring to the Korean won, not the yuan
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Read More
(20)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE