FREE ESSAY ON PALESTINE AND ISRAEL

PALESTINE AND ISRAEL

Our views of world conflicts such as war are influenced by the part of the world in which
we live. When exploring media coverage of discord, it is important to think about where
the author is from and how it has influenced the way he/she has portrayed disharmony.
Reports on a world conflict can express extremely different views depending on the social
values and understandings of the writers. One must read articles that address the issue
of war with cultural relativism by taking into account the local values and historical
experiences of the writer. By neglecting this approach, a reader may be persuaded to
believe biased and often untrue facts. When researching the war in the Middle East, for
example, I found that different countries presented the fighting in different ways. A
U.S. newspaper, the Chicago Tribune, presents the conflict in a biased manner and blames
the Palestinians for the fighting because we are allies with the Israelis. On the other
hand the Dawn, a Pakistani paper, presents the same issues but gives a more accurate and
sympathetic view of the Palestinians' situation. Reflecting on these differences, I
realized that culture and national interests shape newspapers' presentations of war. As
an informed reader, it is important to know that I am often given a biased presentation
of the facts surrounding a conflict and with this in mind I have changed the way I view
reports on war presented by the media.
In order to be culturally relativistic when reading about the history of the conflict in
the Middle East, one must understand that while anger and a desire for land play a role
in the fighting these are not the main causes of this conflict. It is necessary to look
beyond these common myths of war in order to look for the true causes of the bloodshed. A
deep underlying truth that could explain some reason for this turmoil is that neither
side, Israel nor Palestine, has come to terms with living with each other. Therefore, the
two groups' cultures clash as members of each side bind together in compassion and
loyalty while fighting to gain power and prestige for their people. 
Israel gained control of Bethlehem in 1967 when their army invaded the West Bank. Ever
since then the Israelis have felt that Jerusalem is its eternal and undivided capital.
For years the Arabs have also been asking for a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its
capital. On December 6, 1987, an Israeli truck killed six Palestinian workers. The
Palestinians were convinced that this was a deliberate murder. Three days later a young
Palestinian picked up a stone from the ground and threw it at an Israeli patrol. His
friends followed this act and soon hundreds were throwing stones. Palestinian
intellectuals interpreted this action as an attempt of their youth to shake themselves
free from twenty dismal years of Israeli rule. This spontaneous uprising took most by
surprise. For generations Israel's domination of Jerusalem had gone largely unchallenged.
The fighting continued and the casualties that resulted were high. Most of the 1,300
deaths were Palestinians. In 1993 the international community attempted to find a
permanent solution by creating the Oslo agreement. Parts of Jerusalem were officially
handed over to the Palestinian self-rule authority of Yasser Arafat while the Israelis
continued to control other sections. 
Despite the peace efforts the war is still raging strong today. Palestinian leader,
Yasser Arafat, and Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, are now locked in the worst
shoot-out in years. Judaism's holiest site and Islam's third holiest site are on the same
rock in Jerusalem. Arafat wants possession of al Aqsa mosque that lies in the same place
as the Temple Mount, a Jewish holy sight. Various solutions have been proposed but there
seems to be no easy way to divide the city between these two warring groups. The
stalemate, that newspapers endlessly report, is simply that negotiations reflect the
underlying truth that neither side has accepted the other. As long as this fact is
missing, the so-called Middle-East peace process will never be a reality. 
The causes of the war between the Arabs and Israelis are presented differently in
newspaper articles around the world depending on the cultural values and traditions of
the author and the group he is addressing. In order to get a perspective on this conflict
from various parts of the world, I examined two sources. The first newspaper I looked at
was the Chicago Tribune. Charles Krauthammer wrote the article, "Israel's Only Option is
Self-Defense", on October 30, 2000 and he places total blame for the war on the
Palestinians. The Israelis are described as being in a "nightmare" because of the
"murderous" behavior of the Arabs. The article says that Yasser Arafat refused to
cease-fire, despite agreements with President Clinton. More than 200 Palestinians died
because Israeli soldiers fired at Arab rock throwers. Krauthammer, however, ignores this
and emphasis is placed on an incident where "Palestinian civilians got their hands on two
Israeli reservists who were lost and tore them limb from limb." The reporter goes on to
say that when Israel retaliated with helicopter attacks that blew up half a dozen
buildings not one person was killed because Barak gave Arafat three hours' warning.
Krauthammer characterizes the murders of the Israelis as acts of "feral viciousness" and
calls Palestinians "essentially tribal." These terms are racist in nature, implying that
the Palestinians have not reached a stage of civilization that is equivalent to that of
our own. One must assume that the Israeli state-sanctioned murders of Palestinians bear
the mark of civilization in Mr. Krauthammer's opinion. The reality of the situation is
that the Israelis are using US-made Apache helicopters to shoot at Palestinian targets
that are considered to be a "threat" because they are throwing stones. Perhaps we should
help "elevate" the civilization of the Palestinians by arming them as we do the Israelis.

Far too little has appeared in the U.S. press about the deep frustration felt by ordinary
Palestinian families struggling for dignity and for their basic human right under
military occupation. Americans often have a distorted view of the conflict because the
United States has been an ally with the Israelis for a long time. This discrimination is
often communicated through the media. Hugh Dellios article, "Mid East Battle
Rages—On Internet" that was in the Chicago Tribune on October 26, 2000 also places
blame on the Arabs. Great emphasis is placed on shootings by Palestinians while little is
mentioned on the great number of killings by the Israelis. Dellios, who expresses his
great admiration for our President, quotes Clinton as saying "I do think that Chairman
Arafat can dramatically reduce the level of violence." The House vote is also mentioned,
365-30, blaming Palestinians for the recent conflicts. One is now able to see why many
Americans, who have great esteem for the President, choose to criticize the Arabs. This
one-sided stance of the White House and Capitol Hill on the Middle East conflict makes
one despair because of the failing peace process. Palestinians have long demanded the
participation of the UN and EU in peace talks because they believe them to be more
supportive of the Arabs than Washington who is said to favor Israel and has monopolized
sponsorship of the peace process.
The resentment Arab nations around the world have towards the United States because of
their support of Israel is displayed in their media. Almost every article I read in the
Dawn, a Pakistani newspaper, regarding the war exhibited their indignation towards the
US. Most people in Pakistan believe that they must now fight to help their "Arab
brothers" find peace since America's role has not proved to be very helpful. An article
titled "If the US Wants Peace in the Middle East…." by Kim Ghattas was in the
newspaper on October 29, 2000. She boldly states "if America does not want more blood on
its conscience, it must realize it has no choice but to act as a mediator to halt to
violence." It is clear that Ghattas places a lot of responsibility on the US for the
continued fighting. An article written by Daoub Kuttab on October 25, 2000 titled "US
Support of Bully Tactics Stifles Talks" questions the similar values America claims to
have with Israelis. Most would assume these principles would include democracy and
respect for human rights. Kuttab goes on to say that shooting at demonstrators, harassing
ambulances, bombing civilian population and placing 3 million people under siege are
clear violations of human rights and international law. This is nothing more than an
attempt to get political results by using bully tactics. The article says that "the
United States must have the moral courage to kindly tell its friend no. Doing anything
else would not be a true sign of friendship." We talked in class about military spending
and it was amazing to see how much more money the United States and their allies spend in
comparison to other countries in war preparation. From these figures alone it is easy to
see how the Palestinians' hope for freedom and independence has been crumbled as a result
of the excessive force used by Israelis which is possible partly from the help of their
American allies. Because of the cultural values Palestinians and Pakistanis share due to
their extreme devotion to the Muslim faith, it is easy to understand why the Dawn would
portray the Arabs in a more sympathetic way and more readily blame Israelis as well as
the US for the continuing bloodshed.
The fact that both the Palestinians and also the Pakistanis believe the US should go to
greater lengths to instill peace in the Middle East reminded me of our discussion in
class regarding the conflicts in Rwanda. Many people in Rwanda believe that what was
needed to stop the genocide was a message from the international community that continued
fighting and inhumane war tactics were not acceptable. Because of a lack of international
political will thousands of innocent people were killed. Similarly, the people in the US
need to stand up against the unquestionably pro-Islamic position of our government and
look at the reality of the situation. In order to help stop the war in Middle East
Americans must be involved in the political arena and say that biased views of the White
House will not be tolerated. 
While the Chicago Tribune and the Dawn attribute the causes of the war to different
groups, both agree that the consequences of continued fighting will result in instability
and an upheaval of all facets of daily life. The complex political situation makes
large-scale economic development almost impossible. One major problem is that while
Palestinian authority gained autonomy over parts of the West Bank, there are numerous new
restrictions for Palestinians who have to negotiate Israeli checkpoints daily in order to
get to work. Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip need permits to travel
anywhere inside the boundary of Israel, including Jerusalem. Violence often erupts at
these checkpoints because Israeli soldiers refuse to let Arabs through. An article in the
Chicago Tribune titled "Clampdown Threatens Palestinians' Fragile Economy" was written on
October 29, 2000 by Stephen Franklin and refers to the economic and social consequences
that result when Israelis bar Palestinians from entering the country. The article talks
about how the Israeli clampdown touches not only the lives of more than 3 million Arabs
in the West Bank and Gaza Strip but is also affecting Israel, which relies on more than
100,00 Arab workers. It says "Palestinians have few natural resources and rely heavily on
Israelis for almost everything they make and sell. So, too, the Israeli economy buys 90
percent of the products sold by the Palestinians." Cultural rhetoric is interspersed
throughout the article, an example of America's view that the Palestinians are to blame
for these problems. It says that it was necessary to "slap the Palestinians back under
their closure orders" because Israelis are in fear as "Arab violence soared."
An article in the Dawn titled "Crisis Engulfs Palestinian Clinics" was written on
November 6, 2000 by Mary Curtius and goes in to detail about the problems in health care
that have resulted from the war. Even the largest hospitals in the Gaza Strip lack proper
medical equipment such as modern ambulances. With so many Palestinians being killed or
injured in battles with Israeli soldiers, a poorly equipped health-care system is a major
problem. The situation is complicated even further because of the clampdown on
Palestinians since much of the hospital staff cannot get to work. Also, because of the
lack of modern ambulances "many people have bled to death on the way to the hospital." As
a result, the most severely injured are being sent to hospitals in other Arab countries
and some are even being sent to facilities in Europe. As the situation worsens in
Palestine many people are being forced to work as volunteers to help the wounded. This
article gives a sympathetic view of the Palestinians situation as they describe Israeli
soldiers firing "live rounds and rubber coated pellets at rock-throwers." 
Israel gained control of Jerusalem in 1967 and immediately warfare broke out. For the
last 33 years this part of the world has been in an almost constant state of combat.
While there have been times of peace, these short-lived reconciliations would be
categorized as negative peace where there is public order and security but the internal
conflict remains. Positive peace, where there is an absence of the structural causes of
war that produce harmonious social relations, almost seems to be an impossible goal for
the Israelis and Palestinians who seem to be born with a hatred for one another. If
countries such as the US would be more objective the possibility of peace may become a
reality. However, this prospect seems dim when you look at the biased way our media
presents the war. Articles are filled with stereotypes and distorted views regarding the
Palestinians. The average American would like to believe that our allies, the Israelis,
can do no wrong. If we truly want to help stop the fighting in the Middle East Americans
must refuse to accept the pro-Islamic position that our media presents. But while the
Pakistanis newspaper gives a more accurate view of the conflict, being more critical of
Israel, they have done little to help stop the war. In order to bring peace to this
troubled land countries such as the US and Pakistan need to forcefully and
compassionately pressure their governments to uphold basic human rights in the Middle
East.