We were up early and we could really appreciate the beauty of Beit Sahour in the morning light. Beit Sahour is a predominantly Christian town as is Bethlehem. The Christians here are Palestinian. They are the 'original Christians' if you like as Jesus was born, lived and died in Palestine. Palestinians make no sectarian divides along religious lines as we like to in the West. All Palestinians identify themselves as Palestinian first and foremost. Muslims and Christians fought alongside each other in the Intifadas against Israel and continue to resist in equal measure. Admittedly, adversity brings a tendency to gravitate towards religion as it provides some hope in a pretty hopeless situation. However, it should be stressed that the Palestinians' fight is for their homeland, not Allah or Jesus. Palestine has historically been a very secular state. It is the Zionists that try to divide, apartheid style, along religious lines. The inception of their exclusively Jewish state (exclusive in terms of the control of the state though 20% of its population are Palestinian), implanted in the middle of the Palestinian homeland and populated with American, European and Russian Jews, marked the end of the peaceful cohabitation of the 3 world religions in the Holy Land in modern history.
The fact that Western Christian states appear to have forsaken the Holy Land and it's Christian population and allowed it to be usurped by one religion is a point not lost on the Christians here. Although I myself am an atheist, the secularisation of the West has clearly resulted in the loss of a moral code that might have afforded the Palestinians more international protection from Zionism. On the other hand, Zionism has a strange relationship with Christian fundamentalism. The Christian fundamentalist lobby in the US supports Israel on the basis that they believe the Jews should control the Holy Land, until the second coming of the messiah when they will be either destroyed or converted. Israel accepts this support and doesn't seem to have a problem with this theological interpretation of the future of the Jewish people.
As I said, the view around Beit Sahour is beautiful on a clear day. Beautiful that is apart from the concrete monstrosity perched on the highest hilltop and looming over the village like an East London council estate in the middle of the Lake District. This is Har Homa Jewish Settlement (picture above and below - you can enlarge all the photos by clicking on them. Then click 'back' to get back to the blog).
Construction of this settlement on Palestinian land was begun at the instruction of Benjamin Netanyahu (the then Prime Minister of Israel who was this year re-elected) in the late 1990s. It is built on confiscated Palestinian land. In 2003 Israel announced the seizure of more land around Beit Sahour 'for military purposes' and issued demolition orders against many Palestinian homes in the area. They have now built a 'settler road' which is only allowed to be used by the settlers and the Israeli army. This road is surrounded by an electric fence so the Palestinian residents cannot even cross it. It effectively surrounds the area so that any expansion of the Palestinian village is impossible.
These photos show the electrified fence around Beit Sahour. The sign reads:
"Mortal Danger - Military Zone. Any person who passes or damages the fence ENDANGERS HIS LIFE".
You can see in the photo the olive groves that are on the other side of the fence belonging to Palestinian farmers. These have not been harvested for 7 years as the Palestinians are not allowed to cross the road.
We approached the fence to take a closer look. After a couple of minutes we heard sirens and an armoured Israeli police car came charging down the road from the settlement. The policemen were shouting something in Hebrew over a loud hailer. We didn't hang around to find out what they wanted.Settlements
Most Palestinian skylines in the West Bank are dominated by Jewish settlements built by the Israeli government. The first thing that should be emphasised about them is that they are built outside the borders of Israel on stolen Palestinian land. Successive Israeli governments have encouraged these settlements with the objective of maximising the geographic size of Israel and minimizing the possibility of a viable Palestinian state. By transferring civilian populations deep into Palestinian territory (illegally occupied in 1967) they create 'facts on the ground' that form a precursor for any peace talks. The map below shows the large settlement blocks in yellow and smaller settlements in blue:
Settlement building is a continuation of the Zionist colonial ideology and is one which needs to be understood in order to properly appraise Israel's preoccupation with its 'security needs'. While the settlement policy continues, Israel is the one that is jeopardising the security of its people. Hamas has stated that they would agree a 10 year truce with Israel if Israel returned to the pre 1967 borders (ie dismantled the settlements) and they are backed by numerous UN resolutions and international legal judgements in this demand. This is just a selection:
1967 UN security resolution 242 - Calls for a total Israeli withdrawal from the territories it had occupied in Gaza and the West Bank (the occupation continues 42 years later).
1979 UN security resolution 446 - "Determines that the policy and practices established by Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East"
2004 International Court of Justice - Unanimously ruled that the settlements were illegal.
It is in this context that Israels constant bleating about its own 'security' should be interpreted. Who are the extremists here? Israel who flouts all international law, brazenly invades, occupies and colonises its neighbours; or Hamas who fight and resist based on principles enshrined in international law?
Israel does not want peace because peace would mean a withdrawal to the 1967 borders. Successive Israeli governments have had an obsessive preoccupation with incorporating all of the West Bank into Israel, or as much of it as possible. This is a quote from Ariel Sharon, the Prime Minister of Israel between 2001 and 2006:
"Everybody has to move, run and grab as many (Palestinian) hilltops as they can to enlarge the (Jewish) settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them."
This quote gives an insight into both the expansionist aims of Israel and their attitude to the indigenous people of Palestine. Zionism is a colonialist ideology.
A secondary goal of settlement system aims to split the West Bank up into small areas (cantons) which can then be controlled more easily by the Israeli occupiers. With this in mind, the 'settlement roads' are built between settlements that only settlers are allowed to use. The network of settlements and roads that honeycomb the West Bank severely restrict freedom of movement for Palestinians.
The settlements, the settler roads, the checkpoints and the siphoning of Palestinian water into Jewish settlements all demonstrate the apartheid nature of the occupation.
**********************************************************************************
Later that day we were taken to the refugee camp near Bethlehem. This was the first of several refugee camps we visited on the trip. They are not as you might expect a refugee camp to be, primarily because they have been in existence for 40+ years. They were originally just collections tents but have been developed into small villages with buildings, electricity and running water. The only difference you notice within the refugee camps is that they are overcrowded and there are always loads of kids playing in the streets!
The people who live in these camps are the descendants of the original refugees of the Nakba (literally 'catastrophe') in 1948 where hundreds of Palestinians were forced from their homes by the Zionist forces (there are also still some survivors of Nakba living in the camps). They retain their refugee status under UN law because they maintain their right of return to their homeland. The right of return of refugees is a basic rule of war but one which the Israelis will not uphold. Why would they? It was a major military operation to ethnically cleanse Palestine for the Zionist state using massacres, rapes and demolitions of villages. They're not going to allow those they chased from their homes to return, certainly not without international intervention.
The camps come in for the most barbaric treatment at the hands of the Israelis and young men are predominantly (but not exclusively) the victims.
These are a selection of the murals of the martyrs killed by the Israelis in recent years. All were under the age of 18. One in particular was shot by Israeli troops on his way home from school. He was just 16. You can click on the pictures to enlarge them.
Whilst walking through the camp, we were invited into the home of a family who lived there. We all crowded into the living room. The walls were covered with pictures of their sons two of whom had been killed by the Israeli army. We were addressed by the father of the family who was very frank with us. He told us that the Palestinians blamed the British for handing over Palestine to the Zionist forces. His family had lost their homes and their homeland because of how the British had behaved. But he also appreciated what we were doing in solidarity and that the British people often had different views to their governments.
The photo above shows the mother of the house showing us a picture frame (in the shape of Palestine) made by one of her other sons in prison. He has been detained, along with his brother, for 10 years in an Israeli prison camp without trial. The story of this household is a tragedy repeated across the West bank. Although I understood the difficulties these people face, it really brought home the injustice when we sat in the home of a family so deeply affected.
It could be said that the refugee camps are the centre of resistance in the West Bank, what Gordon Brown and George Bush would call terrorism, and yet we walked freely through them. We were only ever greeted with generosity and warmth. The Palestinians have a strong sense of their history and the role of Britain and, more recently, the US in that history but they also make a clear differentiation between the governments of these states and their civilian population. They know that we get a very distorted view of their cause in the West and they understand that they have everything to gain from Westerners visiting them and seeing first hand their plight. It is the Israelis that have something to lose from this kind of alternative tourism (as demonstrated by our reception at Tel Aviv airport). Israel currently has quite a monopoly on the information we receive, because of the way most of the Western media is biased in their favour, but I believe this is being eroded by the internet, youtube, facebook etc.
The Israeli authorities would have us believe that we endanger our lives by visiting the Palestinians. The reality is that even Israeli activists (of which there are no small number) are greeted as friends. In terms of personal safety, I have never felt more safe than when I was in the West Bank (much safer than the months I spent in Egypt for example in 2007). The Palestinians have a strong moral code of hospitality. We were never ripped off in any of the places we visited and even the street urchins selling souvenirs always demanded that they give you your change even if you at first refused it.
The one caveat is that there is a danger in the West Bank and that comes from the Israeli troops stationed there. The majority of violence is now centred around the peaceful protests carried out by Palestinians which are often dispersed with live ammunition from Israeli soldiers. Foreign activists often join these demos in solidarity and it is here where they may by hurt or even killed by Israeli fire. One Palestinian man was killed on one such protest while we were there at Bil'in. He was shot in the chest by a tear gas cannister. The cannisters are designed to be fired into the air over a long range but the Israelis fire them directly at protestors as weapons with deadly consequences. A similar incident occurred a couple of months ago to Tristan Andersen (an American activist). He was hit in the head by a cannister and remains in a coma. There is a video of the Bil'in protest but I warn you that it's quite hard to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/wat
In the spring of 2003 alone the following westerners were attacked by Israeli forces:
1. Rachel Corrie (US citizen) - run over and killed by an Israeli bulldozer while protesting against a house demolition. Eye witness accounts confirm she was murdered.
2. James Miller (Welsh cameraman) - Shot and killed by Israeli soldier while filming a documentary.
3. Brian Avery (US citizen) - shot in the face by Israeli soldier and severely disfigured.
4. Thomas Hurndall (UK citizen) - Shot in the head and killed by an Israeli sniper while trying to rescue some children from the line of fire.
With the exception of the Tom Hurndall case, no Israeli was ever brought to justice for any of these attacks carried out in the space of a few months. The attacks demonstrate two things: First, the Israeli authority's desperation to discourage Westerners from visiting the West Bank. Second, the impunity with which Israeli soldiers are allowed to act.
This should not discourage people from visiting. If you are not on a demonstration you are going to be left alone by Israeli soldiers. The examples above were during a particularly violent and trigger happy period for the Israelis. It's a really rewarding, exciting and interesting place to visit, even just for a week.
No comments:
Post a Comment