Malam Romantis, Saat Gaza Gelap Gulita

Malam Romantis, Saat Gaza Gelap Gulita 

 

Januari 30, 2010

Posted by Qolam_v in Internasional.
trackback Hidup dalam kungkungan Israel, tidak membuat semangat dan perjuangan penduduk Gaza meredup, seperti redupnya lampu di rumah-rumah mereka

Hidayatullah. com–BEBERAPA pekan terakhir, wilayah Jalur Gaza semakin gelap. Pekan lalu pihak pengelola satu-satunya pembangkit listrik di Gaza mengatakan, mereka tidak lagi dapat bertahan. Selain karena pembangkit listrik rusak berat akibat sering dihantam rudal-rudal Israel, bahan bakar pun tidak lagi tersedia, karena blokade Israel.
Sameeha Elwan seorang pelajar Gaza, mencoba tegar menghadapi segala tekanan yang dilakukan Israel kepada mereka. “Makan malam yang romantis,” katanya mengambil sisi terang dari suramnya malam yang mendera mereka, ketika Gaza semakin gelap gulita.

***

Malam ini, seperti malam-malam sebelumnya, kami menggelar candlelight dinner yang romantis. Tentu saja, terima kasih kepada Israel yang menjadikan keadaan demikian.
Menyalakan lilin di atas meja, bukan karena kami mempunyai acara spesial, tidak ada yang berulang tahun. Lilin, sudah menjadi kebutuhan pokok bagi kami penduduk Gaza. Lilin, menjadi satu-satunya sumber cahaya, karena kini tidak ada lagi aliran listrik.
Lampu-lampu padam. Ayah seperti biasanya bertanya jika ruangan tampak gelap, “Apakah listrik padam?”
Tertawa mendengar pertanyaannya, serentak kami menjawab–seperti biasanya, “Ya.”
Ibu mempersiapkan sesuatu di dapur. Ia agak kesal melihat peralatan dapurnya kini tak berdaya. Ia mulai mengutuk Israel, seperti sejak hari pertama mereka menginjakkan kakinya di tanah kami. Sadar peralatannya tidak lagi berguna sekarang, ia mulai mempersiapkan makan malam dengan “tangan kosong”.
Adik perempuanku, yang mengeluhkan membaca buku dalam keadaan gelap membuat kepalanya sakit, mencoba pergi ke kamar untuk segera tidur. Tapi matanya tidak dapat terpejam, maka ia pun mendekati ibu, yang kemudian menceritakan kisah perjalannya di masa lampau, ketika ia pergi ke Tepi Barat.
Kasihan Israel! Mereka tidak tahu, bahwa apapun yang mereka lakukan terhadap kami, tindakan mereka hanya menambah erat ikatan batin kami dengan tanah air tercinta.
Adik kecilku yang laki-laki, seorang penggemar klub sepakbola Barcelona, gusar karena ia lagi-lagi tidak bisa menyaksikan pertandingan klub kesayangannya. Tidak lagi bisa berteriak seru ketika para pemain andalannya melesakkan gol ke kandang lawan.
Sebenarnya, aku suka belajar dengan diterangi cahaya lilin. Rasanya romantis, dan perhatian tidak lagi terpecah dengan hal-hal yang bisa membuang waktu percuma, terutama saat musim ujian sekolah.
Sayangnya, tidak banyak orang yang memiliki perasaan dan pikiran yang sama. Banyak orang yang tidak bisa belajar hanya dengan sedikit cahaya dari lilin. Sebagian, karena memilki masalah dengan penglihatannya.
Ibu yang mulai kedinginan, meminta agar penghangat ruangan segera dinyalakan. Beliau lupa jika alat itu hanya bisa bekerja dengan tenaga listrik.
Aku jadi merinding, membayangkan banyak orang–dalam keadaan dingin yang mengigit seperti ini–tidak lagi memiliki tempat bernaung, karena rumah mereka rusak atau bahkan hancur lebur dihantam senjata-senjata Israel yang menyerang Gaza.
Berita yang dulu hanya rumor, kini menjadi kenyataan: Al-Dardasawi, direktur humas perusahaan listrik satu-satunya di Gaza, Sabtu pekan lalu mengumumkan bahwa mereka mulai kehabisan bahan bakar. Tidak ada alasan lain yang disampaikan, kecuali karena Israel memblokade masukknya bahan bakar ke Gaza.
Satu kebenaran yang lucu, tetapi pahit adalah, bahwa kami orang-orang Gaza sanggup bertahan dalam keadaan yang sangat buruk sekalipun. Kehidupan dalam kurungan blokade brutal Israel selama tiga tahun ini, yang mengajarkan kami untuk tetap bertahan.
Israel sedikit demi sedikit melucuti hak-hak asasi kami, hingga kami tak memiliki apa-apa lagi. Sebelumnya, mereka mengurangi jumlah bahan bakar yang boleh masuk ke Gaza, sehingga kami terpaksa harus hidup dalam kegelapan selama delapan jam setiap beberapa hari. Kami pun berusaha menyesuaikan diri, dan berpikir, “Baiklah, delapan jam setiap beberapa hari lebih baik daripada delapan jam setiap hari.”
Kemudian, persediaan bahan bakar pun semakin dikurangi oleh Israel. Hingga kami harus hidup tanpa listrik 8 hingga 10 jam setiap harinya. Kami pun berpikir, “Baiklah, kami sanggup mengatasinya. Kami masih ada listrik, meskipun sedikit. Bukankah separuh potong roti lebih baik daripada tidak ada sama sekali?”
Keadaan seperti ini sudah lama berlangsung. Tidak hanya dengan listrik, tapi juga dengan barang-barang kebutuhan dasar lainnya; makanan, bahan bakar, dan bahkan susu untuk anak-anak.
Israel melucuti hak-hak asasi kami, dan mereka ingin kami berterima kasih karena mereka mengembalikannya sedikit kepada kami. Sedikit dari banyak yang telah mereka ambil dari kami.
Apakah Israel dan seluruh dunia pikir, dengan mengembalikan sedikit dari apa yang sebenarnya menjadi milik kami, akan membuat kami lupa dengan kepungan yang tidak manusiawi ini, lupa dengan para pengungsi, lupa dengan hak untuk kembali ke tanah air, tanah kami yang dijajah, dengan Yerusalem?
Apakah mereka pikir kami akan berterima kasih, jika mereka mengembalikan apa yang sebenarnya memang milik kami?
Wahai Israel, kami tidak akan berterima kasih. Karena apa yang kalian beri, adalah memang sesungguhnya milik kami. Kami punya hak sebagai manusia. Kami punya hak sebagai orang Palestina.
Dan apakah setelah semua yang telah kalian perbuat kepada kami, kalian akan bertanya; “Mengapa orang Palestina marah?” [di/plt/www.hidayatullah.com]

The Enemy Within

December 31, 2010 by occupiedpalestine 0 Comments

by Jeff Gates / December 31st, 2010

The phrase “enemy within” brings to mind the image of a shadowy spy stealing military secrets. That was the case for Israeli master spy, Jonathan Pollard, jailed for 1980s espionage that compromised U.S. Cold War strategy.
That phrase also describes those involved in a form of psy-ops that is not easily detected because it operates so brazenly. For instance, the well-timed release of diplomatic cables by WikiLeaks displaced reports of Israeli obstinacy in peace talks with reports of a need for war with Iran.
That operation relied on editors at four major newspapers chosen by WikiLeaks to manage the releases. Despite the delight at their impact voiced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, mainstream media failed to mention the possibility of undisclosed bias by those who chose what to release and when.
The bias of The New York Times is well known. Less clear is the role of Ian Katz, Deputy Editor at The Guardian (London) and Executive Editor Sylvie Kauffman at Le Monde in Paris. The geopolitical success of the WikiLeaks operation suggests an enemy within.
Israeli duplicity often operates through what U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates describes as “the people in between.” When waging unconventional warfare, those people are the most dangerous combatants, particularly those operatives in mainstream media.
The People in Between
For systems of governance reliant on informed consent, nothing could be more perilous. The “people in between” routinely target media — freedom’s greatest vulnerability — as a means for displacing facts with what a targeted populace can be deceived to believe.
How old is this duplicity? How long have false beliefs been used to manipulate behavior? Modern technology — particularly media — enables deception on a global scale. Between the American populace and the facts they require to protect their freedom — that’s where this enemy within imbeds its operatives.
The false intelligence claiming Iraqi WMD was a people-in-between operation. Judith Miller at The New York Times fed us a steady diet of front-page news that we now know was fixed around Israeli goals promoted by Ahmad Chalabi, a London-based Iraqi expatriate who, like Israel, sought regime change in Iraq.
Pentagon insider, Richard Perle, developed Chalabi over two decades. A Jewish Zionist, Perle has long been a strategically well-placed “person in between.” Miller left The Times and joined Fox News and then Newsmax.
Yet the impact of complicit media pales in comparison to the enemy within that brought the U.S. economy to its knees and undermined national security at its financial core.
Imbedded Inside
The most devastating in this chronicle of enemies is the most difficult to see. As with other “in between” operations, this too succeeds by displacing facts with false beliefs. Only in this case, those beliefs were imbedded in education and over decades worked their way into law.
Known as the “Washington Consensus,” this widely shared perspective shapes economic policy worldwide. At the heart of this generally accepted truth is found the belief that money should be accountable only to itself.
In this mindset, financial freedom is an article of faith. Instead of the civil rights refrain, “Let my people go,” its proponents insist: “Let my money go.” Allow money the freedom to work its will worldwide and everything will work out fine.
That shared belief works “in between” in the same way that Jonathan Pollard undermined national security, WikiLeaks shifted attention to Iran and Judith Miller induced us to war in Iraq. Only in this case a false belief has been so thoroughly internalized that it’s difficult to see because this shared mindset has become that with which we have been educated do our seeing.
A Global Sanhedrin
The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are the primary apostles of this consensus faith. The World Trade Organization (WTO) now seeks to take this belief to global scale by enforcing unrestricted free trade not only in goods and services but also financial capital.
The WTO operates like a global Sanhedrin akin to a Jewish high council accountable only to itself. What’s now emerging as a global enemy within is a finance-guided form of transnational governance marketed as free trade but accountable only to itself.
That ‘self’ traces its origins to an internalized mindset in which financial freedom serves, by consensus, as a proxy for personal freedom. That mindset was decades in the making.
This modern-day Mindset Warfare is being waged by an enemy that is truly within. Fast globalizing financial forces now induce us to freely embrace the very forces that undermine our freedom.
By waging war on us from the inside out, the originators of this money-myopic mindset dismantled the U.S. economy, enabled vast financial pillaging and induced us to fiscal ruin.
Those wielding this weaponry operate from our internal shadows as the Zionist entity within.

Jeff Gates is author of Guilt By Association, Democracy at Risk, and The Ownership Solution. Read other articles by Jeff, or visit Jeff’s website.

http://occupiedpalestine.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/the-enemy-within/

Advancing solidarity with Gaza

November 4, 2010

The fifth Viva Palestina convoy to break Israel's siege of Gaza drove through the Rafah border crossing with 147 vehicles carrying 380 people from some 30 countries--and humanitarian aid worth some $5 million.
The convoy departed from London on September 18 and traveled 3,000 miles through France, Italy, Greece and Turkey before arriving in the Syrian port town of Latakia, where it was joined by two other convoys--one from Morocco and Algeria, and another that originated in Doha and came through the Gulf States and Jordan. After spending 16 days in Latakia while carrying out frustrating negotiations with Egyptian authorities, the convoys traveled on October 19 to the port city of El Arish, and from there drove into Gaza.
Kevin Ovenden, the director of the Viva Palestina convoy, spoke with Eric Ruder about the convoy's significance for the Palestine solidarity movement.

Members of the latest Viva Palestina convoy celebrate after going through the Rafah crossing into Gaza

THIS LAST land convoy was larger in scale than previous ones--it must have been a huge undertaking. Can you describe what you think it accomplished?

I THINK it was extraordinarily successful, and I think it opened up new possibilities for the movement. The first Viva Palestina convoy headed off from London five weeks after the end of Israel's bombing during Operation Cast Lead in January 2009, and of course the horrific images of that massacre were still fresh on the television.
Now, in most of the media, Gaza hardly features. And so to achieve a more substantial convoy, some 18 months on, shows that we are tapping into a growing audience interested in solidarity with Gaza even after most of the media has moved on.
The convoy comprised people from 30 different countries on five different continents, which is the widest participation in a convoy so far. The total value of the aid that was taken in was in excess of $5 million. Of course, this is a drop in the ocean compared with what Gaza needs, but is a considerable achievement.
We delivered a total of 137 vehicles, including 40 new vehicles for medical use from Algeria. This is the first time that we've been able to get new vehicles into Gaza. When we attempted to take in new vehicles twice--once with the American convoy, Viva Palestina 2, and then again with the same vehicles in January this year--we were blocked.
But this time, all of the aid and vehicles passed through the crossing at Rafah. Most of the aid was medical aid, but there was also aid to help Gaza's beleaguered education sector as well as more general humanitarian aid.
And by the way, there is a false story in the New York Times--predictably, I'm afraid to say--which claims that some or most of the aid went through the Israeli checkpoints. It didn't. We never have gone through an Israeli checkpoint, and we never will--on principle. All of the people who were permitted into Egypt traveled through the Rafah crossing.
It is, of course, regrettable that the Egyptian authorities had seen fit to prevent George Galloway and 10 other members of the convoy from going in. After that decision was taken, and we protested strongly, we got better cooperation from the Egyptian authorities.
The only reason we could get for why they weren't allowed in was on general grounds of sovereignty--that Egypt has a right to decide who comes in and who doesn't on national security grounds. But if I tell you that one of the people banned was an 82-year-old Jordanian called Ishmael Nashwan, who is self evidently not a national security risk, you get some idea how capricious this list is.
Another person who was prevented entry was Amina Uddin, who along with Ishmael is a representative of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the oldest, most-established pro-Palestinian organization in the UK, which has the affiliation of most of the major trade unions. So it's very regrettable--it created a lot of bad feeling. It could have been avoided, and we protested vigorously over it, but weren't able to get them to change their minds.

DO YOU think Egypt will stick to what they declared after Viva Palestina's December convoy--that they won't ever allow George in?

I DON'T think they will stick to that. This time, after they had made their point by banning George and the others, they then were remarkably cooperative. I would read it--and other people in the region read it--as them being stuck up a tree and trying to find a way to climb down gracefully. If that's the case, and I hope that is the case, then so much the better, and we wouldn't expect this ban to last very long.
Secondly, changes are afoot in Egypt. There is a sense of impending change. Exactly how that change unfolds, nobody knows, but things are not going to stay as they have been for the past few years. So my own personal view is that this position will change over the coming months.

WHAT OTHER features of the convoy do you think were important?

FOR THE first time, the convoy was able to arrive in Gaza in daylight, which may sound like a small thing, but it actually makes a huge difference for media coverage and a huge difference for the people of Gaza, who can take a great deal of inspiration from seeing a convoy of people break the siege--from seeing the vehicles and aid arriving to support them.
It sends the message that the world has not forgotten you, that there are ongoing efforts to overturn this horrible siege. It really was a huge uplift in morale. The road was lined from the crossing point at Rafah all the way through to Gaza City.
Second, in less than four weeks, the Algerian component of the convoy raised over $800,000, and this is through a large number of small donations. The Algerian delegation was 110 people, and it was drawn from 55 cities in Algeria--so across the whole of the country.
Similarly, in Jordan, they had attempted a convoy earlier in the summer, which had been blocked. So they had 25 vehicles from that attempted mission. Rather than being deterred, they threw their weight behind the Viva Palestina mission, went back to the people in Jordan and in the Gulf States, and contributed 53 vehicles, more than doubling the number. Plus they brought a vast quantity of medical and other aid.
In New Zealand, in nine weeks, in a country of 4 million people on the other side of the world--you can't get further from Gaza than New Zealand--they raised around $75,000, which is a very great achievement. And for the first time in such a mission, we had a significant component from Italy, with six or seven vehicles. This was also the first time that there was a Tunisian contribution to this kind of siege-breaking effort. This is an important indication that the restrictions that activists in Tunisia feel are no longer sufficient to prevent them from taking part.
So, all in all, this was a breakthrough, in that it was more international, it took in more aid, and it galvanized the people in Gaza enormously, so it was immensely successful.
We also heard from a number of residents of Gaza that the impact of our effort--both in terms of aid and in terms of the general impact on the siege--is significant. From doctors at the hospitals of Al Shifa, Al-Awda and the Jordanian hospital, the materials we took in, they said, will mean that people will live who otherwise would have died. We took in for example, specialized cancer treatment drugs, which they don't have, as well as general medication and medical equipment.
One of our numbers, Patrick from New Zealand, spoke to a manager from a soft drink factory who told him that the factory is now able to work six days a week. They sense a loosening of the siege. He asked the manager if he thought the convoys are helping. And he replied that it's because of the convoys that the siege is loosening.
And that's reflected in all areas of society--among independent trade unionists, among academics, and so on. There's no doubt that we're having an effect. Of course the siege is still in place, but politically, it's already broken in a sense, and materially, it's breaking down.

IF THE efforts so far--the land convoys, the flotilla that was attacked on May 31, 2010, and so on--have had this kind of effect, what do you think the next steps are to continue prying open the siege? And how do you think activists can make further contributions to a general campaign to bring the question of Palestine to world prominence?

I THINK there are several strands, all of which are complementary if they are acted on in a coordinated way, and with the right approach. The first is the direct missions by land and by sea, and we're now working on a mission by air.
Viva Palestina will be taking part in all three of these methods of breaking the siege. These remain very important, because they focus the attention of the world on the fact that there is a siege. And it's the opinion of everybody we met in Gaza that these efforts are essential to raising the morale of the people there. Again and again we heard from people, "Please tell the world what's happening." And so to be able to take in 350 people who are going back to 30 countries to do exactly that is very important.
Secondly, the gathering movement for a boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign, or BDS campaign, to boycott Israel in the way that apartheid South Africa was boycotted is playing a critical role, because it operates on a number of levels.
Through BDS, everybody can find a way in to supporting the movement--from deciding which fruit they will buy in a supermarket; to campaigning on their campus for the university to withdraw investments from companies that have links with Israel; all the way to collective actions such as happened earlier this summer in Oakland, Calif., with the refusal by longshoremen to unload an Israeli vessel in the wake of the massacre on the Mavi Marmara.
The third element is continuing to encourage, through the way that we build this movement, the participation of the mass forces--civil and political, labor, humanitarian and so on--throughout the Middle East, from Marrakesh to Bahrain.
This is, I think, a very important development--that the level of not just awareness but also preparedness to take action over Palestine is growing among the mass of the population of the Arab countries--and this is, in turn, reflected to a degree among some of the political layers.
It's my view that humanitarian efforts and a movement in the West can play a vital role in breaking the system of alliances that Israel depends on, but that the essential role in rolling back this Zionist occupation of Palestinian land will be played by the people directly affected--above all the Palestinians, but also wider Arab society, which itself is a victim of the Israeli presence and aggression, because that presence and aggression is a central part of the way in which the Great Powers have divided the region directly and indirectly through the use of proxy forces for 100 years.

IS THERE anything you can say concretely about future siege-busting efforts, either by Viva Palestina or others, that might be helpful to activists looking for ways to stand in solidarity with Palestine?

THE FIRST point is that one achievement of this convoy was to raise the level of international cooperation to greater heights. We don't simply want to announce, of our own accord, what Viva Palestina is doing and then press ahead, but we're working with people who've been proven to be able to deliver substantial numbers of people, aid, finance and social weight into the movement, from Algeria to Jordan, Indonesia, Malaysia and elsewhere.
Concretely, we're in an intense process of discussion with them so that we have a common program of action over the coming months, and then we hope to announce something soon. What I can say concretely is that everybody's agreed that Viva Palestina 6 must take place, and must take place soon. We are looking at the timing of that and the nature of that mission.
Secondly, all of the forces that took part in this convoy are also raising substantial supports for the next seaborne mission, which, of course, is bigger than any single component parts. We're talking about from Algeria, Kuwait, Jordan, Malaysia and so on, very substantial forces, along with forces in North America and Europe, in a collaboration around the next flotilla. And as I mentioned earlier, we're looking urgently at plans to break the siege by air.
Lastly, in the UK and in Europe, we're seeking a high level of cooperation around the strategy of isolating Israel through the boycotts. We're working with the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, other charities in Britain, some of the Christian churches in Britain and the trade unions, who are also seeking to extend that elsewhere in Europe.
The participation of a strong Italian delegation is good news. Italy did have an extremely large antiwar movement against the Iraq war, but for various reasons, not least the participation of that movement in a government which was committed to the occupation of Iraq, the movement as a whole became disoriented. But there are signs that that is rebuilding--modestly, but it's rebuilding. And that's the case in other countries, such as Germany and France.
So we're seeking now, concretely, to extend this network of alliances around a clear strategy, which has two pillars: one, building up all the links we can with Palestine, particularly besieged Gaza; and two, isolating apartheid Israel. And all with the strategic aim of galvanizing and supporting the forces in the region that can bring chan

http://socialistworker.org/2010/11/04/advancing-solidarity-with-gaza

the Nakba - an event that did not occur (although it had to occur)

Post Your Comment (10 comments)

eMail to a friend Return to General כדילתרגם לעברית למאמר בעברית

Posted by Nakba In Hebrew on December 14, 2005

By Eitan Bronstein, 2004

Palestinian women and children leaving their homes during Nakba. Note the absence of men, most likely they were sent to labor or concentration camps

In March 2004 a memorial event was held near the 'Cinema City' ( Hertzeliya) for the Palestinian village of Ijlil which had existed at the site until 1948. Its inhabitants fled upon hearing of massacres committed against Palestinians by Zionist forces in the area. A detailed report about the village, its uprooting and the fate of its refugees, was published in the local paper 'Sharon Times' on the occasion of the memorial. One week later the same paper published a letter to the editor written by a reader who was outraged at the paper for "providing a stage (...) to some Arabs who claim to have once lived on the site of the recently constructed, magnificent Cinema City." An educator working in Natanya was surprised to hear from high school students that, "before the Jews there were the British in the country." These are two rather incidental examples for the denial of the Palestinian Nakba by Jews in Israel. While it would certainly be possible to find even stronger examples, there appears to be no need for proof of the argument that the Jewish public in Israel denies the occurrence of the Nakba. The Nakba denial is found in the geography and the history taught in schools, on the maps of the country and in the signs marking places on its surface. All of them ignore almost completely the event which made possible the establishment of the Jewish State as a state with a Jewish majority and a Palestinian minority, after the majority of the indigenous people of the country were evicted, their properties destroyed and/or confiscated for the benefit of the new state.

How can we understand this denial of the Nakba?

Can it be explained in psychological terms as the denial of an event that cannot be comfortably accepted?
Could we also say that recognition of the suffering inflicted on the Palestinians would 'remove' Jews in Israel from the status of the ultimate victim which justifies almost each evil action?
Or maybe the denial is a result of plain ignorance?
There may be various correct explanations for this phenomenon. This article will try to shed light on one aspect of the discourse about the Nakba in Israel (before and after its establishment). It will show that the Nakba represents for the Zionist subject an event that cannot possible have occurred and - at the same time - had to occur. From early on, Zionism ignored the existence of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine. It is, therefore, not possible that some 800,000 persons were ethnically cleansed from the country and that more than 500 Palestinian villages were destroyed. On the other hand, the expulsion of the Palestinian majority from their country was inevitable for Zionism that aimed to establish a Jewish State, i.e. a national home for the Jewish people in the world on a territory ruled by a Jewish majority on the basis of law.

The Nakba - an event that did not occur!

Zionist identity was built from the beginning on a two-fold negation: it negates time and space of the Jews outside Zion, a 'negation of exile' which extends beyond the realm of religion, and it negates time and space of those indigenous to the territory of Zion. The latter is best defined by the well-known statement of Zionist leader Israel Zangvil about, "a people without land returning to a land without people." Attitudes of the leaders and architects of Zionism towards the indigenous inhabitants of 'Zion' were situated between their perception as (temporary) guards or holders of the land on one end, and their absolute non-existence as a relevant factor on the other extreme. In this aspect, Zionism resembles other colonialist projects. Edward Said writes in his book 'Orientalism,' that for the Orientalist there is "no trace of Arab individuals with personal histories that can be told (...) The Arab does not create existential depth, not even in semantics" (...) The oriental person is oriental first, and human second." According to the approach of Zionism, a typical orientalist movement, indigenous Arabs of the country exist and live in it, but they are of no importance in the sense of deserving a relationship similar to that shown to 'European humans.' They certainly do not constitute a people or a collective able or interested in realizing itself as such, or similar to the Jewish national collective.

If Palestinians do not 'really' exist, as opposed to the 'reality' of Zionist existence, then also their expulsion cannot occur. It is not possible to expel somebody who is not present. According to Zionism, the violent events around 1948 did in fact occur, but only in form of an unavoidable response to the disturbance caused by the 'locals,' who did not accept the establishment of the new entity, the Jewish State. Therefore, what is important to understand, teach and tell about this period is the story of 'liberation' and 'independence' of the Jewish people in its homeland. According to this approach there was certainly no Nakba or tragedy for any other, because the other had never really existed in the land. Hundreds of villages in the costal areas, in the south and in the center were not expelled; rather 'territorial continuity' was created according to the Haganah's Plan Dalet. The space is thus 'naturally' Jewish. It must only be realized and transferred to Zionist control. Jewish territorial continuity and Jewish demographic homogeneity in Palestine represent the core of the Zionist project. Therefore, the Zionist subject cannot understand or see the catastrophe inherent in this project, especially since what is involved is the historical realization of an idea that derives its relevance from the Bible and a modern nationalism turned into a religion in many aspects. The Zionist subject cannot see the Nakba or seriously debate its circumstances. It must strip off its inner essence, in order to start to see it as an event that has shaped the space in which Zionism realized itself.

Ever since 1948 the Nakba is dismissed, and must be dismissed, from the consciousness of the Zionist subject, because its existence challenges the basis on which it was built - a people without land for a land without people. Recognition of the Palestinian Nakba signifies the destruction of the ground underneath the feet of this subject which understands itself as autonomous, or as a closed unit [MONADA]. Therefore, any such recognition, or even the attempt to look at this tragedy as something that happened to somebody else here, is outrageous and almost incomprehensible. It is possible to recognize that some massacres happened here and there, as a result of local battles and fighting; it is possible to recognize that all Arab armies tried to destroy us, the subject that wished to form itself. It is impossible, however, to look at the Nakba as a catastrophe committed by this subject in order to form itself, or as a necessary process for the Zionist subject.

The Nakba - an event that had to occur

On the other hand, and paradoxically, the Nakba - the violent expulsion of the inhabitants of the country and the transformation those remaining into refugees in their homeland, or into incomplete citizens - is a necessary event, because it brought about the realization of the ethnically pure, closed and autonomous Zionist subject which builds itself in the framework of a state aimed exclusively for him/her. Without the Nakba, the Zionist subject might have become contaminated intellectually by foreign ideas and practices, such as bi-nationalism, or even physically from living in a space over which s/he does not exert exclusive and absolute control. Benny Morris, for example, describes eloquently how the idea of transfer was found strongly in the heads and writings of Zionist leaders back in the early decades of the 20th century, based on the profound understanding that the establishment and existence of the Jewish state will require the eviction of the native inhabitants of Eretz Isra'el.

Morris then proceeds to show that also in the process of the Nakba Zionist leaders decided immediately, and in his opinion rightly so, not to permit the return of the refugees so as not to infringe upon the possibility of the establishment of a Jewish state. The decision then, by the Israeli government, to prevent the return of the Palestinian refugees, clearly indicates that its members were aware of their capability to bring about ethnic cleansing and also justified this indirectly. Some Arab villages had maintained good neighborly relations with the Jews until 1948 and some intervened for leave of the Arabs to stay in the country, however even this did not help them to remain in their homes. Zionism was not concerned with this village or that, depending on its attitude or behavior towards the new state. Arabs stayed in the country as a result of mercy, and, according to Morris, this was a mistake. The Zionist project had to evict the inhabitants of the country in order to realize itself.

Yosef Weitz, one of the heads of the Jewish National Fund at the time, provides evidence which is surprising in its honesty. He tells of the destruction of the village of Zarnouka after its inhabitants had been expelled, despite of numerous calls by Jews to abstain from their expulsion. He describes how he stood in the village watching the bulldozers destroy the buildings which until recently had housed their inhabitants, feeling nothing. The destruction of Palestinian lives does not cause any doubts or emotional disturbance. He is even surprised about the fact that he feels nothing. As if this destruction was expected and premeditated.

The Nakba continues as a non-event and causes anxiety when it appears

If the basic argument outlined above is correct, it can help explain two processes related to the Nakba, one situated in the reality of the violent conflict, the other in the consciousness of Israeli Jews who become exposed to the Nakba..

The Nakba as an event that did not occur in the past continues to not occur also today. Extra-judicial assassination of Palestinian leaders, confiscation of land, barring of Palestinian farmers from working their land by means of the wall under construction and the denial of their basic human rights are understood by the Zionist subject as means of the war against terrorism and as defensive acts necessary in order to fight the intolerable and illegitimate terror of the Palestinian people, who, according a recent statement by an Israeli leader, are seen as a genetically abnormal species. If the Nakba never happened, it is impossible that millions of Palestinians today are refugees who demand restitution of their rights. It is also impossible that the Palestinians demand control of at least one fifth of Palestine, because they also had nothing before. In the eyes of the Zionist subject, everything that is happening today is completely disconnected from the historical context of the Nakba. Reference to the past of 1948 is made only in line with the Zionist narrative which holds that, 'just like they did not accept us here in the past (e.g. according to the UN Partition Plan), they continue to try to throw us into the sea also today.'

The above also helps explain the indifference, in Israel, towards the question of Palestinian return. On no other issue related to the conflict is there a similar and broad consensus like the consensus against Palestinian return. As a matter of fact, there is not even a need to oppose return, because the very discussion of this topic is perceived as an existential threat. It is therefore excluded from the agenda of public debate without meaningful reference. All Zionist Jewish political parties share this approach, which meets the logic of the argument that the Nakba never happened and results in a situation where the rights of millions of people remain denied until this day. If the Nakba was perceived by the Zionist subject as an event that really took place, there could be some Israelis, at least among the Zionist left, who would realize that some responsibility must be taken by the Israeli side for what happened in 1948. However, if there was no Nakba, there is also nothing to take responsibility for.

Another interesting process related to the denial of the Nakba is what happens to Jewish Israelis who become exposed to it for the first time, whether through activities organized by Zochrot or otherwise. The Jewish Israeli individual experiences the encounter with the Palestinian Nakba as a kind of surprising slap in the face. Suddenly, and without prior warning or preparation (a result of years of denial), s/he is confronted with a tragedy that happened to the Palestinian neighbor, while s/he feels part of the side that had caused it. This creates intolerable feelings of guilt and helplessness. Guilt may be relatively easy to cope with, because it can be recognized and forgiveness can be requested. If we are ready to really listen to the voice of the Nakba, the major problem, however, is the challenge of all we have grown up with. The Zionist subject stands on somewhat shaky ground. It established itself by means of a violent process that is denied as an event that did not happen. When the ghostly spirit of this process is risen (by Zochrot, for example), it triggers astonishment and anger. If, however, we rise above these emotions towards a more objective perspective of this threatening past, we may be able to find the key to conciliation almost sixty years after the Nakba.

http://www.palestineremembered.com/Articles/General/Story1649.html