- Details
-
Written by Ilan Pappe, The Electronic Intifada Ilan Pappe, The Electronic Intifada
-
Category: News News
-
Published: 24 April 2009 24 April 2009
-
Last Updated: 24 April 2009 24 April 2009
-
Created: 24 April 2009 24 April 2009
-
Hits: 3658 3658
This righteous fury is a constant phenomenon in the Israeli, and before
that Zionist, dispossession of Palestine. Every act whether it was
ethnic cleansing, occupation, massacre or destruction was always
portrayed as morally just and as a pure act of self-defense reluctantly
perpetrated by Israel in its war against the worst kind of human
beings. In his excellent volume The Returns of Zionism: Myths, Politics and Scholarship in Israel,
Gabi Piterberg explores the ideological origins and historical
progression of this righteous fury. Today in Israel, from Left to
Right, from Likud to Kadima, from the academia to the media, one can
hear this righteous fury of a state that is more busy than any other
state in the world in destroying and dispossessing an indigenous
population.
It is crucial to explore the ideological origins of this attitude and
derive the necessary political conclusions form its prevalence. This
righteous fury shields the society and politicians in Israel from any
external rebuke or criticism. But far worse, it is translated always
into destructive policies against the Palestinians. With no internal
mechanism of criticism and no external pressure, every Palestinian
becomes a potential target of this fury. Given the firepower of the
Jewish state it can inevitably only end in more massive killings,
massacres and ethnic cleansing.
The self-righteousness is a powerful act of self-denial and
justification. It explains why the Israeli Jewish society would not be
moved by words of wisdom, logical persuasion or diplomatic dialogue.
And if one does not want to endorse violence as the means of opposing
it, there is only one way forward: challenging head-on this
righteousness as an evil ideology meant to cover human atrocities.
Another name for this ideology is Zionism and an international rebuke
for Zionism, not just for particular Israeli policies, is the only way
of countering this self-righteousness. We have to try and explain not
only to the world, but also to the Israelis themselves, that Zionism is
an ideology that endorses ethnic cleansing, occupation and now massive
massacres. What is needed now is not just a condemnation of the present
massacre but also delegitimization of the ideology that produced that
policy and justifies it morally and politically. Let us hope that
significant voices in the world will tell the Jewish state that this
ideology and the overall conduct of the state are intolerable and
unacceptable and as long as they persist, Israel will be boycotted and
subject to sanctions.
But I am not naive. I know that even the killing of hundreds of
innocent Palestinians would not be enough to produce such a shift in
the Western public opinion; it is even more unlikely that the crimes
committed in Gaza would move the European governments to change their
policy towards Palestine.
And yet, we cannot allow 2009 to be just another year, less significant
than 2008, the commemorative year of the Nakba, that did not fulfill
the great hopes we all had for its potential to dramatically transform
the Western world's attitude to Palestine and the Palestinians.
It seems that even the most horrendous crimes, such as the genocide in
Gaza, are treated as discrete events, unconnected to anything that
happened in the past and not associated with any ideology or system. In
this new year, we have to try to realign the public opinion to the
history of Palestine and to the evils of the Zionist ideology as the
best means of both explaining genocidal operations such as the current
one in Gaza and as a way of pre-empting worse things to come.
Academically, this has already been done. Our main challenge is to find
an efficient to explain the connection between the Zionist ideology and
the past policies of destruction, to the present crisis. It may be
easier to do it while, under the most terrible circumstances, the
world's attention is directed to Palestine once more. It would be even
more difficult at times when the situation seems to be "calmer" and
less dramatic. In such "relaxed" moments, the short attention span of
the Western media would marginalize once more the Palestinian tragedy
and neglect it either because of horrific genocides in Africa or the
economic crisis and ecological doomsday scenarios in the rest of the
world. While the Western media is not likely to be interested in any
historical stockpiling, it is only through a historical evaluation that
the magnitude of the crimes committed against the Palestinian people
throughout the past 60 years can be exposed. Therefore, it is the role
of an activist academia and an alternative media to insist on this
historical context. These agents should not scoff from educating the
public opinion and hopefully even influence the more conscientious
politicians to view events in a wider historical perspective.
Similarly, we may be able to find the popular, as distinct from the
high brow academic, way of explaining clearly that Israel's policy --
in the last 60 years -- stems from a racist hegemonic ideology called
Zionism, shielded by endless layers of righteous fury. Despite the
predictable accusation of anti-Semitism and what have you, it is time
to associate in the public mind the Zionist ideology with the by now
familiar historical landmarks of the land: the ethnic cleansing of
1948, the oppression of the Palestinians in Israel during the days of
the military rule, the brutal occupation of the West Bank and now the
massacre of Gaza. Very much as the Apartheid ideology explained the
oppressive policies of the South African government, this ideology --
in its most consensual and simplistic variety -- allowed all the
Israeli governments in the past and the present to dehumanize the
Palestinians wherever they are and strive to destroy them. The means
altered from period to period, from location to location, as did the
narrative covering up these atrocities. But there is a clear pattern
that cannot only be discussed in the academic ivory towers, but has to
be part of the political discourse on the contemporary reality in
Palestine today.
Some of us, namely those committed to justice and peace in Palestine,
unwittingly evade this debate by focusing, and this is understandable,
on the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) -- the West Bank and Gaza
Strip. Struggling against the criminal policies there is an urgent
mission. But this should not convey the message that the powers that be
in the West adopted gladly by a cue from Israel, that Palestine is only
in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and that the Palestinians are only
the people living in those territories. We should expand the
representation of Palestine geographically and demographically by
telling the historical narrative of the events in 1948 and ever since
and demand equal human and civil rights to all the people who live, or
used to live, in what today is Israel and the OPT.
By connecting the Zionist ideology and the policies of the past with
the present atrocities, we will be able to provide a clear and logical
explanation for the campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions.
Challenging by nonviolent means a self-righteous ideological state that
allows itself, aided by a mute world, to dispossess and destroy the
indigenous people of Palestine, is a just and moral cause. It is also
an effective way of galvanizing the public opinion not only against the
present genocidal policies in Gaza, but hopefully one that would
prevent future atrocities. But more importantly than anything else it
will puncture the balloon of self-righteous fury that suffocates the
Palestinians every times it inflates. It will help end the Western
immunity to Israel's impunity. Without that immunity, one hopes more
and more people in Israel will begin to see the real nature of the
crimes committed in their name and their fury would be directed against
those who trapped them and the Palestinians in this unnecessary cycle
of bloodshed and violence.
Ilan Pappe is chair in the Department of History at the University of Exeter.