Haaretz: Muslims Speaking Out Against Hamas

My new article from Haaretz.

As our technology advances and our televisions get flatter, bigger, and clearer, there is still one subject that is broadcast to the world in black and white: the Zionist-Palestinian conflict.

The recent events in Gaza have engendered a predictable world reaction: polarization, anger, hatred, and fear. The left screams “massacre”, while the right wants to get tougher.

Watching the mass protest and reading about strident calls for Israel’s dissolution, we Jews can’t help but get that lonely feeling in the pits of our stomachs: The world is against us. Call it a Pavlovian response conditioned by persecution on a mass scale.

But the pro-Israel camp would be wise to pay attention not only to the bellicose cries coming from the mosques and streets, but also to the Muslim voices courageously speaking out against Hamas.

To read more, click here. As always, if the spirit moves you, please leave a comment.

Sometimes History is Worth Repeating: Public Jewish-Muslim Gathering.

Recently I read about the Jerusalem Initiative in Marc Gopin‘s excellent book, Holy War, Holy Peace. The initiative is a Jewish/Muslim treaty that highlights some of the universal and life-affirming ideals of each religious tradition. As I was reading about this, I was reminded of an obscure passage I once came across doing research on the impact the bubonic plague had on the Jews. So I wrote Marc a letter which he published on his blog. Sometimes history is worth repeating. Have a read:

Dear Professor Gopin,

I am reading about the Jerusalem Initiative in your book “Holy War, Holy Peace”, and I was reminded of a gem I once found researching for a paper on the impact that the black plague (1348-1351) had on the Jews. It comes from the pen of Ibn Batutta, the 14th century Muslim scholar and traveler.

In his book, entitled “Ibn Battuta Travels in Asia and Africa 1325-1354″, the author provides an account of the Middle East during the plague. For those of us interested in the “Black Death”, Ibn Batutta’s account is a precious primary source. But there is one passage that really stood out. After documenting all the horrible destruction of the plague, Ibn Battuta describes how the community (i.e. Muslims, Christians, and Jews) responded to the disaster.

He writes:

“I saw a remarkable instance of the veneration in which the Damascenes hold this mosque during the great pestilence, on my return journey through Damascus in the latter part of July 1348. The viceroy Arghun Shah ordered a crier to proclaim through Damascus that all the people should fast for three days….So the people fasted for three successive days, the last of which was a Thursday, they then assembled in the great Mosque, amirs, sharifs, qadis, theologians, and all the other classes of the people, until the place was filled to overflowing, and there they spent Thursday night in prayer and litanies.

After the dawn prayer next morning they all went out together on foot, holding Korans in their hands, and the amirs barefooted. The procession was joined by the entire population of the town, men and women, small and large; the Jews came with their Book of the Law and the Christians with their Gospel, all of them with their women and children. The whole concourse, weeping and supplicating and seeking the favor of God through His Books and His Prophets, made their way to the Mosque of the Footprints, and there they remained in supplication and invocation until near midday. They then returned to the city and held the Friday service, and God lightened their affliction; for the numbers of deaths in a single day at Damascus did not attain two thousand, while in Cairo and the Old Cairo it reached the figure of twenty-four thousand a day.”

As you can read, Ibn Batutta’s account is an arresting example of Jews, Muslims and Christians engaged in public prayer together. While in general, the plague tended to exacerbate divisions and tensions that were already inherit in the structure of the society, we have here an extraordinary example of a disaster bringing different people together. It seems that faced with a common and universal problem, a shared understanding of both its origin and solution, the citizens of Damascus sought to collectively elevate their suffering.

It is worth noting that the interfaith prayer takes place inside a mosque. And not just any mosque, in an example of inter-mythic architecture, Ibn Batutta tells us that it is the Mosque of the footprint of Musa (Moses).

The event in question gets additional significance when we compare it to what was happening to the Jews in Christendom during the time of the plague – as you recall, under Christian rule the Jews were being blamed and persecuted for precipitating the Black Death by poisoning the wells. Historians estimate that hundreds of Jewish communities were destroyed as a result.

Of course this text is also important in light of the fraught relationships between the children of Abraham today. What a text like this shows us is that the inimical relationship between Jews and Arabs is not built in into the DNA of the cultures or the religions. Rather, we see that our traditions are much more plastic than we give them credit for. Moreover, with this historical precedent in mind, one can see that it is not impossible for religion to be leading the way towards unity and peace. After all, the true meaning of the word religion, derived from the Latin ligare, is to bind and connect us together. And in that sense of the word, and that sense only, we can say that the Middle east can use a little more religion.

All the best,

Roi Ben-Yehuda

New Palestinian and Israeli Generation Calling for Tough Hope

Falastine Dwikat, an up and coming Palestinian activist and writer recently published a piece calling for deep introspection and understanding between Israelis and Palestinians. The article explores how both people legitimize violence from a perspective of self-defense and victimhood. Dwikat has a personal understanding of the horrible conditions of the region, yet she urges her readers not to give into despair. She ends the article on an optimistic note, “While misdeeds have been committed against both Israelis and Palestinians”, she writes, “more people are beginning to believe that it’s up to them to create a better future.”

For her article, published in Voices, Dwikat had interviewed me. She asked questions about violence, hope, peace, and an organization I used to work for called Seeds of Peace. For those readers who would like to read the full interview. See below.

Q: What do you think are the main reasons that would make an Israeli legitimize violence directed at Palestinians?

A: The main reason that Israelis legitimize violence directed at Palestinians is self-defense (or its perception). Most Israelis justify violence against Palestinians as a response to terrorism and war. Some see it as a necessary evil, while others see (and desire) it as revenge. There is a minority of Israelis who legitimize violence by reading their holy books and listening to their religious leaders. They believe it is a religious duty (hence legit) to act with aggression against the enemies of the Jews. But as I said, they are a minority.

The one thing that they all have in common is that they de-humanize the other. That makes it much easier for the conscience. As a friend recently told me, “If I have cancer, I want to use chemotherapy for the disease. It is nasty and violent, but that is what I have to do if I want to eradicate the cancer.” So that is how it is done – people become diseases. And this came out of the mouth of someone who believes in peace and co-existence.

Q: You used to work for Seeds of Peace. Can you please tell me about it? Why did you work there? For how long? And how do you look at it’s vision & mission?

A: I choose to work at Seeds of Peace because by brining together and empowering young Israelis and Palestinians (among other kids from regions of conflict) they offer one of the most significant approaches to peacemaking between Arabs and Jews. I worked for Seeds for a few months as an intern back in 2005.

Q: Are these organizations really influential in combating the reasons why people legitimize violence?

A: I believe so. A lot of people when the first hear of organizations like Seeds of Peace react with skepticism. They say something like “oh, it is very nice, but at the end of the day it is merely a drop in the ocean.” By I say that that view is all wrong. The paradigm for peacemaking at seeds is based on a leadership model. In other words, it is ocean going into the drop. The kids selected for seeds are the best and brightest. Their experience at camp – living with, interacting, and talking with the enemy – transforms them and they return back changed. The psychological pattern is one of separation, initiation, and a return. On a grand scale it means that one day these kids are going to run Israel and Palestine. On a micro scale it means that when they come back they can no longer laugh at that racist joke that their uncle says around the dinner table. Because now the other has been humanized.

Q4: Do you see hope in the horizon? Do you think people are ready for peace?

A: The thing with hope is that it came inside Pandora’s box (with all the ills of the world). I am not sure if hope is a remedy or part of the problem? The hope of the Oslo years, for example, still burns in my chest. But hope, as Emily Dickinson said, is also “the thing with feathers.” And I believe it was Camus who said, “where there is no hope, we must invent it.” Without hope we grounded to an uninspiring realism. Without hope we cannot dream. Without it we become paralyzed by nihilism. We must sustain hope. But not just any hope. We need tough hope. Hope that is tenacious enough to deal with all difficulties of the region.

Do I see hope in the region? Of course I do. The fact that people keep on living, get out of bed every morning, act with compassion toward one another, voice their opinion, send their children to school, participate in the political process, all these are signs of hope to me.

As for people’s readiness for peace. People have always been ready for peace. Just on their own terms. The real question is: “Are people really ready for the compromise that real peace calls for?” I think that while Israelis have shown more of a readiness for compromise than the Palestinians (pull-out from Gaza being one example), by and large both people are not yet psychologically ready for the compromises needed. This a fundamental failure of leadership. People want justice not compromise – the latter, as politicians know, is a much harder and less attractive sell. But fortunately, more people are beginning to understand that compromise is the only solution.

The Price Tag: Jewish Settlers Caught on Film Shooting Palestinians at close range.

Recent actions in Hebron by the right-wing Jewish settlers have brought great disgrace to the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. Simply put, this week showed us the dark side of the union between religion and nationalism. Our religion and our nationalism.

The settlers call it a “price tag”: Every time Israeli authorities act against the interest of the settlers, the latter will respond by exacting revenge on nearby Palestinian residence and their property. Much like Japanese Macaques monkeys who when attacked by a powerful and high-ranking aggressor exact revenge on one of his less powerful family members, the settlers are displacing their frustrations on the Palestinians with the hopes of deterring the Israeli government from taking future actions against them.

But judging by the Bulworthesque response of Prime Minister Olmert, the settlers monkey-like actions have backfired:

“As a Jew, I’m ashamed of the sights of Jews firing at Arabs in Hebron. I have no other definition for what we saw but a pogrom. We are the sons of a nation which knows what a pogrom is, and I’m saying this after much thought. I have no other way to put it.”

This is not the first time that Olmert has described the actions of settlers in the territories as pogroms. By using the word ‘pogrom’ Olmert joins those who at times see a moral and historical equivalence between violence committed against Jews in the Diaspora, and violence committed by Jews against non-Jews in Israel and the occupied territories. This may seem like a non-issue, but in reality it is an unusual and potent choice of words for a prime minister to use.

The other interesting disclosure in Olmert’s statement is his admission of shame. Shame is an appropriate response. Shame is an outward directed emotion, it is social and ethical, it means that we feel bad because others see our improper behavior (or those who represent us). But shame needs to be adjoined with another emotion: Guilt. Guilt is internal, it is moral and individualistic, it is our conscience bitchslapping us for actions we know to be wrong.

To read more, click here. As always, if the spirit moves you, please leave a comment.

There is No Business Like Shoah Business

Here is my latest blog-piece over at Jewcy. The piece explores the plethora of Holocaust-related movies that are coming out this month. My blog is in response to a NYT piece on the subject.

“Hollywood does not do nihilism even if life occasionally does. One can only hope that this new batch of Holocaust-related films were done with some sense of humility – after all, these actors, directors and producers are stepping on ground where it isn’t just angels who fear to tread. The challenge is to be fair and honest to the experience. Stories like Schindler, with their emphases on survival, morality and redemption, should be told. They are an important testimony to how, to quote a Buddhist saying, “the lotus can blossom in the mouth of a dragon.” Nevertheless, I am afraid that when dealing with such dragons as the Holocaust, we can ill-afford to put so much emphases on a lotus. To do so is to transgress the 11th commandment, “Thou Shalt Never Forget.”

To read more, click here: As always, if the spirit move you, please leave a comment.

The Ice-Cream Rule and The Arab-Israeli Conflict.

My new weekly blog spot over at Jewcy:

The Ice-Cream Rule and The Arab-Israeli Conflict.

Growing up in Argentina, my girlfriend Gabriela and her sister Paola cherished ice-cream day. On that day they got to eat as much ice-cream as they could. Only there was a catch. Gabriela’s mother employed the ice cream rule: during ice-cream time, the rule was that one sibling would decide how much ice-cream would go into each bowl, while the other had the right to first pick. That way, if one of the sibling had distributed the ice-cream unevenly, the other benefited. It was an ingenious system designed for fairness.

Now what if we could employ the ice-cream rule to the Arab-Israeli conflict? Imagine the following: President Obama meets with Abbas and Livni/Netanyahu. He gives the latter a map and says, “Go ahead, two states for two people. You draw the boundaries, you choose a capital, and you decide where people have a right to reside. There will be no opposition or interference from Abbas. However, once you finish, it is up to Abbas alone to choose which side to take.”

To read the rest, please click here.  As always, if the spirit moves you, feel free to leave a comment.

A Jewish Pogrom? My Latest From The Observers

This amateur video shows armed settlers attacking a Palestinian village with stones and guns on Saturday after an Israeli boy had been stabbed and injured earlier in the day. The shocking video is another result of a citizen-media drive to reveal evidence of violent attacks in the area.

The images show Israelis from the far-right Yitzhar settlement coming towards the West Bank village of Asira al-Kabaliya and throwing rocks. The attackers were responding to an incident on Saturday afternoon when an intruder burnt down a mobile home and stabbed a nine-year-old boy in the area. The footage was shot by a local resident who then sent it to B’Tselem, an NGO that hands out recording equipment to Palestinians to capture footage of violence in the Israeli and Palestinian Territories (see other posts about the group).

The footage has caused outrage because The Israel Defense Forces appear not to intervene in the attacks. After the video was shot the attackers continued into the village, when six Palestinians were shot and injured. Stars of David were painted on the buildings. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called the attack a “pogrom against non-Jews”, and said that it would not be tolerated.

My comments for France 24’s The Observers:

This is yet another video exposing the lucid and raw injustice of the occupation. Everything about this footage – the mob violence, the soldiers’ impotence, and the Star of David looking ever as ugly as a Swastika – makes me sick to the stomach. Sadly, what you see in this video is not an anomaly. It has been happening for years, and recently it has been escalating.

Prime Minister Olmert has called this disturbance a ‘pogrom’ and has said, ‘There will not be pogroms against non-Jews in the state of Israel’. His words are interesting in two respects:

Firstly, by using the word ‘pogrom’ (a word usually reserved for when speaking of anti-Semitic riots against Jews), Olmert joins those who at times see a moral and historical equivalence between violence committed against Jews in the Diaspora, and violence committed by Jews in Israel and the occupied territories. This may seem like a non-issue, but in reality it is an unusual choice of words for a prime minister to use. Perhaps a political leader who is about to resign from office can afford to have on his lips what another politician will only have on his mind.

Secondly, by stating that there will be no pogroms against non-Jews in the state of Israel, Olmert is making a well-intentioned but irrelevant point. Yes, in the state of Israel such actions will not be tolerated. But we are not in the state of Israel. We are in the occupied territories – a place where rights and rule of law do not apply to everyone equally. In the ‘territories’ such actions are not an exception to the rule. If Olmert means to say that the territories are in fact part of the State of Israel then this is the biggest story of the year. What he should have said is that the state of Israel will not tolerate such behavior within its borders or outside of them. The difference between the two statements is quite significant.

The date of this attack – Saturday, 13 September 2008 – is also significant. To begin with, for Jews the Sabbath is a holy day of rest and spiritual rejuvenation. Terrorizing and spilling the blood of the innocent is the very last thing that would be permitted on such a day (it is of course never permitted). These Jews who committed the attack are a disgrace to everything that is sacred in Judaism. They have profaned their religion. I point this out not because I have a preference for mob violence on Sunday as opposed to Saturday, rather because it shows you how far these folks have strayed from the essence of their faith.

The date is also telling because it falls on the anniversary of the signing of the Oslo accords. It was on 13 September 1993 that the Israeli government and the PLO officially began a historic peace-process. Of course this could be just a coincidence (one the press has yet to pick up on), yet I suspect it is not. Every year around this time the settler community laments the “tragedy” of the peace process and gets aggressively riled up on how the present government is failing to learn the lessons of Oslo. While it is clear that this particular act of mob violence was triggered by a heinous Palestinian attack, it does not stretch the imagination to see how the people in question were primed and poised to see all Arabs as enemies. After all, the two-state solution, the objective of the Oslo peace process, is a death-knell to the settlers’ dream of a greater Israel.

The settler movement is the blight of Israeli democracy. One can only hope that this type of videos can further awake us from our ethical and political slumber.”

Protecting My Name From Libelous Journalism

Today, to my dismay, I found myself slandered (libeled really) by a blogger/journalist named Ami Isseroff. Mr. Isseroff runs a number of sites dealing with Israel, Zionism and Palestine. In his introduction to my recent interview with Joel Schalit, Mr. Isseroff wrote “Roi Ben Yehuda lives in Spain. He last concocted a fable about anti-Semitism in Spain, which cannot be verified by people living there.”

When I read those lines I was incredulous. My eyes did a double take. Did he really write this? Claiming that a journalist concocted a fable in a major newspaper is a serious charge. In fact it is the worst charge you can throw at journalist: It is like accusing a priest of spending a little too much time with the alter boys 🙂 I wondered what evidence Mr. Isseroff was basing his claim that I fabricated the whole thing? Who were these people who could not verify my story? And since when can the absence of evidence be sufficient warrant to make a positive claim?

The article that Mr. Isseroff was alluding to was my Haaretz piece entitled Epiphany in A Spanish Neo-Nazi Bookstore. In the piece, I tell of my surprising (and eventually ennobling) experience of encountering signs of Anti Semitism in Barcelona. These included Swastikas (both pro-and anti) which are readily used as part of the city’s culture of political graffiti and a lively experience in a Neo-Nazi bookstore. (Here are recent pictures I took of some Swastikas carvings in Barcelona [I have plenty more]. The latter was in IKEA’s parking garage. I think they are going to need a bigger sign to cover that one up) 🙂

Not wanting to let Mr. Isseroff statement slide, I contacted Haaretz who straight-away asked Mr. Isseroff to respond to his outlandish and libelous claim. Within a short time, Mr. Isseroff altered his introduction to read:

Roi Ben Yehuda is an Israeli, or ex-Israeli, who lives in Spain and writes frequently for Ha’aretz. He previously (see ‘Epiphany in a Spanish neo-Nazi bookstore,’ Haaretz June 15, 2008) alleged that a Neo-Nazi Book shop is selling anti-Semitic materials in Barcelona, a claim made by no-one else to my knowledge, and an assertion that cannot be verified by a friend living there. She notes that the sale of such materials is forbidden by Spanish law. Roi’s story about Nazi bookstores in Spain is therefore dubious, to say the least.

Hmm. Lets look at the logic: Mr. Isseroff never heard of this store. This, for some reason, makes him suspicious. But ever the careful journalist, he decides to call a friend who lives in Barcelona who claimed she could not verify its existence (he later explained to me that his friend does not live in Barcelona but near Barcelona). She further claims that such a store would be impossible because “the sale of such materials is forbidden by Spanish law”. Aha! Mr. Isseroff comes to the conclusion, “Roi’s story about Nazi bookstores in Spain is therefore dubious, to say the least.” Wow Mr. Isseroff, that is some great investigatory journalism. You seemed to have uncovered the Jewish Jayson Blair. Bravo!

But there is just one problem. The store is alive & well. Your “friend” can easily verify the claim by going over and visiting the store. She can also read about the store in (Spanish) Wiki. It is located at la calle Séneca número 12 in Barcelona.

But isn’t the existence of such a store against the law? After all, Mr. Isseroff’s friend said so. Nope. It is true that in 1996 Spain had reformed its legal code in order to criminalize Holocaust denial, but when they actually tried to implement the new law (by arresting and trying Pedro Varela the owner of the neo-Nazi bookstore), the Constitutional Court ruled that Pedro Varela has the constitutional freedom to publish material that deny or justify the Holocaust. You can read about it (in Spanish) here.

But you want to see the store and its Nazi material with your eyes, right? Well here you go. Enjoy.

Ok. Enough with the Spanish. You want something in English. Well, how about something from David Duke (the infamous anti-Semite and Holocaust revisionist). After all, as you should know, he is a good friend of the owner of the “alleged” store (here they are together holding some Jew-friendly literature).

Here he is writing about his friend being arrested in Spain (remember, his conviction was deemed unconstitutional and overturned). Here is a video of the two of them together (If you wait a little the video will turn to english.) At the end of the video Duke talks about all his support in Madrid and Barcelona.

So Mr. Isseroff, you can no longer claim ignorance nor can you rely on your friend’s ignorance. This store exists, it sells vile materials, it has support, and it is legal. I hope that next time you act with more sagacity and prudence before you make baseless and ignorant allegations against someone. You had the courage to throw at me the worst charge a journalist can face, lets see if you also have the courage to admit when you are wrong.

My Haaretz Interview With Joel Schalit

Over at Haaretz I interviewed author Joel Schalit on the politics of being an Israeli in the Diaspora. While we covered many subjects, here is my favorite response from Joel:

Me: Do you consider yourself a ‘yored’? Or has the term become simply anachronistic?

Joel: No, I don’t. It’s intellectually and politically indefensible as an idea, especially if you take Zionism seriously, and understand how profoundly effective it has been as a form of political education. How can you ‘step down’, so to speak, if you carry Israel with you everywhere you go? How can one feel guilty about being apart from something that is inescapable?

This is Zionism’s inherent paradox: Israel is a state of mind as much as it is an undeniable physical reality. If we are not reminded of it allegorically, through worship, we are confronted by it nearly every day, in the form of tragedy, on the news. As that dreadful Eagles song, “Hotel California”, goes, “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.”

To read more of my interview, and please do, click here. Also keep your eyes out for my new Jewcy column (beginning September) which will explore the subject of Israelis living in the United States.

“Dirty Israeli from Hadera!”

Next month I am starting a new column over at Jewcy which will center on the experience of Israelis living in the United States. In preparation, I have been reflecting on my own experiences in the diaspora. Yesterday, to my surprise, an old memory bubbled-up to the surface of my consciousness.

In 1985, seeking economic opportunity my father moved our family from Israel to San Antonio Texas. I was nine years old at the time. I knew no English (other than “hello”, “goodbye”, “Miss Piggy”, and “shut up”) and I was confidant that the IDF could kick America’s ass.

A few years into our stay, my father took us out for a boat ride on a lake. When lunch time came I was horrified to find out that my sandwich was coated with mustered. I protested (loudly and repeatedly) that I had specifically asked for a sandwich without mustered. Whereby my father looked at me with frustration, snatched the sandwich from my hand, and threw it out into the lake.

Embarrassed and angered, I looked around to make sure nobody saw what had happened. When the cost was clear, I gaped at my stern old-man and cried:

“How could you do that? You dirty Israeli from Hadera! How could you do that?”

Not able to comprehend what they just heard, my mother and father looked at me with blank cow-like stares. As if it was not enough that the words “dirty Israeli” flowed effortlessly from my mouth, I had also inserted some Israeli socio-economic class discrimination for good measure. Was a dirty Israeli from Tel-Aviv superior to one from Hadera?

After the initial shock wore off, my mother began to laugh, while my father, visibly hurt by my words, intimated that if I continue to talk like that I would soon be reunited with my mustered-laden sandwich.

Years have passed since the sandwich incident (a classic inter-generational immigrant moment if there ever was one.) As a teenager I had returned to live in Israel, and in my twenties I moved back to the US. I have thankfully outgrown some of those early complexes, but the subject of Israelis living abroad (especially the US) still fascinates me.

Look out for my new Jewcy column starting in September.