Ending the Occupation of Palestine: The Verbal Obstacles

Searching for something that might be meaningful and potentially productive in the overall context of the title, I offer a recommendation: Think about the words we use.

For just a moment, consider the basic issues related to Palestine. Then think about how those issues are consistently buried in bland, euphemistic, totally misleading words and phrases, perhaps generated for the very purposes they have so resoundingly achieved: obscuring and distorting the reality of what is being done in Palestine and to the Palestinians, suppressed in their own homeland.

Think about the words used during the recent Annapolis photo-op. They were a major reason for its fully predictable total failure, and a principal contribution to every previous failure by America to present itself as, and achieve the goals of an honest broker.

Essentially, the final agreement was to consider beginning discussions that might lead to a start in undertaking further efforts to get around to doing something. To underline the true nature of this seminal achievement, the meeting was promptly followed by Israel announcing construction of 370 additional houses in the Har Homa settlement in Occupied Palestine, and the demolition of six more homes in Arab East Jerusalem. Now that's real statesmanship.

Think. Every use of the phrase 'Occupied Territories' suggests that there are alternative views, and implicitly denies that it is Occupied Palestine. That is the only correct description of the core problem, a source of profound global concern. 'Occupied Palestine' must be clearly identified in all statements made on the subject, or else a biased, one-sided view is presented.

Think about the endless, totally inapplicable references to 'ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict'. Conflicts occur between sovereign states that have armies to defend their territories. Palestinians have neither an army nor territory. What they do have is 40+ years of a very repressive, illegal occupation. An 'occupation' is not a 'conflict', and that word should never be used.

Consider this fact: Under the United Nations charter, armed occupation is illegal; armed resistance to an occupation is recognized as legitimate.

Think. The principal objective of all the non-meetings is ending the occupation. References to 'searching for peace' ignore the compelling fact that there is now a sort of peace, but no legality under international law, no justice, freedom or hope. The occupation is the cause of the problem. Peace can and will result only after Israel withdraws -- and, unlike its 'withdrawal' from Gaza, permits the Palestinians to live normal lives.

Think. There cannot be anything even vaguely resembling "Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.' When democratically-elected representatives of the Palestinian prisoners meet with their Jewish jailers to beg for small improvements in the dreadful quality of life inside the prison, no rational, reasonable person could possibly describe that as 'negotiation.' Armed occupiers do not 'negotiate' with the prostrate occupied. That is an oxymoron, a completely misleading concept, use of that word must be discontinued.

The same stigma applies to "Israeli-Palestinian meetings -- or agreements -- or discussions." These words attempt to establish a mental image of some kind of parity, of an equality between the two sides. Nothing could be farther from reality: the powerful and the powerless have diametrically divergent weight, before, during or after any face to face session.

Think about Israel's numerous and outspoken supporters, outraged that anyone would dare use 'apartheid' to describe the manifold restrictions and controls imposed on Occupied Palestine, in particular the massive, illegal wall being built to confiscate further Palestinian land. They insist that it be called a Separation Wall. Now think how to say 'separation' in Afrikaans: apartheid.

None of us should want anything bad to happen to a single Israeli -- or to a single Palestinian. Above all, none of us wants anything bad to happen to a single American. But terrible things have happened, are happening, and will happen, to all three groups. They will happen to Americans -- and I hope I am wrong -- because far too many people to ignore firmly believe our massive military, unstinting financial and solid, unwavering political support for Israel facilitate the endless chain of inhumane and illegal actions taken by Israel in Occupied Palestine. And they are right.

On an hourly basis, America is seen as directly linked to blatant, repetitious violations of every single principle for which we -- and Israel -- endlessly insist we stand: freedom, justice, human rights, dignity, international law, democracy -- and hope.

This is deadly, dangerous hypocrisy. It has undermined our status, our respect, reputation, honor, self-image, and moral standing. The Occupation of Palestine must end, for the sake of everyone, but especially for the sake of those most directly affected. The Palestinians, living in fear and repression, want to live in freedom; the Israelis, brutalized by brutalizing, want to live in peace and security; the Americans, feared and distrusted, want to regain a role in helping to encourage an ever wider realm of freedom, peace and security. Those commendable, mutually supportive goals cannot be achieved while Palestine remains occupied, crushed under the heel of the Israeli settlers and military.

The gains, the manifold benefits from ending the occupation may not be as rapid, profound, or visible as everyone would wish, but they will be infinitely preferable to the alternative. Continuation of the present oppression and dispossession is totally unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of the peoples in the region, including Israelis. Without equivocation, history shows that the inevitable result will be infinitely less desirable. Again, I profoundly hope I am wrong, but greatly fear I will be right.

Comments

[DenverJuggler]

I don't think the author is anti-Semitic, but I always wonder why things seem to be always so one-sided by those supporting the PLO in the past and now Fatah or Hamas. They always totally ignore the slaughter from 'their' side and only focus on the wrongs of Israel. They seem to ignore that the current political party in power, Hamas, has vowed the descruction of the State of Israel and that they wish to drive the Israeli's "into the sea." He also leaves out the fact that Israel has completely withdrawn from the Gaza strip yet rocket attacks into Israel continue. Ask the American Indians about their "land for peace" deal and how that's working out for them. I do think Israel's stance is wrong and they need to stop annexing more of the territory on the West Bank but unfortunately the GOP that this Ambassador has worked for has a hands-off approach that has accomplished nothing with Middle East policy and made things worse. The only person that had accomplished something in this area was a President that the GOP impeached and continue to blame for all the problems in the world. Nice that this author totally ignores how Reagan, Bush 41, and Bush 43 have completely fallen down on the job as far as Middle East peace goes and he ignores that and only blames the Israeli government, which surely is partly at fault, but so are these Presidents that have done nothing, Fatah, and Hamas and the Middle Eastern countries in the region that have done nothing to foster peace either.

[EspressoAtNoon]

Thank you for your honest and heartfelt post!!

[NABNYC]

I've got a word that is central to the entire dispute: Money. My money. Congress votes to give billions of dollars to Israel every year. Israel takes a percentage off the top, launders it back into the U.S. through their "lobby" groups, uses it to bribe Congress, which votes to send them more money. My money.

No need to spend time in these word debates, since they are only designed to hide the truth. Israel steals land and says "I won't discuss giving it back until "they" say we have a right to exist." Say Uncle, Say Uncle. But the fact is, the Palestinians do not agree that Israel has a right to steal their land and their homes, to kill their people. So why should they say it?

If the U.S. stopped giving billions to Israel, the Jewish inhabitants could either learn to live in peace or leave. One or the other. I say after 60 years, it's more likely they'd leave. But one way or the other, at least I wouldn't be paying for it.

There is no reason for the U.S. to continue funding Israel. We should give them one year, then cut off all the money. See what compromises they might consider at that time. Or not. Stay and fight. But do it on your own nickel. The way things are now, the Israelis are willing to stay and fight to the last drop of my money. Let them pay for it themselves. They want to be independent, then be independent.

If Israel was honest, they would admit they took someone else's land, they attacked the neighboring villages and ran the people off, they had an official and intentional plan to run out all the Palestinians and steal their land. They owe enormous amounts of money for reparations for the land they've stolen, and the people they've killed. They even tear down olive trees to try to make the lands barren and force the Palestinians to leave. These policies are not deserving of any sympathy. U.S. Out of Israel.

[StanDaMan]

Thank you for simply stating the truth. Sadly, it is not enough.

America's unjust anti-Pales­tinian/pro­-Zionist policies and actions are dictated by the pro-Zionist lobby in America. If Americans knew the true extent of the Palestinians' suffering and the American government's complicity therewith (your article helps; keep getting the word out), they'd be outraged, because Americans, at their core, are fair and sympathize with the oppressed. But the American media (which is itself controlled by pro-Zionist interests) has distorted, suppressed and ignored the truth to such an extent that the victims (the Palestinians) are portrayed as the criminals while the criminals (Israel's Zionists) are portrayed as the victims.

The Arabs (including the Palestinians) and the rest of the world know the truth. That's why the Arabs and many others hate us. And Bin Laden (who is evil, but no fool) has tapped into that hatred to win support and recruit more suicide jihadists to slaughter more innocent Americans.

[batguano]

THANK YOU for your Honesty! Thank You for your courage! You will of course be villified by the forces of occupation and illegal colonization as an "anti-semite" or anti Israeli, just as Walt and Mearsheimer were for their comments on the power of the pro Israel Lobby ( AIPAC, AEI, etc ) in America that subverts OUR foreign policy to Israeli extremists supposed advantage; policy that is decidedly NOT in America's best interest! http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=my_mod&p=walt+mearsheimer+report
Just as you point out, the Israeli state, immediately after the recent "summit" commited acts at odds with the stated goals. I believe that the Israelis with pre-meditation have consistantly and INTENTIONALLY done the same at every turn for years, to thwart ANY possible end to the "conflict"; any possible raproachment or confidence building. They have intentionally pursued policies and acts to make a VIABLE Palestinian state impossible. The stated goal of Sharon's settler movement at the very beginning was to "put facts on the ground that will be hard to change."
You write "On an hourly basis, America is seen as directly linked to blatant, repetitious violations of every single principle for which we -- and Israel -- endlessly insist we stand: freedom, justice, human rights, dignity, international law, democracy -- and hope.
It has undermined our status, our respect, reputation, honor, self-image, and moral standing. The Occupation of Palestine must end, for the sake of everyone."
Your words speak the truth and you will be viciously attacked for your honesty. THANK YOU!

[dynadem]

"Consider this fact: Under the United Nations charter, armed occupation is illegal; armed resistance to an occupation is recognized as legitimate."

I'm not sure this is quite true. Occupation of territory, by itself, is not illegal, and armed resistence to a lawful occupation is not legal. Look at, for example, the Allied occupation of Germany following WWII. The legal basis for the occupation of Palestine (I'm no international lawyer here) probably can be found in the fact that the territories were not integral parts of any country prior to the occupation, i.e., the West Bank was not Jordanian territory, and Gaza was not Egyptian territory, although the respective territories were administered from Amman and Cairo.

What is definitely illegal in the Palestinian case, however, is the building of Israeli settlements in occupied lands and the colonization of those lands by Israelis. There may be additional illegalities in various means the Israelis have used to control the Palestinian population, such as the use of collective punishment.

[avergejoe]

FINALLY, in America media.
the truth about isreal/Palestine!

p.s. do know Amb. that the CIA world factbook has removed Palestine, added Gaza, West Bank.