The Palestinian Authority's United Nations bid for statehood is divisive. It has furthered America's and Israel's drift from the international community--and has confirmed, yet again, the United States' deep bias towards Israel. The request is also controversial within Palestinian circles. Even if it is successful, will it create meaningful change on the ground? Can it end the occupation? What about equal rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel? What about the Palestinian refugees and their right to return, enshrined in UN resolution 194? And what is the PA's source of legitimacy, when none of the 10 million Palestinians it claims to represent have been given the chance to endorse it?
The interviews I conducted in Ramallah reveal no clear consensus. But PA President Mahmoud Abbas's recent speech to the UN was enthusiastically received in Palestinian cities across the West Bank. For some, it represented, perhaps, a small victory--a moment when the voiceless were given a voice. But that begs the question: which voices are we still not hearing? What are their stories? What unites - and divides - the sometimes mutually antagonistic voices across their society as a whole? Who are these people, the Palestinians?
Arthur Neslen's groundbreaking new book, In Your Eyes a Sandstorm: Ways of Being Palestinian, holds many answers.
A collection of 51 in-depth interviews of Palestinians from all walks of life, In Your Eyes a Sandstorm introduces readers to everyone from ministers in the Hamas government, to ministers in the Israeli government, from sisters who were born and raised in Beirut's Shatila camp, to a drug dealer in East Jerusalem, from a Salafi Jihadist web manager to a West Bank zoo curator. Candid, colorful, and sometimes surprising, the portraits remind us that Palestinians aren't the monolithic group that the Western media depicts them as.
Neslen points his attention to Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza, Israel, Lebanon, and Jordan. While these areas are crawling with journalists, Neslen brings us the stories that go overlooked--like that of Neriman al-Jabari, a 26-year-old widow of an Islamic Jihad leader who was assassinated by Israel in 2004--forcing the reader to interrogate pre-conceived notions about Palestinians.
Neslen's focus on interviewees in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories serves another purpose. As he points out, location affects both experience and one's sense of self. The Palestinians nearest to Israel seem to best know "the terror that conflict brings." Those inside of Israel--an oft-ignored group--wrestle with "identity contradictions that especially afflict Palestinians living close to Israeli Jews." They also offer a glimpse of the racism and segregation that plagues Israeli society.
Nuri al-Ukbi, a 66-year-old Bedouin man, describes the state's demolition of his village, Al Arakib. Nabila Espanyoli, a 53-year-old NGO director in Nazareth, recalls the difficulties she faced enrolling in university, due to discrimination. Tawfiq Jabharin, a lawyer in Umm al Fahem, discusses the state's policy of denying building permits to Palestinian citizens of Israel.
Tamer Nafar, a 29-year-old Palestinian citizen of Israel and founder of the rap group DAM, tells Neslen how all these impulses come together in his hometown of Lyd, just south of Tel Aviv:
"If you buy a map of Lyd, you won't find the Arabic neighborhoods on it... There are cops here all the time. You have no street lights, unemployment, drugs, and a [four]-meter-high separation wall between Arab and Jewish areas. You know when someone does something very ugly, and he doesn't want to look in the mirror? That's the wall."
In Your Eyes a Sandstorm also serves as a primer of Palestinian politics, history, and culture, grouping the interviewees by their generation and, thus, the events they have lived through. It's sophisticated enough to hold the attentions of those already involved in the issues but accessible to those who have just begun to explore the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, too. This is a difficult balance to strike and Neslen does so gracefully.
There was, for me, a slight stumble, however. In the introduction, Neslen describes himself as the son of "left-wing and anti-Zionist Jewish parents." He also mentions that "trust was often difficult to establish" with his Palestinian interviewees. It's a catch-22: Neslen can't not mention these details; but, naturally, some readers might wonder if Neslen's Jewish background was ever an issue. Was there tension with his interviewees? Why was trust difficult to establish?
One interaction was particularly intriguing. Reflecting upon his interview with an 82-year-old fisherman in Gaza, Neslen remarks, "Strangely and unexpectedly, I felt at home." This moment seemed worth exploring.
But this is a minor complaint. And Neslen probably made the right decision. His book isn't a memoir. If he'd introduced too much of himself, he would have run the danger of his story swallowing up those of his interviewees (a Jew in Gaza! A Jew in Palestinian refugee camps! How does he feel? There's no room for that but, still, it's a book I'd like to read).
In Your Eyes a Sandstorm is a gripping look at a society and people who are misrepresented by the mainstream media and misunderstood by much of the Western world. "The Palestinian question" - never the "Jewish question" anymore - is generally posed in a way that omits Palestinian's own experiences from consideration. Through these carefully-crafted portraits, Neslen gives Palestinians the space to begin to answer it for themselves.
Follow Mya Guarnieri on Twitter: www.twitter.com/myaguarnieri
Who are they, indeed? Before the re-establishment of the State of Israel, the term "Palestinian" was hardly ever used -- and NEVER as an ethnonym.
The Arabs living in the Mandate of Palestine were called (and called themselves) exactly that: Arabs. UN's partition resolution talked about "a Jewish state and an ARAB state". Why? Simple: Arabs living in the mandate were (and remain) indistinguishable ethnically, linguistically & culturally from other Levantine Arabs: Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese... Except, that is, the Palestinian Bedouins, who are indistinguishable... from the other Bedouins, aka the Desert Arabs inhabiting the Arabic Peninsula.
The invention of a "Palestinian people" is 20th century's biggest hoax. It was concocted by the Arab "statesmen" (no doubt with help from the Soviets, those great movers of "nations" and "republics") as a political tool against the Jewish State.
Peoples have national aspirations, self determination being the most obvious one. The "Palestinians" don't -- they simply "aspire" to get rid of the Jews. Compare the "Palestinian national aspirations" with those of Jews prior to 1948. The latter "jumped" on the very first opportunity for self-determination. They did not ask if it was "viable" (it certainly was less "contiguous" than anything offered to "Palestinians"); they did not haggle endlessly about percentages. They even gave up Jerusalem, that''s how much they wanted their own nation state. THEY are a nation. Who are the Palestinians?
The residents of the West Bank? They have proven that they can't run their own affairs. Better to reattach the area to Jordan, the real Palestinian homeland.
A people who's flag was invented in 1964. SIXTY-FOUR, 16 entire years after the founding of Israel.
wow.
People that live in territory referred as Palestine. And using this as definition it is easy to see that Palestinians through the history never been a cohesive ethnic group with common religious and cultural roots but multi-ethnic and poly-religious society residing in a certain area. I think that for serious researcher it is inappropriate to avoid historical connotation of the interpretation of "Palestinians".
That is why most Israelis agree today that a Palestinian state is a necessity now, even Netanyahu said as much.
It also means that Israel deserves recognition from the Palestinians as well.
Yes, the two-state solution is accepted by Israeli society. Politically it's been ready for Arab state for some time and if not for horrors of the Second Intifada the Arab state, call it Palestine if you wish, would have already existed. Though not acknowledged by Quartet but the Second Intifada reset the clock of Oslo if not killed the whole thing altogether.
Yes, it would have been nice if Israel could return occupied territories and sign peace agreements shortly after 1967. But that didn't happen not only because Israel was not willing or prepared. Thus the point is mute.
They would've loved to. Jordan had previously annexed it but then relinquished control in shame.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution
Israel would not withdraw as a precondition for peace. Arabs would not accept any treaty without withdrawal.
AGENDA
AGENDA
AGENDA
Meanwhile where is the 'Palestinian Peace Movement?'
After all, it is the Palestinian Arabs who need to decide what their strategy is. Either they decide to renounce the "right of return" in exchange for peace and an independent state; or they decide they want the "right of return" above all things, in which case a negotiated solution is impossible. Pretending to support "two states" while also demanding "the right of return" is dishonest to say the least.
A discussion WITHIN the broader Arab society would also be useful. Is it morally justifiable for Arab countries to segregate Apartheid-like and disenfranchise people who were born in those countries (often for more than one generation, often from mothers who are nationals of those countries)? People who (if they weren't segregated) would be indistinguishable ethnically, linguistically & culturally from the general population?
Unfortunately, in both cases the discussion of this aspect appears to be taboo (like so many other subjects). The last prominent Palestinian Arab to express an unconformist opinion about this (Nusseibeh) was fired, slandered and eventually forced to "toe the line".
We in the west need only look at our own history to see the truth of this. During WWII, what did we in the US and Canada do to Japanese-Americans and Japanese-Canadians, German-Canadians, Italian-Canadians, and Ukranian-Canadians? These people were not the enemy, but we treated them as if they were, because of their shared heritage with those who we were at war with.
If the palestinians are truly concerned about their arab-israeli brothers, the quickest remedy is the same as the quickest remedy for palestinian concerns - peace. Peace will allow israel to look at itself and its own issues rather than having to constantly focus on the external threat.
Your proposition is all too post-modern for me to comprehend.
•… that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.
Article 11 also instructed the Conciliation Commission:
•… to facilitate the repatriation, resettlement and economic and social rehabilitation of the refugees and the payment of compensation.