George Bush’s latest trip to the Middle East did not do much to improve the situation in that troubled part of the world. The primary purpose of the trip was to participate in the 60th anniversary celebration of the founding of Israel. For Palestinians, this is the 60th anniversary of the “Nakba” or Catastrophe in which hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes in Israel/Palestine.
In his speech to the Israeli Knesset, George Bush lavished praise on the state of Israel while making no mention of its effect on Palestinians, even though Palestinian Israeli citizens whose families were affected were sitting in the audience. The message of this speech, that the US is not an honest broker in the peace process, was not lost on the Arab world. The cool reception that President Bush received in the Arab world testified to the fact that the message got through.
Another message of the speech was to introduce God into a conflict that is largely over issues like land and water. Throughout his speech the President related Biblical promises to the modern state of Israel. He said the founding of the State of Israel “was the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David – a homeland for the chosen people Eretz Yisrael.”
He made the connection to the founding of the US saying that the founders saw the US as “a new promised land” and quoted William Bradford stepping off the Mayflower saying “Come let us declare in Zion the word of God”.
This connection is not a new one. Americans have long seen themselves as God’s chosen people, blessed by God. This imagery manifests itself particularly in music and prayers during national holidays such as the 4th of July or Memorial Day. (Does God really bless America and not Iran, Iraq or North Korea?)
One of the reasons for the close relationship between America and Israel is that Americans see this parallel between the founding of America and the founding of Israel. Both countries have a story of a courageous persecuted people, with the help of God, carving a strong nation from a harsh land populated by savage heathens.
Rather than bringing the Divine into the equation, George Bush might have been better to listen to the words of assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Itzak Rabin, “If the conflict were to be theologized, there would never be peace. For to theological conflict, there are no compromises, and therefore no solutions.”
Monday, May 26, 2008
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Proxy War III ?
This week the ongoing governmental crisis in Lebanon boiled over into violence. Hezbollah militias supported by Iran and Syria clashed with militias supporting the current governmental coalition which has the backing of the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel.
The governmental crisis has been going on for six months since President Emil Lahoud left office. Since then, Hezbollah has refused allow a parliamentary quorum to elect a new president and the government has functioned without a president and with a deadlocked parliament. (Many Americans might argue that a vacant presidency and a deadlocked legislature is not a bad state of affairs.)
The US and its allies have supported the governing coalition of Prime Minister Siniora, claiming that it is a democratically elected government. This is a bit of a stretch as in reality Lebanon is a sectarian state. Under the treaty which ended the civil war, the President must be Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim and the Speaker of Parliament a Shi’a Muslim. The Parliament is divided up based on a 1932 census with 50% Christians and 50% Muslims. About the only thing that the parties agree on is that they don’t want another census, but current estimates are that the country is 60% Muslim, 35% Christian and 5% other (mostly Jewish). Hezbollah’s argument is that the election law should be rewritten to more fairly reflect current conditions. (I think they are right.)
A complicating factor is that the Muslims have little trust in the Christians as they are seen as pawns of the Israelis. This largely stems from a 1982 event in which Christian militias with the aid of the Israeli Army led by Arial Sharon massacred thousands of Palestinians, men, women and children, in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
This current crisis, with all of its complicated historical baggage, can only be solved by the Lebanese themselves. Unless the US/Israel and Iran/Syria stop trying to fight their proxy war using the Lebanese, we are on the verge of another civil war which last time killed over 1 million Lebanese.
The governmental crisis has been going on for six months since President Emil Lahoud left office. Since then, Hezbollah has refused allow a parliamentary quorum to elect a new president and the government has functioned without a president and with a deadlocked parliament. (Many Americans might argue that a vacant presidency and a deadlocked legislature is not a bad state of affairs.)
The US and its allies have supported the governing coalition of Prime Minister Siniora, claiming that it is a democratically elected government. This is a bit of a stretch as in reality Lebanon is a sectarian state. Under the treaty which ended the civil war, the President must be Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim and the Speaker of Parliament a Shi’a Muslim. The Parliament is divided up based on a 1932 census with 50% Christians and 50% Muslims. About the only thing that the parties agree on is that they don’t want another census, but current estimates are that the country is 60% Muslim, 35% Christian and 5% other (mostly Jewish). Hezbollah’s argument is that the election law should be rewritten to more fairly reflect current conditions. (I think they are right.)
A complicating factor is that the Muslims have little trust in the Christians as they are seen as pawns of the Israelis. This largely stems from a 1982 event in which Christian militias with the aid of the Israeli Army led by Arial Sharon massacred thousands of Palestinians, men, women and children, in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
This current crisis, with all of its complicated historical baggage, can only be solved by the Lebanese themselves. Unless the US/Israel and Iran/Syria stop trying to fight their proxy war using the Lebanese, we are on the verge of another civil war which last time killed over 1 million Lebanese.
Monday, May 05, 2008
The bill is due
During my recent trip to Amman, Jordan, I had the privilege of being able to meet with children of Iraqi refugees who were attending the Episcopal Diocese of the Middle East Bishop’s School. These children were able to attend this fine school because of scholarship support provided by the diocese and other interested patrons. These bright eyed youngsters answered questions and sat politely as a bunch of old people chatted on in a language that they did not understand. (I am not sure that my grandchildren would have done as well.) They put a human face on the Iraqi refugee crisis that is rapidly becoming an embarrassment to the developed world.
The flow of refugees out of Iraq has its roots in the First Gulf War when Iraqi Christians, previously protected by Saddaam Hussein began to be seen as agents of the US and were forced by persecution to flee. Since then nearly 2 million refugees have fled Iraq for Syria and Jordan, two of the poorest countries in the region, in order to escape the violence. Exact numbers are hard to determine as the refugees do not have legal status in either country and cannot legally hold jobs and therefore are reluctant to make their presence known.
Initially the new arrivals were what Jordanians call “Mercedes Refugees”. These were wealthy businessmen and former Baathists who drove up the price of real estate by buying large houses in new developments in West Amman. The surge in refugees following the bombing of the Shiite shrine in Sammara and the resulting outbreak of civil war included the middle and lower classes. These people are now running out of money since they are unable to support themselves. They have no viable options. They can’t go back to Iraq because of the violence; they can’t remain in Jordan because they have no way to support themselves and they can’t go else ware because, with some exceptions, no one will accept them.
The most vulnerable are those who have worked with the US occupation force and with international NGO’s. The US has promised to admit 12000 of these people this year, but to date has admitted only 1700. One small city in Norway has admitted more Iraqis than the entire US. If the rest of the US had resettled as many Iraqis per capita as my small state of Idaho, the US would have met its goal.
When the US invaded Iraq in 2003, NY Times columnist Tom Friedman reminded his readers that the “china shop rule” applies; “if you break, you own it”. The US broke it. Now the bill is due and we are delinquent in our payment.
The flow of refugees out of Iraq has its roots in the First Gulf War when Iraqi Christians, previously protected by Saddaam Hussein began to be seen as agents of the US and were forced by persecution to flee. Since then nearly 2 million refugees have fled Iraq for Syria and Jordan, two of the poorest countries in the region, in order to escape the violence. Exact numbers are hard to determine as the refugees do not have legal status in either country and cannot legally hold jobs and therefore are reluctant to make their presence known.
Initially the new arrivals were what Jordanians call “Mercedes Refugees”. These were wealthy businessmen and former Baathists who drove up the price of real estate by buying large houses in new developments in West Amman. The surge in refugees following the bombing of the Shiite shrine in Sammara and the resulting outbreak of civil war included the middle and lower classes. These people are now running out of money since they are unable to support themselves. They have no viable options. They can’t go back to Iraq because of the violence; they can’t remain in Jordan because they have no way to support themselves and they can’t go else ware because, with some exceptions, no one will accept them.
The most vulnerable are those who have worked with the US occupation force and with international NGO’s. The US has promised to admit 12000 of these people this year, but to date has admitted only 1700. One small city in Norway has admitted more Iraqis than the entire US. If the rest of the US had resettled as many Iraqis per capita as my small state of Idaho, the US would have met its goal.
When the US invaded Iraq in 2003, NY Times columnist Tom Friedman reminded his readers that the “china shop rule” applies; “if you break, you own it”. The US broke it. Now the bill is due and we are delinquent in our payment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)