American logic - an oxymoron?

Former Vice President Al Gore’s most recent book “The Assault on Reason” bemoans the fact that reasoned discourse has been replaced by emotional and ideological responses that are encouraged by mass media and 10 second sound bites. Although many reviewers have suggested that he is making much adieu about nothing and is ignoring the role of emotion in making sound judgments, a look at US Middle East policies leads one to conclude that that he may have a good point. Some examples quickly come to mind.

Support democracy in the Middle East while implementing policies that enrage the general population and expect that they will elect governments that are friendly to the US. (A good example is here)
Support a Shia government in Iraq and at the same time oppose influence and involvement by Shia Iran
Give millions of dollars of weapons to Saudi Arabia and at the same time accuse them of undermining US efforts in Iraq
Encourage a Sunni barrier around the “Shiite Crescent” and expect that there won’t be sectarian rivalry
Support Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory and expect that Palestinians will peacefully accept the status quo
Threaten Iran with sanctions, nuclear attack and regime change and expect that talks will encourage them to help the US out of the mess in Iraq
Isolate and starve Palestinians in Gaza and expect that they will blame Hamas rather than the US/Israel (A story about Hamas’s approach in Gaza is here)
Encourage Israel to bomb Lebanon and kill over 1000 civilians and expect that the Lebanese will blame Hezbollah rather than the US/Israel
Exclude Hamas from peace negotiations and expect that any agreement would be supported by the majority of Palestinians who elected them to office

Maybe American logic is an oxymoron.

Living in a bubble

With respect to what is going on in Palestine, most Israelis “live in a bubble”; preoccupied with living their everyday lives in a modern advanced society. They either don’t know or choose to ignore what is going on right next door less than twenty miles away. For them the West Bank might just as well be Zimbabwe. Few have ever been to the West Bank. They think that “It is much too dangerous”. I have been there many times and no longer think twice about traveling there. Those Israeli Jews living in the upscale West Bank settlement of Maale Adumim can commute to work on the settler road and never have to see an Arab and don’t even have to look at the separation wall. In this area it is being faced with sandstone on the Jewish side so that it blends into the landscape. My Jewish friends are shocked when they hear that I have stayed in Arab East Jerusalem. An Israeli Jew said to me that if you blindfolded an Jew from West Jerusalem or Tel Aviv and took them to East Jerusalem, he would be terrified and would think that he was in Jenin or Nablus. An American developer is building condos in East Jerusalem and marketing them to American Jews as being 7 minutes from the Wailing Wall. I think that the buyers will be surprised to find that all of their neighbors are Palestinian Muslims and the Wailing Wall is only 7 minutes away at 4 o’clock in the morning. Others have had similar experiences.

I received this note from an American student at Hebrew University.

“Until I studied at Hebrew University, with mostly American Jewish but also Israeli students, I did not understand just how high the level of fear is among many of Israel's Jewish citizens and American visitors. When I tell many of my fellow students that I stay on the Mount of Olives, a Palestinian neighborhood near campus, their eyes open wide and their faces tighten, as if I'm either crazy or in imminent danger. When I explain that I work in the West Bank, and go there often to visit friends, their jaws drop. Some are notably disapproving of this and would consider me a terrorist sympathizer, or a radical leftist, or tragically naïve. Many, however, are just curious, wanting to know how dangerous it is. The rewarding part for me is meeting the brave few who have begun to ask questions, who have set off, some timidly, others more confidently, on the lonely road to truth, knowing that it will be a very uncomfortable truth. I am coming to appreciate just how difficult a step that is for them, and I am inspired by their willingness to confront their own deep-rooted fears. The role I've been able to play is to gently push them along the way, even when it isn't comfortable for them. Between those few and the zealots who have no conception of Palestinians as human beings are a great number of people who express nicely packaged sentiments about co-existence but are too comfortable or too afraid or both to advocate for any real change. It reminds me of reading Dr. King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail in which he responds to a group of clergymen who had cautioned against what they considered provocative activity.One American woman, with whom I was studying, listed off a dozen or so organizations dealing with things like Arab-Jewish coexistence and reconciliation that she was involved in. When I mentioned that my organization supports Palestinians who engage in nonviolent resistance she looked at me warily. She began to inquire about my experiences with Palestinians. "What is it they want?", "Along with rights, do they have a sense of responsibilities?" I responded by explaining that their sense of responsibility to one another and to their guests, under harsh conditions, is more than admirable. I knew this wasn't what she was looking for.”Israel and its friends abroad need to start asking themselves about their responsibilities to Palestine, instead of always about the Palestinian's responsibilities to Israel. Under the current status quo the responsibility of the Palestinians to Israel is that of African-Americans to Jim Crow and of non-white South Africans to apartheid. None. The Palestinian's responsibility is to engage in a struggle that respects common humanity and seeks to dismantle the current state and replace it with one in which Israelis and Palestinians are not cast into the roles of oppressor and oppressed. The responsibility of Israelis is to stand with them in that struggle.”

Perspective on Iran

In May, my wife and I were privileged to be able to be able to spend two weeks in the Islamic Republic of Iran. We were able to have conversations with ordinary Iranians at a school, a madrassa, in a home, in parks and on the street. The one thing that you realize right away upon arriving in Iran is that “you are not in the Arab World anymore Dorothy”. Iranians make it very clear that they are Persians with a long history of advanced civilization. This is immediately apparent when one engages with the women. In the Arab World women tend to be very conservative in their dress and reticent in their behavior. This is true even in Israel, Palestine and Jordan where there is no government dress mandate but where behavior is more influenced by religious, family and cultural norms. In Iran, although the government mandates “Islamic dress”, the women “push the envelope” in terms of dress, readily initiate discussions with men and make up more than half of university students and more than half of the work force. They are leaders of organizations involved with human rights, women’s rights and freedom of the press and expression.
This is a very young society with more than 70% of the population under the age of 35. This segment of the population is restless under the strictures of the authoritarian Islamic government of the mullahs. Although the Islamic government spawned by the revolution has changed a lot in the past 30 years, the young population is pushing for still more change. It is clear, however, that this change must originate from Iranians. As one person said to me, “The last thing that we need is another revolution. It would set us back thirty years. Change will come, but it must come from within Iran”. Iran has a long sad history of exploitation by western countries. Any government that is seen as a creation or puppet of the west would have no legitimacy and would not be accepted by Iranians.
Most Iranians that I talked with were concerned about the current regime’s “totalitarian tendencies”. Complaining about the regime seems to be a national pastime engaged in by everyone from the elites to the man on the street. Everywhere we went we were welcomed by Iranians of all ages, surprised and happy to see Americans in their country. In general Iranians admire and respect America for all that it has accomplished and for the values that it advocates. They do comment that in recent years America seems to have lost its way. In a discussion that I had with an Iranian about how Iranians seem to separate their disagreement with the American government’s Middle East policies from their feelings about ordinary Americans. He said “That is true, but it may change. You are a democracy and in a democracy the people are responsible for their government”.
In my opinion and experience, the US has much more in common with Iran, an historic ally in the region, than we do with many of the other authoritarian regimes in the region that we currently support. Our experience may be best described by a quote from Tony Wheeler’s book Badlands after his visit to Iran. “Wander through any park full of picnicking Persians, endure another barrage of welcomes and accept another glass or two of tea and you begin to realize that these are not the rabid extremists some segments of the Western media would have us believe.”

Peace not apartheid

Recently former President Jimmy Carter attracted a lot of criticism in the west, particularly the US, for language in his book Palestine: Peace not Apartheid which linked the behavior of Israel to the white supremacist state of South Africa. Although he said that he was merely trying to provoke discussion and not make a comparison, the message was clear. Now the debate about the nature of a Jewish state in Palestine has surfaced again within Israel. A law allocating sales of government land to Jews only has begun the legislative process with what appears overwhelming support by politicians. (For more details, click here.) Many Israeli opinion leaders are questioning whether this type of legislation foretells a racist Jewish state in Palestine. (For a Haaretz editorial on this, click here) You will note from the comments on these two articles, this behavior seems to have a lot of support within the Israeli public. As the prospect of a single state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict gains more credibility this debate will continue to grow. Award winning author Ghadi Karmi's new book Married to Another Man: Israel's Dilemma in Palestine will increase the discussion.

Answering the questions

Here is a letter that I have written to those involved in advocating for a solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Dear friends:
There has been much talk in recent months about a vision for a “two state solution” to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Those calling for a two state vision, whether they are Condoleezza Rice, other governments, Israeli Peace advocates or western NGO’s have an obligation to describe their vision. In my opinion any two state vision needs to address these questions.
1. Does the vision provide for a viable Palestinian state living alongside a secure Israeli state?
2. How will this vision deal with the refugees from the 1948 and 1967 wars?
3. Is the vision politically acceptable to both the Palestinians and the Israelis?
If they cannot answer these questions, they have no vision.
I have been engaged with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict for a number of years. I used to think that the “two state solution” provided the best opportunity for a resolution to the conflict. Two years ago, I began to have doubts. After my most recent visit to this part of the world this spring, I have reluctantly concluded that a “two state solution” is no longer possible. As is common in the region, events on the ground have outrun the political process. Over the past 15 years, the Israeli government has tried to establish “facts on the ground” that preclude a “two state solution” and they have succeeded. With 500,000 Jewish settlers living east of the green line, a complete loss of hope and faith in the Palestinian community and a hardening of attitudes in the Israeli polity, there is no longer a “two state solution” that is politically possible. The “single state solution” remains the only alternative to continuing suffering for all parties. All parties involved in searching for a solution need to recognize the futility of the “two state solution” and deal with questions about a single state. The question to be answered now is “What will be the nature of the single state?” Will it be a secular state with equal rights for all in which everyone practices their own religion? Will it be an apartheid state in which one group isolates and oppresses another? Will it be a state which is ethnically cleansed of one group for the benefit of another? We need to shift to a mode of considering how we can best mitigate the negative consequences of such an outcome. We can advocate for one state with equal rights for all, but we need to be prepared to deal with the most likely outcome, the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. The first requirement for solving a problem is to recognize the brutal reality

More strange bed fellows

The Middle East is a part of the world where many odd alliances appear. One is never sure who is allied with whom and whatever one thinks may all change tomorrow. After George Bush’s State of the Union speech in which he declared Iran part of the “Axis of Evil” and after the well documented Department of Defense plans for war with Iran it became clear that the US government considered Iran an arch enemy. Ongoing saber rattling and deployment of forces were designed to intimidate the Iranian government. (For the latest episode, click here.) We now seem to have a new ally in our efforts to intimidate Iran and perhaps an ally in any war effort with the Islamic Republic. Our old friends at Al Quada have also decided that Iran is an enemy. They have declared that unless Iran ceases their support for the Iraqi government they will begin attacks against Iran. (For this story, click here) Since the US Armed Forces are over stretched in Iraq, perhaps they could use the help of Osama bin Laden in any military adventure against Iran. We should, however, think about the unintended consequences of supporting the objectives of Al Quada in the Middle East. As one of my friend said to me after a presentation on my trip to Iran “I don’t agree with everything you said, but you made me think”. Thinking is good. Our government should try it some time. It might help.

Supporting Terrorists

There are several defining events in the history of US-Iranian relations. These include the CIA overthrow of the democratically elected government of Mohammed Mossedegh, the US support of the oppressive regime of the Shah, the attack on the US embassy and the subsequent hostage crisis and US support of Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. One can argue about the level of the US support for Iraq during the war, but this conflict which resulted in the deaths of 1mm Iranians shapes much of the Iranian worldview. Murals of the martyrs (heroes) of this war are everywhere in Tehran. Another result of the memory of this conflict is that there is only one group more unpopular in Iran than the “Zionist regime” in Israel. This unpopular group is the Mujahedeen al-Khalq Organization (MKO) or People’s Mujahedeen, aka Mujahedeen e Khalq (MEK). This group, with its odd Islamist/Marxist ideology, shared the anti Shah viewpoint of other Iranian groups and participated in the 1979 Islamic revolution. They quickly fell out with the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini and after increasingly militant opposition were forced into exile in France and Iraq. A military wing which advocated overthrow of the Islamic Republic by force was formed in Iraq and became supporters of Sadaam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war. With strong contacts and relationships within Iran, the MKO was able to provide Sadaam with useful intelligence as well as Farsi speaking fighters. This participation in the deaths of so many Iranian young men has made the MKO a hated group both within the Iranian government and among the Iranian people on the street. This animosity has been heightened by MKO terrorist attacks on Iranian civilian targets. The terrorist attacks resulted in the MKO being classified as a “terrorist organization” by the US State Department. The US, however, seemingly looking for another way to increase animosity between the US and Iran has decided to support its own “terrorist organization” in the region. Everybody else has one; why not us? (For this story, click here.) This unusual policy choice may have something to do with US domestic politics as the MKO has considerable support within the ex-pat Iranian community in the US. In the Middle East it sure is hard to figure out who the “good guys” are. Maybe there are no “good guys”.

Border security and unintended consequences

With Congress seemingly unable to reach a compromise on how to deal with immigration reform, we are headed toward more of the same in terms of an extension of current policy. Over the past few years legislation has focused on increasing border security in the name of protecting our borders from immigrants who might perform dastardly deeds such as terrorist attacks or getting a job. This increased border security resulting from manpower, technology and walls has had an effect on cross border migration, but not all of the consequences are intended. The construction of walls in urban areas like San Diego has had the effect of changing the migration routes from the urban routes where undocumented immigrants are more easily apprehended to the desert areas of Arizona and New Mexico which are harder to police and more dangerous for the immigrant to traverse. Because border crossing is now more dangerous and expensive, undocumented immigrants have chosen to stay in the U.S. rather than return to their home countries. In-migration to the U.S. has stayed relatively constant since the early nineties. What has changed is a dramatic drop in out-migration. This discrepancy has resulted in a big increase in the undocumented immigrant population. As Congress addresses this increase by such policies as forcing all 12mm undocumented immigrants to return to their home countries and preventing future immigrants from entering the country, it seems to be neglecting a number of very real considerations and responding to hysterical statements by the anti immigrant crowd. There are moral, practical and economic issues to be considered. Recent surveys show that there are 14mm people living in households headed by undocumented immigrants. Of these, 4mm are American citizens, primarily minor children who are citizens by birth right. If we deport the heads of these households, are we prepared for media pictures of crying children and parents as they are separated, perhaps never to be reunited? (For a real story, click here) From a practical point of view: How will we fill these jobs while they are gone? In the 21st century global economy goods, services and all of the inputs (capital, information, technology, etc.) except labor flow relatively freely across national boundaries. Does a policy of further restricting the flow of labor make sense? The US economy creates 400-500,000 more jobs each year than the native born population can fill. It seems to me that there are several possible solutions to this mismatch of demand and supply.
1. Slower growth to reduce the number of jobs created
2. Export the unfilled jobs overseas
3. Import workers to fill the job demand
Slowing the natural growth rate of the economy and making everybody poorer does not seem like a wise policy either economically or politically. A policy decision to export jobs overseas would result in the high skill and high paid jobs being done by foreigners leaving the low paid jobs for “Americans”. Indians, Chinese and Poles can do the high paid technology jobs; only “Americans” can mow my lawn. If we choose to import workers to fill the job demand the questions are: Will they be documented or undocumented? Will we know who they are and where they are? From a security point of view we would be better served if they were documented. Current proposals would allow high skilled workers to enter legally for 2 years. Isn’t there a disconnect between bringing in highly skilled workers, training them and then sending them home to do the job there. Maybe we should recognize that in a global economy migration “just is” and focus on mitigating the problems resulting from it.

Rolling out the big guns

Over the past few months several UK organizations have been in various stages of approving and implementing boycotts of Israel because of their human rights record during the 40 year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. These organizations include UNISON, a 1.3 million member trade union, Britain's National Union of Journalists and the University and College Union. Although some of the boycotts are largely symbolic some, particularly the UNISON boycott, have the potential to make a difference. The British may being leading on this issue because they can more readily see the parallels between the situation in Israel/Palestine and the situation in apartheid South Africa. A British religious leader who was traveling with me in Israel/Palestine and who was involved in efforts to change the white South African regime commented "This is my first time here. Everything that I saw in South Africa I am seeing here". The Jewish/Israeli lobby appears to see the potential that this activity has to create a problem for them and they "rolling out the big guns". A coalition has been formed to make the case that these boycotts are a product of antisemitism and bias against Israel. (To see a story on this click here) Leaders in this effort include not only the usual suspects like Harvard professor Allan Dershowitz, but also respected opinion leaders like NY Times columnist Tom Friedman. (For his column entitled "A Boycott Built on Bias" click here) Mr. Friedman makes the point that is wrong to boycott a university, Hebrew University, that is a leader in Israel in providing equal education opportunities to Jews and Arabs alike. He is right in saying that Hebrew University is a leader in this area, but what he either doesn't know or chooses to ignore is that some Arabs are more equal than others. The kind of behavior that the boycott organizers are critical of allows the Israeli Army to make decisions based on "security concerns" that prevent the "less equal" Arabs from taking advantage of this opportunity. (To see stories on this click here and here) The Anti Defamation League has implemented a major ad campaign to fight the boycotts. (To see this click here) They make the point that the boycott organizers are singling out Israel and ignoring the human rights behavior of such countries as Zimbabwe, Sudan, Iran and Venezuela. It seems to me a little odd that an organization supportive of Israel would include Israel in this list of pillars of the human rights community. I guess politics makes strange bed fellows.

Sweet and Sour

During a visit to St Anne’s Cathedral, a Catholic Church in the Muslim quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, I asked Father Michel La Voie, a French Canadian Priest, what it was like to live in the Old City and Israel. He responded in his soft spoken tones “It is like Chinese food, sweet and sour. It gets a little heavy after awhile” Similar sentiments are expressed by Pastor Russ Siler, Pastor of the English speaking Lutheran congregation in the Old City of Jerusalem who is now leaving after four years in the city.

9 June 2007

It is almost as if I am returning to school after a summer break, preparing to write the obligatory essay on what I did over my vacation. Save for the fact that this term stretched out for four years, it was truly a break—a world apart from that which most people in my home country experience on a daily basis. Here is a world in which one is not free to travel where one wishes. It is a place not of freedom, but of restrictions—not of liberty, but of oppression. As my wife Anne and I prepare to leave this land which has been our home these past few years, I wish that I could package this segment of our lives and make it available to you in such a way that you could see, feel, hear, smell, taste, and touch the things we have. Then you would be as overwhelmed by joy, sadness, elation, and despair as we are. But I cannot. All I believe I am capable of doing is telling you what I will miss and what I will not miss as we return to the United States.
I will miss the beautiful homes left to us from a magnificent past, with their arched windows and ornate porches and high ceilings. I will not miss the piles of rubble and rebar which mark demolished Palestinian homes—more than 15,000 of them since the Occupation began, most on the flimsiest of pretexts by the Israeli army or municipal authority—where I know lie crushed under each one a family's dream of a place of their own.


I will miss the magnificent countryside, littered with rocks and hills of every size and description, and the rugged landscapes that Abraham and Sarah, Hagar and Ishmael, Jesus, Peter, and Andrew hiked through. I will not miss the monstrous Wall, barbed wire fences, dirt mounds across unpaved village access roads, and ugly, prison-fortress-like crossings and terminals, ubiquitous in their barbarity. I won't miss them, because Israel presents them to you as dire necessities for their security, indeed, for their very survival, while we see the truth of Israel's reality which is to carve up Palestine into ever tinier clusters of humanity whose religious, cultural, societal ties are so slashed into disconnected ribbons that a nation is impossible.
I will miss ever so much the innocent smiles and playful giggles on the faces of the children—Israeli, Palestinian, international—all over the place. I will not miss the heaviness dragging on my heart like an anchor, as I realize how very soon that playful innocence will fall victim to fear and hatred, to bigotry and racism. I will miss the steady stream of visitors—vacationers, pilgrims, seekers, tourists—that arrive like clockwork at our 9:00 am Sunday worship in St. John's Chapel.
I will miss their delight at being in the Holy Land—many of them first-timers, but many more veterans of the land—their eagerness to meet Palestinian Christians whom, they soon learn, have been a vital presence here for the entire life of the Christian Church, and their openness to listen to narratives of the deadly conflict that the rest of the world seldom hears. I will not miss the busloads of tourists whose guide takes them to Bethlehem for a quick peek at the Church of the Nativity, then hurries them back to Jerusalem, because, "It's dangerous in the West Bank."
I will miss the witness of the courageous Israeli and Jewish women and men—Machsom Watch, Rabbis for Human Rights, Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, Women in Black, and all the others—as they tirelessly seek to stand in solidarity with people who seek justice and to educate those who wonder what unspeakable things are being done in the name of their beloved religion. I will not miss those coarse voices who violently insist—to the detriment of intelligent dialogue, discussion, disagreement, debate, or dissent—that any person who dares to criticize Israeli policy is either self-hating or anti-Semitic.
Perhaps, however, more than anything, I will miss the thousand times a week I hear ahlan wa salan—Welcome—singing out with genuine warmth from face after face of those who are desperately eager to let me know that, regardless of appearance, religion, or nationality, I am their brother. I have no doubt whatsoever that, were one of these persons to be down to his last piece of bread, he would beckon me closer and say, "Come, sit, eat!" What I will never miss are the questions spontaneously emerging from these same warm hearts, "Why does America treat us this way?" "Why do they help Israel oppress us and take our land?" "Will you please tell Mr. Bush that all we want is to be treated fairly; we only want justice." I will not miss these questions because I think they are harsh or prompted by bad intentions, but because I have no answers which will make a whit of difference to my sisters, to my brothers who are so baffled by the way our country treats them.
Some of you have asked what I will do when we return to the States. At this juncture I can only grin broadly and say "Retire!" We do know there are challenges and adventures awaiting us; we just don't know what or where or when. The only certainty in my mind—No. Make that in my heart—is that I will continue to speak up and to speak out. My friends here would understand if I did not. They would softly comfort me, "We know how hard it will be." The problem is that I will not be that easy on myself. I cannot see the tears in my brother's eyes without tasting the salty bitterness in my own mouth. And I cannot swallow the bitter taste; I must open my mouth and let it out! Thank you for your faithful willingness to listen and for your constant support. They have been life-giving! Peace!

Russell O. Siler,
Pastor
English-speaking Congregation Lutheran Church of the Redeemer Jerusalem, Old City thesilers@earthlink.net

On self censorship

Iranians that I talked to during my recent trip to this complex country described the media situation as being very nuanced. Although overt censorship is no longer common, there are "red lines" that media outlets critical of the regime would be wise not to cross if they wish to keep their jobs or stay in business. (For a good description of the situation click here) The meeting that we were scheduled to have with a group of journalists was canceled. Although the actual reason for the cancellation was not completely clear, the best guess was that they did not want to risk being associated with Americans at a time when such association could impact their livelihood. As the article points out the location of the "red line" is not clear and therefore journalists need to be careful and exert a large degree of self censorship with respect to what they say or publish. In the US, however, the location of the "red line" with respect to the Israel/Palestinian conflict is very clear and one crosses the line at one's peril as DePaul University political science professor Norman Finkelstein found out. If you are in academia or the media and dare to cross the line your livelihood will be in peril. (For this story click here) My advice would be: If you are in this position and want to keep your job, exercise a little self censorship.

Do I want my child in this world?

This morning in church the sermon included a poem by Wendell Barry

Manifesto: The Mad Farmer Liberation Front.

Love the quick profit, the annual raise,vacation with pay.

Want more of everything ready-made.

Be afraid to know your neighbors and to die.

And you will have a window in your head.

Not even your future will be a mystery any more.

Your mind will be punched in a card and shut away in a little drawer.

When they want you to buy something they will call you.

When they want you to die for profit they will let you know.

So, friends, every day do something that won't compute.

Love the Lord. Love the world.

Work for nothing.

Take all that you have and be poor.

Love someone who does not deserve it.

Denounce the government and embrace the flag.

Hope to live in that free republic for which it stands.

Give your approval to all you cannot understand.

Praise ignorance, for what man has not encountered he has not destroyed.

Ask the questions that have no answers. Invest in the millennium.

Plant sequoias.

Say that your main crop is the forest that you did not plant, that you will not live to harvest.

Say that the leaves are harvested when they have rotted into the mold.

Call that profit. Prophesy such returns.

Put your faith in the two inches of humus that will build under the trees every thousand years.

Listen to carrion - put your ear close, and hear the faint chattering of the songs that are to come.

Expect the end of the world.

Laugh.Laughter is immeasurable.

Be joyful though you have considered all the facts.

So long as women do not go cheap for power, please women more than men.

Ask yourself: Will this satisfy a woman satisfied to bear a child?

Will this disturb the sleep of a woman near to giving birth?

Go with your love to the fields.

Lie down in the shade.

Rest your head in her lap.

Swear allegiance to what is nighest your thoughts.

As soon as the generals and the politicos can predict the motions of your mind, lose it.

Leave it as a sign to mark the false trail, the way you didn't go.

Be like the fox who makes more tracks than necessary, some in the wrong direction.

Practice resurrection.

The line that resonated with me was "Will this disturb the sleep of a woman near to giving birth?" It reminded me of a conversation I had with a young Palestinian woman on the West Bank. She said "My husband and I are not sure that we want to have children. Is it fair to bring another life into our existence?" We should be concerned if we are creating a world into which women are afraid to bring to life. This is a road to death not resurrection. Perhaps one of the criteria for government policy should be: How will women feel about bringing new life into the world we are creating?

The danger of soft power

Prior to our recent trip to Iran, my wife and I had many people question our sanity in going to such a dangerous place. We heard comments like “Why would you go there?” and “We will pray for you”. We were also warned in Iran of the dangers, if somewhat tongue in cheek. One afternoon we went to a tea house at the end of one of the beautiful old bridges in Isfahan. As I was talking to the Iranian at the reception desk, he asked where I was from. When I said “America”, he responded with a grin “American. Why would you come here? Don’t you know all Iranians are terrorists?” As I was leaving the tea house and inquired how much I owed him he responded “You are Americans; you are my guests”. Upon our return to JFK airport in NYC the immigration official, when he saw that we had been to Iran, said “Don’t you know that people disappear all the time in Iran?” In some respects these warnings were accurate. Several Iranian-Americans have been arrested and detained in Iran in the last few months. (To see the story, click here and here) These people have been primarily human rights advocates and activists. We also experienced the efforts of the Iranian government to reduce the contact between American citizens and the Iranian people. Many of our meetings with journalists and women’s rights groups were canceled either by the government or by the groups themselves who were afraid of the repercussions of meeting with Americans. The group following ours had all of their meetings canceled. The reason given by the government is that they are afraid that contact with Americans will lead to a “velvet or soft revolution” such as occurred in the Soviet Union. The government is afraid that by engaging with the young and restless Iranian population Americans could create a non-violent regime change. The US government, however, seems to be on a completely different path and seems to being to doing its best to sustain the unpopular regime. US and international sanctions give the Iranian regime a scapegoat for their bad economic policies. Efforts to undermine the regime with propaganda and collusion with outside opposition groups, who have little support within Iran, give the mullahs an excuse for their repressive policies. US refusal to recognize Iranian rights under the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT), military threats and saber rattling tend to solidify popular support behind the regime. It is these types of policies that have succeeded in keeping Fidel Castro in power in Cuba for 50 years. Some Iranians say that the regime would like to see the US attack Iran as it would unite the population against the “Great Satan”. The greatest danger to the regime, as the regime itself admits, is engagement with Americans. The current government might well fall of its own weight. All Iranians that I talked to wanted this to be a peaceful transition created by Iranians. They said “The last thing we need is another revolution. It would set us back 30 years” and “A new government must not be seen as a creation of the west. If it were seen as sponsored by the US, it would have no legitimacy”. The Islamic regime has gradually moderated since the revolution. As one Iranian said to me “We are going through a difficult time now, but this too will pass. Democracy is not a pill that you take.”

End of the beginning-beginning of the end

This month’s travels to the Middle East, including Israel and Palestine, yielded a view of a situation much worse than I saw last year. The light of hope has gone out of the eyes of West Bank Palestinians. Economic sanctions, the cut off of aid, border closings, the arming of factions and the disruption of communication and travel have resulted in frustration and a loss of hope. Internecine warfare and chaos have added to the despair caused by high unemployment and a collapsing economy. It is becoming increasing clear to me, if not to our political leaders, that a negotiated two state solution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is unrealistic. For there to be a negotiated settlement there must be overlap between the positions of the parties. As the Israeli rejection of the Arab peace proposal indicates, there is a large gap between the minimum that the Palestinians would accept and the most that the Israelis would offer. Israelis are not going to give up modern settlements on the West Bank, like Maal Adumim, which are made suburbs of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem by bypass roads. These settlements are home to 500,000 Israeli Jews. Years of weak and even incompetent leadership in the US, Israel and the Palestinian Authority have brought us to this point. They have been unwilling or unable to make the difficult political decisions required for a solution. We are at the end of the peace process and the beginning of the road to apartheid and ethnic cleansing. (Jeff Halper, Coordinator of Israeli Committee Against Housing Demolition makes this point here) Heading down this road, we are in danger of arriving at out-right war. The Palestinian/American lawyer who is the legal advisor to the Palestinian Authority told the story of a conversation that he had on the streets of Ramallah on the West Bank. After he had led a team of Palestinian Authority lawyers at the International Court of Justice who won their case and had the ICJ declare the Israeli separation wall/fence illegal, he was told “You may be happy, but it will have no effect. The US and Israel will ignore it and the rest of the world will go along. No one knows we are here unless we make a noise”. The lawyer said “I knew what he meant”. Sooner or later a Palestinian Israeli citizen, enraged by the death of a sister in childbirth at an Israeli checkpoint or the death of a brother as collateral damage from an Israeli targeted killing will “make a noise” at a coffee shop in Tel Aviv or Haifa. (The novel The Attack by Yasima Khadra explores this scenario.) The resulting Israeli crack down will surface all the fissures in Israeli society and expand the conflict throughout the region. More innocent Israelis, Palestinians and maybe Americans will die. But perhaps there are no innocent Israelis, Palestinians or Americans. In a discussion with an Iranian about the fact that Iranians don’t hold the actions of the US government against individual Americans he said “This may change. You are a democracy and in a democracy, you are responsible for your government.” Israel, the Palestinian Territories and America are democracies. In a democracy you get the government that you deserve.

Welcome to my country

As an American visitor in Iran who is obviously not Iranian, one is frequently approached in public places with the question “Where are you from?” When you say America”, the usual response is “Welcome to my country” or ‘Welcome to my city”. This response of ownership reflects the strong nationalism of Iranians and their great pride in their ancient civilization, much of it dating from the 2nd millennium BCE. I met a young lady in Persopolis, a palace complex dating to 500 BCE, who was in tears. When asked why she was crying, she responded that “I am so sad that that my country has fallen from where it was to where it is today.” This pride in their country’s historical importance manifests itself when the man in the street supports the efforts of a relatively unpopular regime to stand up to the west and insist that their rights under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) be respected. Given this popular support it is unlikely that US efforts to force Iran to suspend its nuclear enrichment program will have an impact. The best that the US can hope for is that Iran will live up to its obligations under the NPT and allow effective IAEA inspections to remain in place. The current US sanctions are having little effect. There is some cost to the economy since international credit card transactions have to be processed through Dubai, some US patented drugs hard to obtain and spare parts for US made equipment are unavailable except at a very high cost. Everything needs a middleman. (Our guides mother and mother in law both called to see if he had survived our flight from Tehran to Yazd. They said “Our planes are not safe.”) There is also a cost to the US from the sanctions. Iran is building strong business relationships with French, Russian, Chinese and Arab state business entities. These business relationships will be hard to overcome when relations are normalized and Iranians fully expect that to happen. When there was pressure to sell the US embassy property to pay compensation to the victims of the Iran Air flight shot down by the USS Vincennes, President Amadenijad refused to allow it. He said “The property belongs to the US and they will want it back when they return”. Currently the former embassy is a now closed museum of American “crimes”. Current US policy of attempting to unilaterally isolate Iran will probably have the same effect as US Cuba policy and keep the current regime in place for a long time. We would be better served by engaging this proud nation with its moderate Muslim population and with its potential to be an ally in stabilizing this troubled part of the world.

Remaining in Power

Two weeks of traveling in Iran have it clear that this beautiful and ancient country is a land of many contradictions. The three identities that Iranians hold (Persian, Islamic and modern) are constantly in conflict and shape the views of average Iranians on all the issues that face them. Any government in this country must deal with this reality. In addition, with 75% of the population under 30, there is constant pressure to provide a future based on economic and political opportunity. To Supreme Leader Khamanei it must feel like trying to raise 50 million teenagers. Like any politician Khamanei and President Amedinijad are primarily interested in remaining in power. When the Islamic republic was founded with the overthrow of the Shah, it was an idealistic state. The leaders of the revolution had ambitions of spreading their form of government throughout the Middle East. They set out to suppress all internal opposition, killing and imprisoning members of the Shah’s repressive regime as well as any others whom they saw as potential opposition. Since then a strong dose of political reality has significantly moderated the regime. Social restrictions have loosened. People talk openly about the failures of the regime. They remain, however, reluctant to talk “on the record”. Even the monarchists feel free to express their point of view. The media is not as free as many would like it to be. To deviate too far from the government line risks having your company be shut down. For this reason the media tends to practice self censorship much like the US media practices with respect to the Israel/Palestine issue. Western news, however, is readily available on satellite and on the internet. There is some internet control. In my experience, it is primarily focused on internal Iranian blog sites and sites such as Victoria’s Secret which are deemed un-Islamic. Given the easy availability of western media outlets,it is not clear to me that the US propaganda station is a useful enterprise. It in fact may help the regime by allowing them to accuse the US of interference and give them an excuse to crack down on satellite TV. This is similar to the excuses given for blocking Al Jazeera in the US. (Some Iranians believe that the government bureaucrats are in cahoots with the people that sell satellite antennas. The government confiscates the antenna so that people have to buy a new one.) Some even argue that the regime is helped by encouraging more western TV. Conservative Iranians look at the lifestyle portrayed by US TV programming and conclude that “we don’t want to be like that”. Trying to deal with this educated, informed and demanding population is a daunting task for the leadership. In order to remain in power they must cope with many constituencies and go to great lengths to insure that opposition does not become too organized and motivated. To this end they even maintain two armies, the regular army and the regime loyal Revolutionary Guard) in order to minimize the chance of a military coup. With these dynamics in mind it is important that whenever Americans listen to events in Iran that we remember that much of it is for domestic consumption. Iranian politicians are acting like politicians everywhere-trying to remain in power.

Message for the Supreme Leader

Much has been made in the Iranian blogs the last few weeks about the effort by the Iranian government to crack down on “unIslamic dress” in order to encourage more conservative dress among Iran’s youthful population. (75% of Iranians are under 30) The “fashion police” have been out on the streets peering into cars and stopping women on the streets to chastise them and some times arrest them for “bad hejab”. (I have not seen any of this activity) Our guide said that his wife felt the need to purchase a new manteau that would cover more of her curves. Yesterday my wife, Marcia, decided that she needed to purchase a second manteau. I am not sure whether this reflected the need to make more of a fashion statement or the practical need to be able to get one washed after wearing it for a week. Buying a manteau is a bit like buying a Model T Ford. For the most part you can get any color that you want as long as it is black. In order to accomplish this mission, we asked the young lady at the hotel desk where to go buy a manteau. This was the wrong question. I should have asked “Where does your mother go to buy a manteau?” After a hair raising cab ride through the traffic mayhem that is part of the adventure of Iran and the near death experience of crossing the street (I find it useful to find an Iranian woman covered in a complete abaya and stick close to her. The men are much too agile.) we arrived at the mall. This was Thurday night, the Saturday night of the Iranian workweek, and the mall was filled with young people “cruising” to hook up with members of the opposite sex. The girls were dressed in jeans and manteaus that had to have been painted on. The XXL size in the shops was about a 10. After 30 minutes in this mall, I have a message for the Supreme Leader: In your battle to improve Islamic dress in Iran, you are losing.

PS: Our cab driver finally understood the problem and took us where his wife shops. Mission accomplished.

View from Tehran

Tehran is a clean, bustling city of:
Traffic mayhem,
Parks
High end malls
Warm hospitable nationalistic people
Beautiful women in hejab measured in inches and manteus that barely reach the thigh
Pictures of martyrs
Death to America murals
Ancient artifacts
Snow covered peaks
Palaces
Bazaars
Wealth and Poverty

Voices from Gaza

Zakeya Shabit, grandmother, patient at Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza: “During our Ramadan feast, the Israelis shot at a school near our home. Four of our bed-rooms and our kitchen were demolished. My brother was killed. My nephew was shot at her neck. 6 donums of our land were uprooted. We call God to interfere.”

Hanniyeh, nurse at Al Ahli Arab Hospital: “During an invasion we cannot reach our kitchen to get water, because it is near the area of shooting. They shoot at anything that is moving. So the family gathers in the center of the house to have as many protecting walls around them as possible. Anyone can be killed at any time. We started taking shifts in sleeping, because sometimes they knock at the door at night, and if we do not hear them they may shoot the whole house. Even if I smile, my heart is suffering! May God help us!”

Imm Alla’, patient at Al Ahli Arab Hospital: “I want to understand one thing: Are human beings divided into classes? Are not all people human beings? Are Moslems, Christians and Jews different from each other? Are we as Moslems second class human beings? Why should my mother have to grieve and cry? Would you agree if someone was to take you out of your house? Kill your son? Take your water? Bulldoze your trees, your land, your house? Where are our human rights???”

Imm Ahmed, patient at Al Ahli Hospital: “We cannot continue to live in fear our whole life. Fear has become a common feeling. When the airplanes are bombing we prepare ourselves for death.” “We are the living dead! Better to die than to live like this. Enough! They have taken the land and we are left and forgotten in Gaza. There is no hope! We only want to live in peace!”
“The psychological pressure causes headaches and affects our eyes. We are all psychologically ill. I am here in the hospital because of the situation. I believe my illness is a direct result of the psychological impact of the shelling and bombings. We cannot take it any more!”

Dr. Maher Ayyad, medical director at Al Ahli Arab Hospital: “The voice of peace is weak in this land. It should be strong and the whole world should encourage the people of this land to make peace. People should be more open and believe that this is the land of God which was given to all of us. We can live together. They cannot dismiss all Palestinians, and we cannot dismiss all Israelis. Let us live and grow together. Killing will not solve anything! All who draw the sword will die by the sword! Let our children grow in a better atmosphere! Let us make this land the Holy Land!”

Suhaila Tarazi, director of Al Ahli Arab Hospital: “The Arab Christian can be a mediator between the Jews and the Muslims, the West and the Middle East. For us Christianity is peace and love for everybody. But we fear that Jesus will not find one single follower when he comes back. The Church should help the Christians to stay here. This is the land of Christianity and all His followers. Christians should be here to help and give a good example of Christianity.”
“But where is the conscience of the true Christians in this world? It is very dark in here. I do not see any hope. The situation has deteriorated in a way I cannot describe. In a week’s time 48 people were killed.”
“Israel has the right to security. But it does not have the right to excessive weapons. They are empowering Hamas.”
“It seems that Israelis have no sense of guilt about what they have done to the Palestinians. The Jews have suffered so much and I feel with them. But why do they victimize other people? Will not any person who was once poor remember the value of a piece of bread and give it to the one in need?”

Time is Running Out

Last month King Abdullah of Jordan spoke in front of the US Congress. His message was essentially that time is running out for a peaceful settlement of the Israeli – Palestinian conflict. Progress must be made soon on finding a just solution or the situation will begin to go downhill rapidly. Congress in its wisdom promptly ignored him. Perhaps they felt that he should be satisfied with the opportunity to speak in front of this august body of pontificating politicians. In this respect Congress is following in the footsteps of President Bush who completely ignored the Iraq Study Group when they said that the road to peace in the Middle East runs through Jerusalem. As I have wandered around the Middle East for the past week and a half, most of the conversations that I have had would confirm King Abdullah’s opinion - time is running out. As the economic, political and security situation continues to deteriorate under occupation and economic boycott in the West Bank and Gaza, the frustration, loss of hope and anger within the Palestinian population is growing daily. Stories of nine hour trips from Nablus to Jerusalem (an 1 ½ hour trip without check points) in which only westerners get to finish the trip and Palestinians must turn back are frequent. At the King Hussein Jordan/Israel border crossing I met a young doctor from Columbus, Ohio, who was on her way to see her parents in Ramallah. She said that it was entirely possible that she would be denied entry altogether. As I proceeded through the 2 hour labyrinth of Israeli border security, she disappeared. I have no idea what happened to her. A Palestinian shopkeeper who I know in Bethlehem said “2008 will tell. The wall/security fence will be completed. The Palestinian Territory will be divided into Bandustans. Everything will be more difficult. We shall see; I am not optimistic”. My Palestinian driver in Jordan feels that it is already too late. He says “There will be no peace. Both people will continue to suffer”. An Israeli Palestinian said “If something doesn’t change soon Israel/Palestine will become another Iraq”. This scenario is Israel’s worst nightmare. Twenty percent of the Israeli population is Arab Palestinian. To date they have largely confined their protests to the political arena. Should the palpable anger that was in the voice of this young man boil over into violence, he may well be right. When a German journalist who has been here for over 2 years was asked if he saw any hopeful signs, he paused for a long time and then said “Only the patience and hope of the Palestinian people gives me any optimism”. Palestinians continue to use the word “hope”, but there is no longer the light in their eyes. Time is running out!