Israel & the Middle East @ime16-blog - Tumblr Blog

Israel promoted an Arab police officer to deputy commissioner, the highest rank obtained by a Muslim in the nation.

With all types of stories like this, it’s kind of difficult to know whether what has happened is praiseworthy or the fact that this hasn’t happened before is worth criticizing. However, it does look like Israel is working to make things better - they are making “new and improved” police stations in Arab neighborhoods and towns and they are commissioning “hundreds of new Arab police officers”.The acknowledgement from the Internal Security Minister: "Until this day, we have not provided the Arab sector with equal law enforcement capabilities" also makes me hopeful. I think it’s also encouraging that Israel is charging Arabs with improving the policing in Arab areas; they are more likely to understand the needs of their communities.

The Israeli prime minister's office says Israel will

This article is very short and doesn’t provide a lot of details on this plan... but it sounds like Israel is just trying to find some sort of euphemism for what they are doing in the West Bank. The fact that they are investing time and money into these structures shows that they have no intention of getting out of the West Bank anytime soon, as does the quote about the areas they are building in being “part of Israel in any future agreement”. I would be interested in knowing how much new land will be developed and the percentage of the buildings that will be new - “small” is such a vague word, but I feel like this does not bode well for Israeli-Palestinian relations in the West Bank regardless.

A far-right Israeli politician has been admonished by his party and roundly condemned by commentators after suggesting Jewish and Arab women should be separated in maternity wards in apartheid-style segregation.

Although it would be ridiculous to claim that the condemnation of this politician’s racist remarks means that the issue of prejudice in Israel is resolved, I find it heartening that the remarks were so widely condemned. Especially since the criticism came both from inside and outside Smotrich’s party. While I can agree that Smotrich’s remarks were prejudiced and deserving of criticism, I can’t quite get behind the people calling him a “Judeo-Nazi”. Racist, sure, but it’s going overboard to compare him to a Nazi and it seems particularly insensitive given that he is Jewish. Can’t criticism be made without this type of extreme and inaccurate comparison? I feel that such superlatives only undermine the person’s argument by making it seem irrational.

thoughtshavei-blog

Israel’s War on the Arabic Language

I am surprised at Israel’s apparent lack of concern with learning and understanding the Arabic language. Being in the Middle East, with neighboring Muslim countries for the sake of bettering relations with other countries and enabling diplomacy Israel should take a greater interest in encouraging citizens to learn Arabic. Israel’s refusal to include the Arabic language in public places, despite a 2002 court ruling that all signs should be in Arabic as well, could be seen as similar to the United States reaction in incorporating Spanish. Some Americans are vehemently opposed to learning Spanish, believing that English is American. Israel exclusive of the Arabic language is slightly different though in that they are court mandated to post in the Arabic language. Israel is also forcing Arab litigants who don’t understand Hebrew to pay for translation costs. Additionally, public institutions such as hospitals, universities, transportation, the post office, and government ministries don’t translate Hebrew into Arabic. This practice is highly discriminatory against Israeli Arabs and shouldn’t be tolerated in a democracy.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/04/israel-war-arabic-language-160404102325547.html

loudlytinyflower-blog

I’m thankful that you shared this article, and encourge others to read through it. I agree with you that the exclusion of signs in Arabic, especially in public areas, should not be tolerated. However, the only legal action that has been taken against this is human rights lawyers in Tel Aviv threatening the city with a contempt of court action. Surprisingly, this is happening 14 years after the legislation was passed and not sooner. In addition, I found it interesting that last week the Palestinian members of the Knesset switched to speaking Arabic. As you mentioned, the parliament provides no translation services and most of the Jewish members, “like the rest of the Jewish population,” do not understand Arabic. The point was made in the article that they had sacrificed their right to speak Arabic for the sake of the Jewish members understanding, however they weren’t being listened to anyways. Although I think the English/Spanish and Hebrew/Arabic do have their differences, I really thought that there was a strong parallel when the article reported that “The hostile attitude of offficial bodies, including municipalities like Tel Aviv, encourages a general climate that treats Arabic as an alien and despised language,” said Jamal Zahalka, a Palestinian member of the Israeli Knesset who is currently suspended from the parliament.

ime16-blog

Such a fascinating article... It’s always interesting to see how Israeli/Palestinian conflict reaches into all areas of life. I was really interested in the fact that Arabic as an official language is something left over from the British mandate period, since I feel like a fair amount of the legitimacy of the claims that Arabic needs to be included on the signs stems from the language’s official status. However, I think the inclusion or exclusion of Arabic on signs is less a matter of legality or even a matter of whether a large enough percentage of the population speaks the language to warrant its inclusion. I see it more as a symbolic gesture - by excluding Arabic, the message that Arabs themselves are not wanted is sent. I think the inclusion of English on signs supports this point, along with the slightly ridiculous excuse that including Arabic would mean “too much text” on signs. If they can find room for English on the signs, surely they can find room for Arabic, especially since it’s an official, widely-used language in the country. Nine times more people have Arabic as their first language than have English as their first language in Israel. (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4335235,00.html)

dril9-blog

Shipments of cement for large international projects will continue, body that oversees Israel's civilian policy towards Gaza says in statement, accuses Hamas of 'flagrant deviation from the agreements.'

This article does not go into much depth as the curtailment of shipments happened extremely recently, but if Israel’s allegations are right then it serves as another example of how the leadership in Gaza ignores the needs of common citizens. Given that the cement was supposed to help rebuild homes that were destroyed in the 2014 conflict, taking actions to divert the cement to other projects clearly prevents citizens from having a basic standard of living. If true, such actions by Hamas leadership in Gaza are clear examples of exploiting citizens and should be condemned. However, Israel’s across-the-board freeze on cement is also problematic, as it makes it impossible for individuals who were using the building materials for their intended purpose (rebuilding destroyed homes) to carry out their work. This across-the-board freeze also hurts civilians whose homes were destroyed, and it seems to be a needlessly blunt response to the ongoing theft of the cement.

ime16-blog

I agree with your assessment of this situation. Hamas’ harmful actions indicate that they’re out of touch with (or simply don’t care) what the citizens living in the Gaza Strip need or want. I also agree that stopping all shipments seems like a bit of an overreaction. From the article, it doesn’t really seem that Israel is taking steps to get the shipments back on track. I wonder if the project will be written off as a failure and not continued. I certainly hope not, since the shipments were going to rebuild homes destroyed in the 2014 conflict.I feel like there must be some way to ensure that Hamas does not have the chance to steal the cement.

When the Israeli company left the West Bank amid international pressure, it left behind hundreds of Palestinian employees, too. SodaStream's CEO lays blame for the lost jobs with Israel's government.

For me, the main takeaway from this article was a new understanding of just how complicated the issue of Israeli businesses in the occupied territories really is. The point that the Israeli occupation has ruined the Palestinian economy is valid, but at this point, it seems like identifying the source of the problem isn’t enough, because the solution to the problem is no longer simple. The occupation has gone on long enough and the companies are deeply entrenched enough that picking up and leaving just doesn’t solve the issue. Even the solution of allowing Palestinians to work is Israel doesn’t really seem all that beneficial - not with a two hour commute each way. The article does a good job of putting a human face on the issue - it even shows how the regular Palestinian can benefit from Israeli companies being in the occupied territories (e.g. they offer higher wages). Coming away from reading this article, I don’t really have an opinion on what the best way to solve this issue would be, just a better understanding of its nuances.

Israel's parliament gave initial approval on Monday to a bill that would allow members to suspend from the legislature colleagues whom they believe have supported Israel's enemies or have acted against the state.

The article title is a little misleading - the law doesn’t say it will suspend Arab legislators, legislators who parliament believes “have supported Israel’s enemies or have acted against the state.” Given how fraught relations between Arab and Jewish Israelis often are, Arab Israeli legislators are probably right to suspect this law of targeting them, as it’s easy to see how their stances might be interpreted as anti-Israel. (The article shows that this kind of interpretation happened even without the law.) But on the surface, it’s hard to criticize this plan - what country would want those who would harm it in positions of power? I would guess that Israel would be particularly sensitive to this, given its lack of allies in the region and the threats it’s neighboring countries pose to its existence. I think it will come down to how this law is implemented; it looks like it could be walking a fine line between protecting the country and restricting free speech and debate.

Israel criticises the UN Human Rights Council for voting to establish a database of firms doing business in settlements in the occupied West Bank.

I really don’t see the database as a bad thing. The Israeli settlements are already considered illegal under international law; the database is simply in line with this belief. It’s not a new condemnation of what Israel is doing in those disputed territories and it’s debatable whether it can really be called a condemnation at all: it looks like the database would just provide information to people who wanted avoid business with the settlement-linked firms and that the UN is not calling for a boycott of these firms.

As something of a side note, Netanyahu makes a fair point when he calls for the UN to address the “violations of Iran, Syria and North Korea” as well as ISIS, but the existence of what are arguably worse problems doesn’t mean that the issue of the Israeli settlements should be ignored.

“The proposal does not aim to treat unreasonable noise, but to violate the freedom of religion,” the Israel Democracy Institute says about this proposal, and I’m very much inclined to agree. The bill proposed would have banned mosques from using PA systems to announce the call to prayer. An amendment to the failed bill would limit the decibel level the announcement systems could use. The fact that this amendment was only proposed after the total ban lacked support speaks volumes. If the original goal was to “treat unreasonable noise”, the decibel level restriction would probably have been proposed initially. Frankly, I’m glad that the bill couldn’t gain support, because it just seems like another way to drive a wedge between the Muslim and Jewish populations in the area, another (albeit tiny) barrier to peace.

adriennezalien

Textbook Maps

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/08/mcgraw-hill-education-withdraws-textbook-maps-viewed-anti-israel

This article describes why Mcgraw-Hill Education decided to destroy a line of textbooks because of some maps that depict “Palestinian loss of land from 1946 to 2000”. While I think that destroying a lot of already printed books is wasteful, I think it is important for publishers of books, especially text books on the matter, phrase things carefully. I am not anti-Palestinian, but I think the decision to rethink how the information in these books is a good one (even if I don’t think that they should destroy all of them because of a map). As we have talked about in class, there has never been a Palestine. The phrasing might be misleading, maybe looking like at one point there was a state of Palestine. I think we all can agree that many Palestinians have lost their homes and lands due to forced relocations, voluntarily leaving their homes, or being forced to evacuate by Israeli officials. I think it is hard to have an unbiased book on the matter, particularly because the conflict is so heated.

I also found the comment section very interesting. I think it further shows how divided people are on this subject and what they think is important for people to know about this conflict.

ime16-blog

After looking at the map that was printed in the books, I can see why people took issue with it and I can agree that it shouldn’t have been printed. I too, wondered about the decision to destroy the books. Levels of waste aside, I feel like this isn’t the normal way textbook companies proceed when there has been an error in printing. Don’t they often send out pages to paste over the rejected ones? I wonder if the very divisive nature of the subject (which, as you note, the comments section makes abundantly clear!) made McGraw Hill feel that only drastic measures would appease those who were upset about the map. I’d also be interested to learn how the non-map parts of the book that discussed Israel/Palestine dealt with the conflict.

Nearly 30 transgender women strutted down the catwalk in skinny jeans, crop tops and stiletto heels at a Tel Aviv club on Thursday, vying for a chance to enter the first

I don’t know that I think Israel deserves to be overly commended for this, as they are not one of the very first countries to hold such an event - similar pageants have existed in many other countries for several years - but I think it is still worth praising. Though they may not be pioneering in the world of transgender beauty pageants, as the article points out, this level of acceptance makes Israel stand out from other Middle Eastern countries.

Not to keep bringing back the issues that were brought up in the post about the trips to Israel offered to Oscar nominees but... While “pink-washing” is a valid concern, I would argue that publicizing events such as this (which are actually beneficial) promote a better view of Israel in a much better way than, say, essentially paying for some American celebrities to have good opinions of the country.

An Egyptian lawmaker and popular TV talk show host was expelled from parliament Wednesday over a meeting he had with the Israeli ambassador to Egypt.

I feel that this article does two things. First, it illustrates how intolerant people in the Arab world can be of interactions with Israel, even if their countries are officially at peace with Israel. It really shows how it will take more than legislature to solve the problems of the region; people’s attitudes will have to change too.

Secondly, the article seems relevant to the recent discussion about whether or not the media simply reports the news, with no bias. The article’s title implies that the meeting with the Israeli ambassador was the only reason for Okasha’s expulsion. Someone who didn’t read the article thoroughly wouldn’t realize that the parliament had had other issues (justifiable or not) with Okasha preceding the meeting with Koren, the shoe throwing incident, etc. Does the reaction to the meeting with the Israeli ambassador show intolerance? Yes, but the article’s title makes it out to seem like that is the only reason for the expulsion, when the issue is actually much more complex.

#legislatures and parliaments

ime16-blog

Oscar-nominated celebrities were urged on Wednesday to skip a $55,000 trip to Israel offered as part of an awards gift bag.

The controversy of these free trips (which are not officially affiliated with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, by the way) is that they are being seen as an attempt to “distract from almost 50 years of illegal occupation of Palestinian land”. All in all, this seems like fair criticism. The Israeli government has even revealed that it helped finance the trips “as a means of offsetting news coverage of the country’s troubles.” Minister Yariv Levin is quoted as saying “They will experience the country first-hand and not through the media.“But it really seems unlikely that anyone who might accept the trip would see anything but the nicest parts of Israel – they might experience it “firsthand” but they wouldn’t come away with a genuine understanding of what life in the country is like; they almost certainly would not see the more objectionable things that are happening in Israel. When reading this article, I was reminded of the one someone posted a few weeks ago about how American students studying in Israel would help improve the perception of the country. Can we blame Israel supporting things that will hopefully change their increasingly-demonized image? Maybe not, but it’s hard to see things like this as anything besides a “distraction”.

incoherentjellyfishwhispere-blog

No I do not like this ridiculous attempt by the Israeli government to manufacture an image that is contrary to the realities they themselves have created through their misconduct in the region. You’re right in that Israel would ensure that the visitors would experience nothing but the best that Israel has to offer. Ideally, if they wanted to get a real sense of Israel, they would visit the illegal settlements in the west bank. Then travel south to the Israeli occupied Gaza Strip and have a conversation with the Palestinians to get a good sense of what Israel is really all about. The Israeli government should be ashamed of this attempt and seek to change minds by, I don’t know, not being jerks and seek to a resolution with the Palestinians. Even if that means giving up things they don’t want to. The media is only trying to bring the news to the people. Be better, and they will always have good things to say about you.

unlpols470

The last two sentences of this post are striking and raise a fascinating question that would be good for everyone to consider:

Given what we know from our first seven weeks of in-class discussion and from the media coverage we’ve read for our blogging assignment, do you think “The media is only trying to bring the news to the people” and that, if Israel was better in its treatment of the Palestinians, the media would “always have good things to say about” Israel?

If you agree, what makes you think so? If you disagree, why do you?

ime16-blog

I would like to think that “the media is only trying to bring the news to the people” and to an extent I think the media would also like to think they are “only trying to bring the news to the people”. But it’s not possible to entirely get rid of things that create bias and influence perspective (e.g. nationality or even personal opinions). And some media isn’t interested in being unbiased. We’ve also seen how difficult it is to have all the information and see all the perspectives on issues in Israel.

As far as the second question - whether the media “would always have good things to say about” Israel if they were “better” - I have to disagree because no country can ever be without fault and the media has a tendency to seek out and amplify bad news and negative behavior. No country, including Israel, will ever only have good things said about it. That being said, I wouldn’t say that Israel should continue on exactly as it is, with no attempt to fix the bad things that are going on. But I don’t think that the motivation for change should be the hope of getting a more positive portrayal in the media.

Oscar-nominated celebrities were urged on Wednesday to skip a $55,000 trip to Israel offered as part of an awards gift bag.

The controversy of these free trips (which are not officially affiliated with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, by the way) is that they are being seen as an attempt to “distract from almost 50 years of illegal occupation of Palestinian land”. All in all, this seems like fair criticism. The Israeli government has even revealed that it helped finance the trips “as a means of offsetting news coverage of the country's troubles.” Minister Yariv Levin is quoted as saying "They will experience the country first-hand and not through the media."But it really seems unlikely that anyone who might accept the trip would see anything but the nicest parts of Israel – they might experience it “firsthand” but they wouldn’t come away with a genuine understanding of what life in the country is like; they almost certainly would not see the more objectionable things that are happening in Israel. When reading this article, I was reminded of the one someone posted a few weeks ago about how American students studying in Israel would help improve the perception of the country. Can we blame Israel supporting things that will hopefully change their increasingly-demonized image? Maybe not, but it’s hard to see things like this as anything besides a “distraction”.

Hossam Haick, whose breakthrough work in nanotechnology has garnered global accolades, says his success as an Arab citizen of Israel proves that education knows no boundaries and is key to improving his community's lot.

While this article is largely a celebration of Hossam Haick and his many impressive accomplishments, it also provides a look at how, in day-to-day life, Arab Israelis are affected by the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and the difficulties they face, regardless of how successful they may be. The article was eye-opening in this way, especially where it shows how Arab Israelis face difficulties both within Israeli (because of the Arab part of their identity) and within the wider Middle East (because the Israeli part of their identity).

Haick views his online class taught in Arabic as a way to build bridges and he says “By staying, maybe we can contribute to the society from which we came.” It’s unclear whether his efforts will really have an impact especially in light of things like the fact that students withdrew from the class after learning it was being offered by an Israeli university, but I think that Haick should be commended for doing what he can to “build bridges”. If peace is ever to be achieved, it cannot only come from a governmental level - people’s perceptions/levels of acceptance have to change as well.

Donald Trump, who has argued his experience negotiating tough real estate deals makes him best qualified to be U.S. president, said on Wednesday it might be impossible to forge a lasting peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

It’s difficult to argue that Mr. Trump is the most qualified presidential candidate, but his remarks as reported in this article raise even more questions. Firstly, the article insinuates that Trump has just now become aware of how difficult negotiating an agreement between Israel and Palestine will be - and it makes it seem as though his revised opinions were based (at least somewhat) on learning, from as Israeli, "the other side has been trained from the time they're children to hate Jewish people." Trump also commented "You have one side in particular growing up and learning that these are the worst people." As the reading for this week made clear, the prejudices and misunderstandings are present on both sides - that it is not one side or the other that would be blocking an agreement. It is difficult to completely evaluate Mr. Trump’s plan in regards to Israel/Palestine, since it isn’t fully reported here and since he doesn’t talk much about foreign affairs (with the exception of his opinions on walls and Mexico), but comments like those quoted in the article don’t bode well.

iandme1-blog

Israel Bulldozed Palestinian Houses

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/02/palestinian-families-homeless-as-israeli-military-demolishes-west-bank-houses

Israel does not and should not have the right to randomly bulldoze Palestinian houses. I understand that there is ambiguity surrounding who controls the land on which these houses were located but regardless it isn’t acceptable for one party to completely demolish the homes of 110 people without warning. Clearly this is merely a way for Israel to signal power to the Palestinian people because as the article states, the houses were located in the hills and only accessible by dirt roads. The whole situation just seems pointless to me because really the only thing that Israel got out of it was a one-up move to the Palestinians.

ime16-blog

I’m inclined to agree with your idea that Israel is trying to signal its power to the Palestinian people by doing this, although it seems to me that the manner in which they removed them does this more than the removal itself since, as you mention, there is some ambiguity about who controls the area. I thought it was interesting that the people in the area base their claim to living there on the fact that they were there long before the Israelis - this is the Palestinian claim in general, and here we can see that claim affecting people on a very personal scale. In any event, the fact that the people only knew what was going to happen because “some of the villagers who can understand Hebrew heard the soldiers talking about how the buildings were going to be destroyed” raises some red flags. Forcing people out of their homes is one (admittedly very objectionable) thing, but the destruction of their property and belongings without warning really doesn’t seem necessary, nor does the timing, which forced all these people to be homeless in winter. Since the people living in the area had a lot of support from the international community, I’d be interested in seeing how the international community reacts as this incident plays out.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Israel & the Middle East