Hi.  I'm kicking myself for the last-second addition of the Libby
article to Middle East Matters in Friday morning's mailing.  It
flooded an otherwise coherent 3-part view designed for maximum
information in the fewest words.  I missed the LA Times front page
article on Libby but that only compounds the error.  Apologies.
Maybe delete the offender and try it again.  -Ed

Professor Ilan Pappe on Norman Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpah

Occupation Hazard

Norman Finkelstein Challenges the Conventional Line on Israel.

By Ilan Pappe | BOOKFORUM | Feb/March 2006

Why is the history of modern Palestine such a matter of debate? Why is it
still regarded as a complex, indeed obscure, chapter in contemporary history
that cannot be easily deciphered? Any abecedarian student of its past who
comes to it with clean hands would immediately recognize that in fact its
story is very simple. For that matter it is not vastly different from other
colonialist instances or tales of national liberation. It of course has its
distinctive features, but in the grand scheme of things it is the chronicle
of a group of people who left their homelands because they were persecuted
and went to a new land that they claimed as their own and did everything in
their power to drive out the indigenous people who lived there. Like any
historical narrative, this skeleton of a story can be, and has been, told in
many different ways. However, the naked truth about how outsiders coveted
someone else's country is not sui generis, and the means they used to obtain
their newfound land have been successfully employed in other cases of
colonization and dispossession throughout history.

Generations of Israeli and pro-Israeli scholars, very much like their
state's diplomats, have hidden behind the cloak of complexity in order to
fend off any criticism of their quite obviously brutal treatment of the
Palestinians in 1948 and since. They were aided, and still are, by an
impressive array of personalities, especially in the United States. Nobel
Prize winners, members of the literati, and high-profile lawyers, not to
mention virtually everyone in Hollywood, from filmmakers to actor, have
repeated the Israeli message: This is a complicated issue that would be
better left to the Israelis to deal with. An Orientalist perception was
embedded in this polemical line: Complex matters should be handled by a
civilized (namely, Western and progressive) society, which Israel allegedly
was and is, and not entrusted to an uncivilized (i.e., Arab and regressive)
group like the Palestinians. The advanced state will surely find the right
solution for itself and its primitive foe.

When official America endorsed this Israeli position, it became the
so-called Middle Eastern peace process, one that was too sophisticated to be
managed by the Palestinians and hence had to be worked out between
Washington, DC, and Jerusalem and then dictated to the Palestinians. The
last time this approach was attempted, in the summer of 2000 at Camp David,
the results were disastrous. The second intifada broke out, and it rages on
as this article goes to press.

The Zionist narrative is as simple a story as the history of the conflict
itself. The Jews redeemed their lost and ancient homeland after two thousand
years of exile, and when they "returned" they found it derelict, arid, and
practically uninhabited. There were others on the land, but they were
basically nomads, the kind of people you could, as Theodor Herzl wrote in
1895, "spirit away" outside the Promised Land. Still, the empty land somehow
remained populated, and not only this, but the elusive population rebelled
and tried to harm the Jewish returnees. Like any other narrative, this one
too can be laid out elegantly and scholarly or conveyed coarsely and simply.
It can appear as a sound bite on American television when a suicide bombing
is "contexualized," or it can dominate a book produced by one of the
prestigious university publishing houses in the West. But however verbose or
taciturn Israel's advocates may be, the historical narrative they insist on
broadcasting is a false representation of the past and present realities in
the land of Palestine.

In academia, the Israeli claim of complexity and the Zionist time line as a
whole have been exposed as propaganda at best. Similarly, the pendulum has
swung in favor of many principal chapters in the Palestinian narrative,
regarded hitherto as an Oriental fable. The emergence of critical and
post-Zionist scholarship in Israel helped this process along by providing
internal deconstruction of the Zionist metanarrative and accepting many
historical claims made by the Palestinians, especially with regard to the
events of 1948. The group of "new Israeli historians" who have focused on
1948 have endorsed the basic Palestinian argument that the native people
were forcefully dispossessed in what today would be called an
ethnic-cleansing operation.

But outside the universities, particularly in the United States, public
figures continue to be embarrassingly and unapologetically pro-Israeli. Few
have dared to challenge these self-appointed ambassadors because many of
them are quite often influential journalists, highly placed lawyers, or
former politicians, ex-hostages of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee in its most active years. Norman G. Finkelstein is one of the few
who has. In 1984 he confronted head-on Joan Peters's From Time Immemorial:
The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict Over Palestine, which claimed that
most of the Palestinians made their way into the territory only in the 1920s
and '30s, an assertion so ridiculous it made Peters's book easy prey.
Finkelstein tore her argument to shreds.

Now, in Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse
of History, Finkelstein goes after bigger targets and challenges some of the
most sacred taboos in the American public arena regarding Zionism and
Israel. One such exposure involves the misuse, indeed abuse, of Holocaust
memory in defense of Zionism. Any substantial criticism of Israel is
immediately branded by apologists for the state as a new wave of
anti-Semitism. The Anti-Defamation League's grotesque manipulation of the
message of Mel Gibson's film The Passion of the Christ and its purported
association with the Palestinian struggle against occupation makes one
wonder how intelligent people, even basically moral people, could spin such
idiotic tales and arouse unwarranted, hysterical reactions with the effect
of papering over Israeli atrocities on the ground. The puzzlement grows when
one reads Finkelstein's industrious, at times sarcastic book, which shows
how easy it is to distinguish what happened in fact from what Israeli
sources (and their American defenders) say happened. Scholarly work by
historians Finkelstein does not particularly care for because of their
political positions (such as Benny Morris) and self-inhibited Israeli human
rights organizations such as B'Tselem show that even within their apologetic
and cautious representations there are few doubts remaining on two issues:
that Israel forcibly ejected the Palestinians in 1948 and that it has
abused, oppressed, and humiliated those that remained ever since 1967.

I will spare most of the individuals for the purposes of this review; they
are all named in the book. One after another, the most famous figures in the
American Zionist establishment, and some fellow travelers, like the current
president of Harvard, are all shown here to subscribe to the exact same
message: Criticism of Israel feeds a new wave of anti-Semitism in the United
States. Reading their declarations in a single place, one can appreciate the
madness of their views, and Finkelstein has not missed a thing.

And to his further credit, he does not dismiss the possibility that
anti-Jewishness has in fact risen as a result of Israeli brutality in the
occupied territories. But the cry of anti-Semitism is not a response to this
development; it is rather, in his words, "an ideological weapon to deflect
justified criticism of Israel and, concomitantly, powerful Jewish
interests."

No one co-opts intelligence in defense of a fable better than Alan
Dershowitz. Finkelstein observes that, unlike Elie Wiesel, a troubled Jew
who cannot apply his universal moral standards to the state of Israel and
thus legitimizes all its misdeeds and crimes by default, Dershowitz comes
from the realm of criminal law and has himself stated that "the criminal
lawyer's job, for the most part, is to represent the guilty, and, if
possible, to get them off." Israel must be guilty in Dershowitz's mind, as
becomes apparent in The Case for Israel, which defends his client's most
obvious crime. its human rights record. It would have been a more "complex"
case had he chosen to stand for Israel's right to exist or its wish to
represent world Jewry, but no: He opted to cleanse the most glaringly
unpleasant feature of the Jewish state since its inception, its treatment of
the Palestinians. In so doing, Dershowitz attacks everyone from Amnesty
International and the United Nations to Israeli human rights organizations
and Jewish peace activists, on top of course of condemning anyone who is
Palestinian or pro-Palestinian. They are all part of the new anti-Semitism.

The most original aspect of Finkelstein's book is his deconstruction of
Dershowitz's praise for the Israeli Supreme Court and his own examination of
the court's record. Finkelstein's book is full of evidence of Israeli
oppression that in itself is essential reading for those who wish to judge
Dershowitz's propagandist claims. But the Israeli Supreme Court is one of
the strongest links in an otherwise very weak chain on which Dershowitz
hangs his defense of Israel. It is after all a body commended throughout the
world for its professionalism and impartiality. Finkelstein systematically
shows how the most callous aspects of the occupation, torture centers,
demolition of houses, targeted killings, and denial of medical care. were in
fact legitimized a priori by the Israeli Supreme Court. The court, and the
legal system as a whole, like the Israeli media and academia (neither of
which is treated in the book), are essential components in the state
oppression and occupation of the West Bank. Much more work needs to be done
in this direction; hopefully Finkelstein will be one of many who further
analyze this atrocious reality.

The concluding section of Finkelstein's book is devoted to the
historiographical aspects of Dershowitz's work. We can only concur with
Finkelstein that "next to Alan Dershowitz's egregious falsification of
Israel's human rights record and the real suffering such falsification
causes, Dershowitz's academic derelictions seem small beer." In fact the
coda is anticlimactic in such a powerful book, but to be fair it appears as
an appendix and not as an integral part of the work. Morris stars as the
main source for refuting Dershowitz's historical claims; it would have been
better to use Palestinian historians and oral history sources in addition to
Morris. But this does not undermine the overall service Finkelstein has
performed in exposing one critical layer of knowledge production concerning
Palestine that for years defeated any attempt for the Palestinian plight to
receive a fair hearing from the American public. The Palestinians deserved,
but never received, the same empathy and support good-hearted Americans
usually lend to occupied, oppressed, and persecuted people the world over,
even those harassed by their own government. Shrewd advocates of the
occupier and the oppressor. abusing Holocaust memory and heightening years
of anti-Semitism, succeeded for a long time in stifling solidarity with the
Palestinians. This book cracks the wall of deception and hypocrisy that
enables the daily violation of human and civil rights in Palestine. As such,
it has the potential to contribute to the removal of the real wall that
shuts out those in the occupied territories.

Ilan Pappe is the author, most recently, of The Modern Middle East
(Routledge, 2005).





---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to