Saturday, May 29, 2021
Syrians filled the polling stations to defend their sovereignty and now fill the streets to celebrate the result
The irony of media outlets and pundits from America tweeting about what they view as the failure to hold free and fair elections in Syria was not lost on some. I wrote yesterday of the jubilation I saw in eastern Ghouta, where Syrians were celebrating the arrival of election day and proudly voting. I also noted that people “in eastern Ghouta were put through a hell that most of us, living safely far from war, cannot begin to fathom.” Back in 2018, I had seen their tortured faces shortly after their liberation. That made seeing them this week smiling incredibly moving.
Just ahead of the vote, I predicted there would be Western cynicism if President Assad won again, which would mean the West had failed in its regime-change project. I was right.
Syrian analyst Kevork Almassian, of Syriana Analysis, tweeted a thread about the mass celebrations around Syria, including in Homs, once dubbed the “capital of the revolution” by the delusional crowd, and Aleppo, the city the Western media said “fell” when it was liberated of the terorists who reportedly murdered up to 11,000 civilians via their bombings and snipings.
He also noted that the media’s claims of Sunni Muslims hating Assad had no basis in reality (never mind the fact that the First Lady is Sunni, as are many in top leadership positions), tweeting photos of masses of Sunnis voting.
The Guardian, guilty of some of the filthiest war propaganda against Syrians, and usually reporting from Istanbul, deemed the 2021 elections “fake” and a “sham”. But the Guardian has never liked to give voice to the vast majority of Syrians in Syria, preferring instead to quote al-Qaeda-linked “media activists” and “unnamed sources”. So, it’s hardly surprising it would denigrate the event that Syrians are currently celebrating around the country.
Likewise, the BBC, another contender for the most outstanding war propaganda on Syria, unsurprisingly cited the “opposition” as calling the elections a “farce”.
The Western media likewise bleated “farce” when Syria provided 17 witnesses to testify at the Hague against the claims that Syria had used a chemical agent in Douma – a narrative that has been thoroughly debunked. And they’re still lying after all these years.
Speaking to Syrian media yesterday in Douma, Assad said of the West’s derision of the elections: “The best response to colonialist countries with histories of genocide and occupations was the mass turnout of the people for the vote.”
And, regarding what the West thinks of the legitimacy of those elections, he concluded: “Your opinions are worth zero, and you are worth 10 zeros.”
Amen to that.
On Wednesday, the government extended the time in which people could vote by an additional five hours, as they did back in 2014, due to the high turnout. It even had to provide more voting boxes. In fact, in 2014, in Lebanon, which hosts the largest per capita population of Syrian refugees in the world, voting was extended not merely by five hours, but by an entire day.
As I wrote recently, Western nations have closed Syrian embassies globally to prevent those eligible from voting. But interestingly, as I learned from political analyst Laith Marouf in our discussion this week, “Syrians in the US went to the embassy at the UN and voted. That was a direct challenge to American hegemony, since the Americans closed the Syrian embassy in DC. But there is still a Syrian embassy at the UN, and that they can’t touch, the Americans. So many people showed up at the UN headquarters, waving flags, and so on.”
According to Marouf, in Beirut, tens of thousands Syrians went to the Syrian embassy last week, but “members of the Lebanese Forces party cut the roads towards the embassy and attacked cars and buses carrying Syrian citizens,” allegedly killing one in front of his children and on national live television.
“The other two countries that host the majority of Syrian refugees or immigrant populations, Germany and Turkey, again blocked the Syrian votes from happening,” he said.
Marouf spoke of the candidates, noting there were three: a leader of the opposition, a former minister, and President Assad.
“They have been vetted through security, making sure that they stand for the sovereignty of Syria, given that Syria has been living under a global war of terrorism, led by the US.”
On the ground on election day
I wrote on election day of the vibrance and peace I witnessed in Douma, and tweeted about the celebrations, about the Syrians singing and dancing. One woman in Irbeen, a village in eastern Ghouta, told me, “Today is historic. He is writing victory, a renewed victory for Syria, the general and protector of Syria, Bashar al Assad. The people you see coming, do so by their free will.”
A side note: from the cross necklace she wore, I knew the woman was a Christian. The “rebel” terrorists the West supports and whose sadistic death cult they would have installed to govern Syria would have persecuted, even killed, women like her.
And that’s the crux of it: Syrians aren’t just celebrating the leader they overwhelmingly love and respect, they’re celebrating the defeat of this terrorism in their country and of the imperialists’ regime-change project in Syria.
A Syrian-American friend, Johnny Achi, flew to Syria expressly to vote in the elections. He told me: “I’m a Syrian citizen and have lived in the United States for about 30 years. I’m here in Damascus to exercise my rights and duties as a Syrian citizen, since the US chose to close our embassies. As long as the embassies are closed, we’re going to keep making the trip here, to exercise our duty and our democratic right.”
“I chose Douma, in eastern Ghouta, under the ‘rebels’ until 2018, to show that there is a big turnout here, that people are happy to be back in a government-controlled area. Everyone I talked to is so jubilant that they got rid of all of Jaysh al-Islam, Faylaq al-Rahman, and all those brigades that were making their lives miserable,” he said.
In Achi’s view, the US would not have accepted any of the candidates, no matter who won.
“They decided that this election was illegal. Their excuse this time is how can you have a democratic election when you have land under occupation? But the land is occupied by Turkey and the US. If they would leave us alone, we would have freed those three provinces and would have all 14 provinces under Syrian control,” he said. “But this vote will help us liberate those provinces still under occupation.”
The pundits will opine, the media will screech, but aside from addressing that, I don’t care, and Syrians don’t care because they’re too busy celebrating.
On Thursday, while the votes were still being counted, I passed through Umayyad Square, a massive roundabout in central Damascus, where a party was beginning. Later in the evening, I returned, staying until after the votes had been counted and Assad had been declared the winner. Electric doesn’t even begin to describe the mood of triumphant Syrians celebrating their victory.
I’ve been coming to Syria since 2014, making 15 visits in all, gathering many heartbreaking testimonies, being caught up in many dangerous encounters with mortars and terrorist sniper fire. I, too, celebrate the return of peace to Syria. But, moreover, I celebrate the Syrians’ shunning of Western diktats and for continuing to live their lives as they choose.
As I stood filming cheering Syrians, the results were announced. The crowd went wild and the party continued. Of course, Western media outlets won’t accept Assad’s 95.1% result, but those Syrians simply do not care. They know the West has lost the plot.
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/525037-syria-election-assad-celebration/
#Syria’s Victory Stuns NATO, Enemies
After a decade-long torment from terrorist mercenaries deployed covertly by the Western powers, as well as overt aggression from NATO military forces illegally attacking the country and from cruel economic sanctions warfare, the people of Syria remain defiant and independent.
President Bashar al-Assad was re-elected for a fourth seven-year term after winning 95 percent of votes cast. The achievement is stunning. It completely refutes – indeed makes a mockery of – the Western narrative depicting Assad as a “tyrant”.
Despite all the grueling hardships, the Syrian people turned out in droves to vote on Thursday. The turnout was over 78 percent with more than 14 million votes cast out of an eligible 18 million electorate.
There is no way the Western governments and their servile corporate media can spin this epic demonstration of popular defiance to their nefarious intrigues for regime change in Syria. Hence, the total silence among Western media about the election result. That silence is at once hilarious and damning of Western guilt over the real nature of the war in Syria.
It was always a foreign war of criminal aggression. If there was any justice prevailing in this world, Western politicians by the dozens should be tried for war crimes.
Before the election this week, the United States, Britain, France, and other NATO powers tried to smear the Syrian democratic will, labeling the ballot as neither fair nor free.
Well, the sheer numbers of people turning out to vote and the subsequent scenes of jubilation across Syria tell another story, one that confounds the Western propaganda and exposes the criminality of the NATO powers and their toxic media.
The Syrian nation has refused to bow after years of NATO-backed terrorism in their country. They have chosen their president – again.
The same kind of shameful silence in Western media has been seen numerous times before when the Syrian army liberated towns and villages from Western-backed terrorists. When people came out to greet their Syrian army liberators, the Western media simply ignored the reality despite having told their consumers beforehand that the Syrian army and their Russian allies were committing slaughter against “rebels” and civilian populations.
Not one Western mainstream media outlet has followed up to report on how Syrians feel about being liberated and of having their peaceful lives restored. That’s because Syrians would praise the leadership of Assad, the courage of the army, and the crucial help of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah. In other words, the West’s lies would be demolished by the truth, and so their media are compelled to ignore and keep silent.
For everyone around the world who desires justice and peace and the defeat of imperialism, the victory from Syria’s election is a glorious day to celebrate. Congratulations are due to President Assad. But more so to the people of Syria who showed that it is possible to stand up to the real tyranny, that of the United States and its lawless NATO rogue allies who wanted to destroy Syria in order to install their own puppet regime. Despite unspeakable barbarities inflicted on the peace-loving people of Syria, they have remained steadfast in their unity and determination for independence, regardless of their different religions. The NATO ploy of trying to incite a sectarian war among Syrians failed because they knew all along who their real enemy was.
For those willing to see reality, Syria exposes the forces of evil in this world. The Western lying media tell us that Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, and so on, are “bad” and are threatening global peace. The Americans and their NATO partners lecture and pontificate about “rules and order”. When it is they who are caught in the headlights of truth: they tried to destroy a country just like they have countless others. But that country – Syria – just showed its spectacular strength to overcome the evil designs of the United States and its minions in NATO.
Lamentably, Syria faces more trials and challenges from the continuing economic warfare being waged by US and European sanctions. Reconstruction from a decade of NATO aggression will not be easy. But with the help of Russia, China, Iran, and others, the Syrian people will win finally. They have just shown their invincible resilience beyond any doubt.
The views and opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect those of Sputnik.
With Love From China: US mired in its own Cultural Revolution and COVID-19 conspiracies
The conspiracy theory that COVID-19 began as a lab leak in Wuhan is again being placed under the spotlight of US mainstream media outlets. On Sunday, The Wall Street Journal published a report, "Intelligence on Sick Staff at Wuhan Lab Fuels Debate on COVID-19 Origin." The Washington Post has joined the hype, with articles such as "How the Wuhan lab-leak theory suddenly became credible" published on Tuesday.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, a top US expert in public health, said last year that there is no scientific evidence to back the theory that the coronavirus was made in a Chinese laboratory, and he doesn't "entertain" the theory that the virus was leaked from a laboratory. However, the expert changed his tone recently, noting he is "not convinced" COVID-19 developed naturally and, "I think we should continue to investigate what went on in China."
The "lab leak" hype is almost the same with the round of sensational spin last year, with no new content or evidence. Why is the US playing it up all over again? The reason lies in US incompetence in handling its own problems. While witnessing its sluggish economic recovery, intensifying social contradictions, and the increasingly exposed weakness in governance, the US needs a scapegoat.
China has opened its door toward WHO expert groups, twice. The latest probe found that a lab leak is "extremely unlikely." But the fact does not matter to the US, only its own political motivations do. As long as the WHO's conclusion has little to do with blaming China, Washington won't accept it. Washington wants to send its own expert team with a presumption of guilt to prove that China is sinful. Clearly, China won't allow it.
Internally, the US is confronting too many difficulties and too much pressure amid its virus management. This makes it feel the strong need to pin the blame on someone else. This will be a long-term reality China has to face. And Washington is also very skilled at manipulating public opinion. It often cites undisclosed documents and thus has the reason not to provide evidence. This is a convenient way to push simple and irresponsible conclusions.
The US has tasted the benefits of finding itself a scapegoat - some Americans do not blame the US government but blame China instead, and Washington gained some endorsement on the global stage. Therefore, the US is convinced the tactic works. It has only bad influence on the country's fight against coronavirus and domestic governance. Yet this is nothing for US politicians, who only care about their short-term interests.
There is a considerable amount of anti-intellectual people in the US, who can be easily affected by political manipulations. They can be easily brainwashed to become anti-China. As a result, be it COVID-19 or China, the Americans' thinking and perception has been going around circles without any progress.
It is no longer news that US mainstream media outlets are tools of American political propaganda. But now, even elite scientists like Dr. Fauci, a top expert in public health, are being kidnapped by politics. This is a dangerous tendency. In terms of COVID-19, Fauci had made some statements that contradicted former president Donald Trump. Because of these statements, he received death threats, and his daughters were harassed. Now that Fauci has overturned his previous statement on the enigma of COVID-19 origins, he is bowing to politics.
But once science is kidnapped by politics, the decision-making of a society will only become irrational. The US today is like China during the period of Cultural Revolution (1966-76), when all issues were highly politicized. This being the case, how can US society develop without the capability to come up with scientific decisions? This is a pressing problem for the US.
Against the backdrop of such a political environment, the US will keep hyping its conspiracy theories to pass the buck. Facts are the most convincing way to refute them. China can also promote investigation into origins of COVID-19 in the US with reasonable doubts. Why was the US biological lab at Fort Detrick suddenly closed in 2019? Why did a mysterious pneumonia, linked to vaping, break out in the US in the same year? We can also insist that the WHO group should visit the US for an investigation with Chinese scientists' participation.
China used to be too passive. We can act in a more high-profile way in this regard. The US has an ugly record of biological warfare in its history, and China has every reason to doubt it.
How Mitch McConnell killed the US Capitol attack commission
The story of how Republicans undermined the 6 January inquiry is informed by eight House and Senate aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Days before the Senate voted down the creation of a 9/11-style commission to investigate the Capitol attack, the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, was adamant: he would oppose the bill, regardless of any amendments – and he expected his colleagues to follow suit.
The commission that would have likely found Donald Trump and some Republicans responsible for the insurrection posed an existential threat to the GOP ahead of the midterms, he said, and would complicate efforts to regain the majority in Congress.
McConnell’s sharp warning at a closed-door meeting had the desired effect on Friday, when Senate Republicans largely opted to stick with the Senate minority leader. All but six of them voted to block the commission and prevent a full accounting into the events of 6 January.
But it also underscored the alarm that gripped McConnell and Senate Republican leadership in the fraught political moments leading up to the vote, and how they exploited fears within the GOP of crossing a mercurial former president to galvanize opposition to the commission.
The story of how Republicans undermined an inquiry into one of the darkest days for American democracy – five people died as a pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol and sought to hang Mike Pence – is informed by eight House and Senate aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The prospect of a commission unravels
Surrounded by shards of broken glass in the Capitol on the night of 6 January, and as House Democrats drew up draft articles of impeachment against Trump, Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the House, made her first outreach to canvas the prospect of a commission to investigate the attack.
In the immediate aftermath of the insurrection, Pelosi had reason to be hopeful. Spurred on by the threat felt by many Republicans to their personal safety, a swelling group of lawmakers had started to agitate for an inquiry to reveal how Trump did nothing to stop the riot.
But what was once heralded as a necessary step to “investigate and report” on the attack and interference in election proceedings unravelled soon after, with the commission swiftly reduced to an acrimonious point of partisan contention in a deeply divided Capitol.
The main objection from House and Senate Republicans, at first, centered on the lopsided structure of Pelosi’s initial proposal, that would have seen a majority of members appointed by Democrats, who would have also held unilateral subpoena power.
And only weeks after the riot, the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, was already advancing the complaint for his ultimate opposition: that the scope of the commission did not include unrelated far-left violence from last summer, a political priority that stalled talks.
With little progress three months after the Capitol attack, Pelosi made a renewed effort to establish a commission on 16 April, floating a revised proposal that mirrored the original 9/11 commission with the panel evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.
Pelosi briefed her leadership team that included the House majority leader, Steny Hoyer, the House majority whip, Jim Clyburn, the assistant speaker, Katherine Clark, and notably, the chair of the House homeland security committee, Bennie Thompson, about the proposal the following Monday.
During that meeting, Hoyer first raised the prospect of also extending equal subpoena power to Republicans – a concession that would allow Democrats to meet all of Republicans’ demands about the structure of the commission – which Pelosi adopted a few days later.
By the penultimate week of April, Pelosi had deputized Thompson to lead talks as she felt the homeland security committee was an appropriate venue, and because the top Republican on the committee, John Katko, was one of only three House GOP members to impeach Trump.
With the House on recess, Thompson made enough progress in negotiations to brief Pelosi and her leadership team on 8 May that he secured a tentative deal on the commission, though Katko wanted to wait on an announcement until Liz Cheney was ousted as GOP conference chair.
Tensions within the House Republican conference had reached new highs the previous week after Cheney continued her months-long criticism of Trump’s lies about a stolen election at a party retreat in Florida, and Katko was wary of injecting the commission into the charged moment.
“As soon as the vote on Liz Cheney is taken, he will be prepared to do a joint statement,” Thompson said in remarks first reported by CNN.
Minutes after House Republicans elevated Elise Stefanik to become the new GOP conference chair on 14 May, Thompson and Katko unveiled their proposal for a bipartisan 9/11-style commission.
McConnell cracks down on the bill
The ouster of Cheney solidified Tump’s outsize influence on the Republican party, and set the scene for the weeks to come.
McCarthy almost immediately sought to distance himself from the commission and was non-committal about offering his endorsement. Asked whether he had signed off on the deal, McCarthy was direct: “No, no, no,” he told reporters in the basement of the Capitol.
By the following Tuesday, top House Republicans were urging their colleagues to oppose the commission bill, with McCarthy positioned against an inquiry on the basis that its scope focused narrowly on the Capitol attack.
As Hoyer had anticipated when he suggested that Pelosi also offer equal subpoena power to Republicans, McCarthy struggled to demonize the commission, and several House Republicans told the Guardian that they found his complaints about the scope unconvincing.
The Senate minority leader, meanwhile, had until then denounced Trump, who he faulted for inciting the insurrection, and publicly seemed open to a commission. But as it became clear the scores of House Republicans would vote for the bill, his calculus quickly changed.
Two days after the Senate returned for votes on 17 May McConnell informed Senate Republicans at a private breakfast event that he was opposed to the commission as envisioned by the House, and made clear that he would embark on a concerted campaign to sink the bill.
Underpinning McConnell’s alarm was the fact that Democrats needed 10 Senate Republicans to vote in favor of the commission, and seven had already voted to impeach Trump during his second Senate trial – a far more controversial vote than supporting an inquiry into 6 January.
Cognizant that Senate Democrats may find three or four more allies in uncertain Republicans, McConnell cracked down.
After announcing at the breakfast event that he would oppose the commission, McConnell railed against the bill as being “slanted and unbalanced” on the Senate floor, in biting remarks that represented a clear warning as to his expectations.
He kept up the pressure all afternoon on that Wednesday, so that by the evening, McConnell had a major victory when Senator Richard Burr, who voted to impeach Trump only four months before, abruptly reversed course to say that he would reject the commission.
In the end, only six Senate Republicans – Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, Bill Cassidy, Rob Portman, Lisa Murkowski and Ben Sasse – voted to move forward on the commission.
As the final vote hurtled towards its expected finale, the Senate minority whip, John Thune, who also switched his position to side with McConnell, acknowledged McConnell’s arguments about a commission jeopardising Republican chances to retake majorities in the House and Senate.
Summarising his concerns, Thune said: “Anything that gets us rehashing the 2020 elections I think is a day lost on being able to draw a contrast between us and the Democrats’ very radical leftwing agenda.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/29/mitch-mcconnell-us-capitol-attack-commission-senate-republicans
Lebanese Singer Samir Sfeir Deported From Saudi Arabia After 50-Day Detention
https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/9580132/samir-sfeir-deported-saudi-arabia-lebanese-singer
Opinion | What Stands in the Way of Gaza Rebuild? Qatari Cash, Misguided Policies – and Hamas Itself
Hamas’ strength is a result of several factors – including a misguided policy on Gaza that has run its course. Stumbling from war to war isn’t a policy option, it’s a policy failure.How did Hamas rebuild its arsenal and build miles of tunnels? Given the blockade by Israel and Egypt on Gaza, the common assumption is that Hamas has been finding ways to divert humanitarian assistance and Western aid, taking materials and goods and using them for nefarious means. In reality, it has been a failed policy towards Gaza that has led to the buildup of Hamas’ arsenal, where Palestinians suffer from a blockade that prevents adequate relief and recovery from arriving while enabling weapons to pass through a back door. This accusation of aid divergence has been repeated by politicians in Israel and the United States and is now at the forefront of officials’ minds as they start to consider how to rebuild Gaza after this most recent round of fighting. The reality, however, of how aid is delivered into the Strip is not well understood, nor the major gaping holes in the security envelop which are far more likely to be the culprit than aid diversion. Following the 2014 Gaza war, the United Nations created the Gaza Reconstruction Mechanism (GRM), a temporary mechanism designed to deliver humanitarian assistance, including dual-use items such as concrete and rebar, in such a manner to prevent it from being diverted. The mechanism is extremely complex and requires sign off by the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Israel for every project and every vendor. The materials imported are subject to rigorous inspection. If this is where the story ended, the question of how Hamas rebuilt its arsenal would still be that it must have come through the GRM in some manner, in addition to some smuggling through tunnels into Egypt. However, this is not the end of the story. In order to buy quiet, Israel has allowed Qatar to deliver suitcases full of money into Gaza to pay for Hamas workers, do direct cash transfer to needy Gazans, and purchase fuel for the power plant. Throughout 2018 and 2019, at times of high tensions, Israel has permitted these untraceable $100 bills into the Strip, with no oversight of where the cash goes and where it ends up. The tax revenues from these transfers end up in Hamas’ coffers as well as whatever additional monies Hamas wishes to skim off the top.So, if Hamas has the resources to buy additional items, where could they be coming from if not through regulated crossing points with Israel? As Neri Zibler has documented, in early 2018 Salah al-Din Gate, a commercial border crossing between Gaza and Egypt, opened; it is staffed by Hamas on the Gaza side of the border. Despite it being vastly smaller than the Kerem Shalom crossing, Salah al-Din offers a commercial crossing point where there are few checks in place to determine what is and isn’t coming into the Strip. In addition, the gate offers a new crossing where Hamas can generate greater tax revenue, with one estimate pegging it at $500 million between March 2018 and February 2019. So much concrete was flowing into Gaza through Salah al-Din that in 2019 the Israeli government took concrete off the list of dual-use materials as it was so readily available inside the Strip that it just seemed useless to prevent import from Israel as well.
Of course, it’s not easy getting all the materials you would want to rearm through a much smaller crossing point that is in the middle of the Egyptian desert, but with enough resources and will, it stands to reason that it is far more likely that Hamas obtained what it needed through the money it generated both through the crossing at Salah al-Din and the Qatari aid than hoodwinking the humanitarian community through the GRM.
As the United States aims to make good on the administration’s promise to rebuild Gaza in a manner that empowers the PA and not Hamas, there are few if any good policy options. U.S. law makes it near to impossible to act through the PA to facilitate rebuilding Gaza. All roads, it seems, lead back to the GRM system and finding a way to encourage Egypt, Qatar, the PA and Israel to implement a system that enables the rebuilding of Gaza that ensures timely assistance and larger scale projects so that dependence on Hamas is limited.Standing in the way of such a policy of course is Hamas itself. Given its control of the crossing in the south and its lack of care of how much its citizens suffer, they are more than happy to return to the situation where it demands suitcases of cash as a protection racket.
Israel did not sleepwalk into this terrible policy environment. Since 2009, the Israeli government has done little to bolster the standing of the PA as evidenced from Defense Minister Benny Gantz’s statement that now is the time for “long-term processes that will weaken the extremists and strengthen and bring together moderates.”The result is what the Biden Administration is now facing: a PA that is weak and seen as illegitimate in the eyes of the majority of its people, and an entity that is unable to be supported by the U.S. government directly. Even if the PA amended the prisoner payment system, it would also need to publicly suspend all International Criminal Court action before U.S. law would allow direct assistance to take place. Both of these moves would be deeply unpopular on the Palestinian street, especially as Hamas’ popularity after the recent war is at its peak. As families and business owners look to rebuild their shattered buildings, the international community should go further than just solve the geopolitics of limiting the ability of Hamas to find other ways to rearm or profit. They must design a system that, while strict in its vetting, enables and is attractive enough to an average Palestinian in Gaza to rebuild their lives using a secure assistance corridor and an ability to trade their goods with the world, rather than a gray market economy that puts money in the pockets of Hamas. If not, we will be left with the same situation as we are today. Hamas’ strength is a result of several factors – including a misguided policy on Gaza that has run its course. Blaming current vetting just distracts from the lack of a strategy. Stumbling from war to war isn’t a policy option, it’s a policy failure. We owe it to the next generation to do better. Joel Braunold is the Managing Director of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace
Palestinians need their own voice, not afraid of Hamas, Fatah - opinion
By DAVID BRINN
We can see nuances in the situation we find ourselves in with the Palestinians, which enable us on the one hand to defend Israel’s actions in Gaza while at the same time criticize our government.It was both tense and awkward. But it was necessary. For the last few months, under the auspices of local interfaith association, my wife and I along with other Israelis have been participating on Zoom in mifgashim (meetings) with Palestinians.They are a continuation of face-to-face gatherings that we’ve been part of for years between Israelis from the Jerusalem area and Palestinians from the surrounding towns like Azariya. In-person came to a standstill during the pandemic, naturally, but the option of online meetings – though not as desirable as flesh and blood encounters – has enabled the geographic scope to broaden, with Israelis from around the country and Palestinians from Jericho, Ramallah and Bethlehem now able to participate.Politics are off-limits for the meetings – as difficult as that may sound – with the goal to learn more about each other’s lives, customs, holidays, backgrounds and families. Connections are made through that familiarity, and the common themes we share being parents, employees, tenants – and human beings – begins to compete with the canyon of cultural gaps, and of course the elephant in the room: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But when we gathered online this week for the first time since the recent war, the elephant was too big to ignore. Instead of focusing on wedding customs, Passover, Ramadan or family histories, the Jewish and Muslim coordinators of the group decided that this session would focus on “feelings” – how the two sides were dealing emotionally after two weeks of massive rocket fire on Israel and massive destruction and loss of life in Gaza. It was a decision that could have led to raised voices and mutual recriminations, but the alternative would have made a mockery of the efforts to build dialogue from different viewpoints, between two peoples who just lived through a major conflict. From Samih in Bethlehem to Ala in Ramallah and Muhammad in Jericho, all spoke passionately of the loss of life in Gaza, and the pain they felt. They also mentioned the rockets fired at Israel, but it was done in a vacuum of “Yes, both peoples have suffered.” In today’s politically correct world, it’s frowned upon to bring up who started a conflict or blame one side over the other. In the group, all the more so. That’s why it would have been futile and potentially volatile to suggest: Hey guys, perhaps if Hamas hadn’t fired rockets at Jerusalem then Israel would not have started precision bombing in Gaza. And if Hamas hadn’t responded with 4,000 more rocket attacks aimed at Israel, then the IDF might not have leveled buildings and killed civilians while conducting specific targeted attacks on Hamas members and installations. It was within bounds, however, for the Palestinians to bring up the Sheikh Jarrah eviction saga, and Israeli “aggression” on the Temple Mount. The Israelis on the forum let the Palestinians vent, and I’m sure more than a few, like myself, held their tongues. For our part, we also lamented the loss of life on both sides, without laying blame, and talked about how to rebuild trust and ties that have been frayed over the last month. Despite venturing out of the safety zone of parve topics, the meeting remained civil, with talk ending on a positive note about trying to renew face-to-face gatherings in the near future. Reviewing the hour-long encounter, however, I became more and more troubled by what had gone down. Here in Israel we have more opinions than people. We have right-wing hardliners and we have peace movements, those who feel Israel is 100% in the right on all moves made regarding the Palestinian issue and the many people who put as much blame, if not more, on Israeli policies as the underlying reason for this war against Hamas. Thousands of protesters have been gathering for months outside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s residence on Saturday nights calling for him to step down. Those who don’t care for the way he leads the country have actually gone to the polls four times to try to replace him with a “change” government. And if efforts to form that coalition don’t succeed, Israel will soon enough hold a fifth election. It’s called civil action and it’s called democracy. We can see nuances and shades of gray in the situation we find ourselves in with the Palestinians, which enable us on the one hand to defend Israel’s actions in Gaza while at the same time criticize our government. On the Palestinians side, there’s a stark lack of that kind of indignation against their leadership. The Palestinian members of the interfaith group decried the innocent Gazans killed and the massive destruction, but they never consider looking inward and coming to the conclusion that, just maybe, their own Hamas and Palestinian Authority leadership is partially culpable – at least – for the dire situation in Gaza and in the West Bank. The concept of self-awareness and looking at an issue broadly seems lost on them. Or maybe they’re just scared to challenge the reality they’ve grown up with. Two years ago, during one of our in-person meetings, two young Palestinians from Jebl Mukaber near Jerusalem’s East Talpiot neighborhood were complaining about the lack of employment, the living conditions in their village, and the lack of help they receive from the PA. So, why don’t you go out and protest and demand change, we asked, reminding them of Israeli economic-led upheavals like the cottage cheese revolution. Their answer? “We don’t want to end up in jail.” That’s a valid reason to stay mute and docile. But whether it’s due to fear, or whether their ability to think critically has been numbed by decades of blindly following corrupt and ineffective leaders, believing insidious propaganda about Israel, and yes, living under Israel’s oppressive rule, Palestinians seems unable to look beyond their own victimhood to weigh alternative narratives as to how they ended up where they are. Israelis of all walks are able to agree that the loss of life in Gaza was heartbreaking. We can blame Hamas and their international enablers or we can point to Israel’s policies in the West Bank and Jerusalem as contributing to the war; we can take to the streets and protest the policies of our government, and we can go to the polls and try to change the system ourselves. But until the same is true for the other side, until a Palestinian peace movement stands up to the status quo – in Gaza and in the West Bank – with the same strength that the Israeli shinui movement does, until we see the Palestinians question their own leadership and stop solely blaming “the occupiers” for the dead-end of destruction, frustration and despair they’ve been led down, there’s little hope that anything will change for them, or for us. Chances are we’ll be gathering again in a couple years, neighbors in our war-torn land separated by suspicion and distrust, trying to take the first tentative steps toward understanding each other and reaching some tentative form of reconciliation after another round of war that could have been prevented. https://www.jpost.com/opinion/palestinians-need-their-own-voice-not-afraid-of-hamas-fatah-opinion-669437