Over 1,000 Palestinian Dead

Since the aggression against Gaza began, we have been watching the numbers of dead and injured climb while hearing the increasingly riduculous and disgusting justifications. I don't even the NY Times articles about Gaza anymore. The best news source by far is al-Jazeera. From the first day they have been in Gaza, reporting live.

But everyday we watch less. The first few days it was constant. Now, we switch to news for updates occaisonally. I can't take more dead and wounded children. Arabic television is much more graphic than American tv; there is no sanitizing war. The cameras show tiny bodies wrapped in shawls, parents wailing, people with horrible injuries.

I haven't written much about Gaza because I really don't feel I can add anything that hasn't been stated more eloquently elsewhere. The information is out there: Israel broke the ceasefire on Nov 4. The climbing dead and wounded. Hamas wants a ceasefire. Israel doesn't, as Kadima wants to look tough before elections. How many dead will be enough? And it's not as if anything I write will convince some one set against it. On the Palestinian issue, it's rare that logic or compassion actually changes anyone's mind. The response to the enormous loss of life is "What if New York / Seattle / Dublin / Toronto / Houston / etc was fired upon daily? Wouldn't you respond if everything you've got?" Of course the counteranalogy, what if your family was forced off of its land 60 years ago into a tiny strip of land, then punished for its democratic choice by months and months of midevil seige while food and medicine ran out and then bombarded by one of the world's most technologically advanced armies? That, apparently, does not occur to American politicians because they can see themselves as Israelis, but not as Palestinians.

I have also seen some criticism of the world response to Gaza, compared to the relative silence on Congo, Darfur, and Somalia. Ideally, media and world should respond to all of these crises, though the intranational nature of these conflicts is much more complicated then: Israel - Stop bombing the fuck out of Gaza! While some of this coverage inequality may be due to racism, as well as the news cycle (Gaza is fresher), as an American I see why American media SHOULD respond to Gaza more - those are our bombs killing Palestinians. It makes me sick to watch the news, then read about American politicians' steadfastness to Israel. We will continue to support the killing of a defenseless population. We will continue giving lip service to "peace" that asks of the Palestinians consessions on top of all they have endured and rewards Israel for its blatant violation of past agreements by excising illegal settlements out of the Palestinian state.

That is all. Tomorrow more amusing anecdotes.

Defending Itself

Why is the blockade of Gaza and military incursions always compared to the damn rockets? As if they are morally equivalent? As if they are anywhere on the same scale? The New York Times describes the bombing as "retaliation for rocket fire from the area".

"The Palestinian groups again launched barrages of rockets and mortars into Israel on Sunday, extending their reach further than ever before, and the Israeli government approved the emergency call up of thousands of army reservists in preparation for a possible ground operation."

and later: "Israeli military officials said that the airstrikes, which began on Saturday morning, were the start of what could be days or even months of an effort to force Hamas to end its rocket barrages into southern Israel."

That makes it sound somewhat similar! In fact, it's as if the Israelis are only responding or even retaliating for this horrible barrage of rockets.

Currently around 280 Palestinians dead, with at least 600 wounded. "Several Israelis were lightly wounded by shrapnel."

Yup, sounds about equivalent.

In Sha Allah Mabrouk

I had a weekend just chock-full o' parties, beginning Thursday night when I went to Um Mohammad's daughter's engagement party.

Um Mohammad is a Palestinian woman who cleans the UNFPA and sometimes we ride the servees together. We got to talking, and I no longer lament my Jeramana -Mezzeh commute as she lives in Husayniyya, out past Sitt Zenaib and the airport. It takes her an hour and half to get to work.

She further told me she had 8 girls and two sons. I remarked that it must be crazy with all those kids, to which she replied that oh, all the girls but three are married off so there's not that many. And Iya is getting engaged next week! Would you like to come? You can sleep over! We'll kick the men out so you don't have to worry, it'll just be girls!

I accepted the invitation for the party, which is how I found myself dancing with 50-year-old muhajjibas to reggaeton.

I had been expecting a lot more meat. It's almost shameful that I've been here 11 months without a single Shami wedding, but I had heard what to expect: Ladies be off by themselves, stripping down to impressively gaudy dresses and putting Rotana video to shame. But while the party was predominantly female, there were a few guys so many hijabs stayed on. This however, did not stop the Sexy Dancing. Neither did the heat, which had hit 43 C that day, compounded by the sweaty multitudes dancing inside a concrete room. I thought that I would be able to impress with my ability to bust a move, but I was put to shame by grandmothers and 12-year-olds in belly tops.

The engaged girl, Iya, who is 18, looked mostly bored as she sat on her raised platform above the revelers. She must have spent hours at the salon: makeup heavily done, each strand of hair shackled down, and everything topped off with glitter and stick-on stud rhinestones. Her pink dress had an impressive circumfrence that, when she sat, fanned out behind her. An aunt helpfully stuck a kleenex into the halter bustier to cover up the cleavage.

The groom was brought in with much fanfare and photos. The fiances looked at each other nervously when he walked up to her and took his seat next to her on the platform. For the official photos, the mother of the bride hauled out a matching pink cape to drape over her daughter's bare shoulders. The two awkwardly shuffled a dance, careful with her dress, before retaking their thrones and we, the masses, began to shimmy and debke again. Then the groom left to go back to his party in Mughayyam Jeramana.

The evening ended after 9pm, but the seeminly endless sisters of Um Mohammad and their children and children's children stayed. We sat out in the garden sipping sugary tea and talking. I had to focus a bit more than usual because they are from countryside Palestine and have a different accent: most notably they say gaff for qaff, though a few of them used kaff. They all lamented the tiny size of my family (my brother and I) while boasting of their own. Um Mohammad has her 10, one of her sisters, 13, another 12. "Palestinians love children!" they told me. Um Mohammad's 24-year-old niece has three and one on the way. There were children everywhere during the party, running underfoot, being handed off, staring at me and offering me candy.

A Syrian friend later told me, "Oh the Palestinians. They have children like they're competing against each other."

Yes Palestinians and Irish Catholics! We will breed our way into taking back our lands!

Um Mohammad and her son refused to let me go home alone. "We understand its different in Jeramana, but girls don't walk by themselves in Husayniyya." They came with all the way to Mughayyam Jeramana, despite my protests of knowing the way. Really sweet woman, Um Mohammad - since I didn't stay over I've now promised a sleepover in the near future.

I love how people say, "In sha Allah mabrouk!" (Hopefully congratulations!). It is after all just the engagement, with the actual wedding planned after a year or so. Anything could happen between now and then, so mabrouk, in sha Allah.

Gaza

Did you know that a few primitive rockets can serve as justification for starving 1.5 million people?

Fortunately, Hamas blew up the border and Palestinians are streaming into Egypt in order to buy... flour.

Bush Comes to the Middle East

Bush came to the Middle East yesterday morning: I was at Manar's house and we happened to catch the pomp and circumstance of his visit to Israel live on every news channel.

Amid the backdrop of the plane and mixed American and Israeli flags, Bush descended, greating Olmert like an old friend. Children waved American and Israeli flags, and Bush and Olmert both gave speeches about the strong friendship between the two states. Because it wa live al-Jazeera had no translation so I translated a bit for Manar.

Why the show? Everyone who has talked to me about the visit, including Manar, immediately rolled their eyes. "And he's going to achieve peace? Yeah, as if we don't know what side he's on." We already knows what side he's on, so why make a big show about it? It only makes everyone on the other "side" all that more certain of the pun my Arabic teacher has repeated nearly daily since Anapolis - ana bolees - Arabic for "I am the police". Bush isn't interested in real peace or in the Palestinian people, just in control and Empire etc. Do we really need singing Israeli children or the image of six-pointed stars and stripes to reconfirm the suspicions of the non-Israel lovin' world?

But maybe I should give Georgie a little credit. Maybe, just maybe the show is a sign to Israelis that America really really supports them and Bush really really loves them, so when (please let it be when, not if) the American president requests difficult sacrifices - like "stop building those settlements that you've been saying you would stop building since Oslo" - the Israelis will oblige, secure in the knowledge that Bush really really loves them and cares about their security and is only asking because these sacrifices are neccessary.

Or maybe the love-fest is just straight-up love for Israel, no matter how it may play on al-Jazeera.

Who Wants Peace?

Obviously not these idiots. Or their government that turns a blind eye to these activities. Quick to demolish Palestinian homes in collateral punishment, but slow to evict illegal settlers (by Israeli definition!), if they are ever even evicted.

Classes Classes

I've had three days of classes thus far, and it's not so bad (when you drink water). Today I didn't even wake up for sohour, so I feel incredibly well-rested, and I've already had a bottle of water and a date so I feel incredibly fucking incredible.

Classes aren't bad. 9am-1pm 5 days a week. I have 14 in my class, Germans, Swiss, French, Koreans, Spanish, Danes, a Norwegian, and another American. You can hear their accents through the Arabic, which is quite funny. Especially the French and the Koreans. But I've already hooked up a language exchange with a medical student twice a week to really learn the Syrian ammiya, as class is straight fusha.

Yesterday after class I went to Yarmouk, a Palestinian refugee camp on the outskirts of Damascus to help my friend Colin teach an English class. There wasn't a great turnout because of Ramadan, but once this month is over there should be a lot more coming. It's sad - we were at a Palestianian Cultural center and the walls were covered with murals drawn by the children. While the situation is obviously more dire for Palestinians in the occupied territories its hard to believe that in all the negotiations the only mention to the refugees is that there should be "a just settlement". Class was on the roof under a large curtain to shield the sun, and looking over Yarmouk (which is huge) I thought, "These people will never return to Palestine." It's really fucking sad.

After class I accompanied Colin to his friend Ra'id's house for iftar (where we all had hung out playing cards last Thursday night). It's really fun hanging with those guys, but Ra'id is hitting on me and I really don't need that. I just wanna hang, yo. He called me Saturday to invite me to an art gallery on Sunday morning, but I had class. Then last night he's asking me if we can go out sometime this week to talk, so he can "get to know me better." Jesus. The food was delicious though, and Ra'id and Ruba's (his 20 year old sister) mom loves me and my laugh and jokingly told me I had to move in.

Principal Resigns After Explaining Meaning of Word

New York Department of Education is opening a small public Arabic secondary school that will eventually serve grades 6-12, Khalil Gibran International Academy. About half will have Arab heritage and half will not have any experience in Arabic or have Arab heritage - it will be the latest of several dual-language public schools in New York. The school's been generating some controversy since the beginning, with some claiming the school would promote radical Islam. Being a DOE school, a public school, they will presumably be teaching the same topics as other public schools, only in Arabic. It furthermore is not even an Islamic school (there are several private Islamic high schools in New York), but a regular ol' public secular school in Arabic. How is Arabic alone going to radicalize students? Apparently because Arabic words themselves are way too contentious:

The principal's stepped down because of the controversy over statements she made last week at a press conference. Debbie Almontaser was asked by The Post about the phrase "Intifada NYC," on T-shirts being sold by Arab Women Active in the Arts and Media, group that has no relation to the school. Her response was apparently the wrong one:

"The word basically means 'shaking off'. That is the root word if you look it up in Arabic. I understand it is developing a negative connotation due to the uprising in the Palestinian-Israeli areas. I don't believe the intention is to have any kind of that in New York City. I think it's pretty much an opportunity for girls to express that they are part of New York City society... and shaking off oppression."

Oh my god every body freak out! The Post certainly did, calling her the "Intifada Principal" in a headline. Somehow, this quote has morphed into "comments that seemed to support the violent Palestinian Arab uprising known as the intifada" (The Post). More from The Post:

The school hasn't even opened yet. But the hijab-wearing principal of a taxpayer-funded school founded especially for Arab students has issued a fatwa against the kids of New York. She said there is nothing wrong with intifada. And the principal of the Khalil Gibran International Academy - scheduled to open next month less than two blocks from that hotbed of radical Muslim thought, Brooklyn's Atlantic Avenue - argued about the definition of the word that has sent so many to their graves.

First of all, why was she even asked about some unrelated group's t-shirts? Her only association is that the group with these t-shirts is in the same building as the Saba Association of American Yemenis, of which Ms. Almostaser is part. And second, she didn't argue about the meaning of the word - she gave the actual meaning of the word. She even acknowledged the connotations of the word in the Israeli-Palestinian realm, but offered her thought (because she doesn't know for sure, not being part of the group that produced the t-shirt) that the shirt was probably invoking the meaning of intifada, not the Palestinian intifada. Really, there's no way she could have answered this question "right", short of ripping off her hijab and offering to join the IDF (notice the dig about the hijab and the incorrect information about the school being only for Arab students).

Congratulations! She's resigned.

1936 Travelogue to Damascus and Jerusalem

Sometimes youtube spits up pure brilliance:

Damascus and Jerusalem in a 1936 travelogue. Syria was under French mandate, and Jerusalem was part of the British Mandate of Palestine. 1936 is in fact the beginning of the Arab revolt in Palestine, which lasted until 1939. But the haughty superiorior expressed by the narrator, the mangling of foreign words, calling Islam "Mohammadan" - this is truly a gem. The narrator is particularly keen on emphasizing the dirtiness and lack of progress of Damascus:

"Cheap soap, but from the appearance of the people there is little demand for it." Men are described as wearing "headdressed which remind us of Biblical characters." At a bakery, we are reminded "no, the baker's not wearing gloves."

How Orientalist can you get?

Stalling...?

Who is really itchn' for peace? This past weekend Palestinians Say Olmert and Abbas Are Set to Meet (NYT) in Jericho soon. What are they going to talk about? Well, like fall peace conference idea, it's a bit vague, and all parties are saying stating different purposes for the meeting:

An Abbas aide, Nabil Amr, said the leaders must be ready to hold “political” talks that included so-called final status issues for the creation of a Palestinian state, including borders...But an Israeli government official said that Israel was prepared to “mention larger issues in the realm of the future,” but would not negotiate on these issues at such meetings.

This meeting might be another gesture to bolster Abbas/Fatah against Hamas, and might indeed be nothing more than a gesture. The moderate peacenik foreign minister, Tzipi Livni suggests that both sides focus on the "widest common demoninator," presumably instead of Hard Issues. Prime Minister Olmert has floated a "declaration of principles" between the govs. Ooh, can I make some suggestions? How about an accord stating the respective governments' dislike of dead children? Or perhaps their shared admiration of hummus? And people of both sides must also be in agreement that Lindsay Lohan needs to pull her shit together. This is just a start, of course.

Delays benefit the Israeli side more than the Palestinian. The Hard Issues were left off the table in exchange for photo-ops throughout the 90s Oslo peace process, and in the meantime? More Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Stalling benefits the more powerful side, which can continue to shape the status quo to a position it's willing to negotiate from. And it is hardly radical to say that Israel is the massively more powerful party here.

Speaking of settlements, sounds like there was quite a show in Hebron this morning: Israel Removes Settlers in West Bank. No, not all of them, just a bunch of truly gung-hos who had illegaly (according to Israeli courts) set up in the center of Hebron. The "well-advertised confrontation" could be, and is intended to be a sign of the Israeli government cracking down on unruly settlers. But NYT sees some other intended messages behind the show:

In contrast to the way the Israeli army operates quiet arrests of Palestinians at night in the cities of the occupied West Bank, the Israeli government gave the settlers significant notice. A relatively fierce confrontation served both the settlers and the government, creating heroes among the settlers and allowing the government to show to the world that dismantling the nearly 80,000 settlers who live beyond the separation barrier will not be an easy task.

Taking Sides for Peace

After years of a half-hearted "Quartet" Road Map, Bush is gearing up for the Peace Conference to End All Peace Conferences. With Iraq, um, as it is, his only hope to have something not disastrous is this new Fall Peace Conference. The Administration is pulling out all stops on this one - Rice has been meeting up a storm with government officials. There's talk that Syria may even be invited (even Syria!).

All of these diplomatic machinations (like the recent Israeli freeing of Palestinian prisoners and a promised $80 million for Abbas's security forces) are attempts to bolster Abbas and the Fatah-West Bank against Hamas in Gaza. In other words, Hamas should not be expecting an invitation to the conference, despite the fact that Hamas is part of the elected and legitimate Palestinian government. When Israel includes Yisrael Beitenu in its majority coalition, a party that believes even Israeli Palestinians (Israeli Arabs) should be kicked out, that sort of extremism is alright, but God forbid an Islamist party is included in the Palestinian government. The U.S, E.U, and Israeli policy of shunning was certainly a success in any case...

But now that Hamas and Fatah have been conveniently seperated, we can lend our support to one faction against the other. No matter Fatah's horrible corruption- Hamas won legislative elections in 2006 partly because many voted "against Fatah" rather than "for Hamas". The corruption was so bad that it was cheaper to buy goods off the Israeli settlements in Gaza (obviously before their dismantling) than from the marketplace after all the bribes to Palestinian Authority officials (basically Fatah). So Fatah is crap in the eyes of many Palestinians (as is Hamas in the eyes of many others), but Fatah does not wave the green flag so the U.S. supports them wholeheartedly.

But is there a chance that this proposed peace conference will actually achieve anything? There are some hints that it might. Today Saudi Arabia indicated it might take part: Saudi Arabia Says it May Meet Israel. Saudi Arabia put forth their own peace proposal, endorsed by the Arab League, and negotiated the Mecca agreement between Fatah and Hamas, so they are no stranger to the issue. Saudi Arabia says they will only attend the conference if it tackles the big "final status" issues:

the fate of Palestinian refugees who fled or were forced to flee their homes in Israel, mostly before or during the 1948 war; the status of Jerusalem; the borders of a Palestinian state; and the dismantlement of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Thus they might actually work on the hard issues, the ones that everyone knows needs to be addressed but are much easier to leave aside (see: Oslo) and then bite everyone in the ass later (see: everything after Oslo).

Then again, maybe not. The Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni (about whom there was a massive article in the Times Magazine - sorry it's Times Select so get registered with your .edu address for free already!) responded by saying that sometimes "it's not wise to put the most sensitive issues out first." So what instead? Leave any issue of subtance off the table and have a pretty photo op rather than a serious attempt at solving issues? Livni, by the way, protested back in 1979 against peace with Egypt. She felt Sinai (Sinai!) was part of greater Israel. It'll be interesting to see how she feels about giving up "Judea and Samarra" now.