Daily Times

The state of Palestine was the dream of all Palestinians, Muslims and Christians included. The struggle for such a state was, since Israel’s creation, spearheaded by freedom fighters who wanted the land for its entire people, not just the Muslims. Both political and military resistance to Israel’s creation and then its occupation of Arab lands had its participation across religions. The freedom struggle was secular in character and even the military resistance had fair numbers from among the Palestinian Christians and, surprisingly, the liberated Jews as well. It was a period in time when military resistance was tolerated around the globe and the Irish Republican Army in Ireland, UNITA in Angola and others elsewhere were active in a manner that brought the civilian population into harm’s way yet they were not termed as terrorists. In such a permissive environment, Palestinian groups like Al Fatah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and others were formed to fight the occupation. Both these organisations had members across religions. George Habbash and Leila Khalid, both Christians, were household names at the time. Similarly, Uri Davis and Ilan Halevi are worth-mentioning names as they became senior members of the organisations formed later for the liberation of Palestine. Ilan Halevi rose to become an advisor to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. While the manner in which some groups conducted their struggle was questionable, as they targeted the innocent as well thereby taking away the moral high ground, their struggle was for all the people of their land and was secular in character. They may have talked of wiping out Israel as a state but were not anti-Semitic in any manner. Their war was not against the Jews.

Collectively, the Palestinian struggle was, for decades, led by the PLO of which both Al Fatah and PFLP were members. Few in the world branded the PLO a terrorist outfit. The PLO had championed the cause of the Palestinians for decades and its secular approach carried global appeal. This situation did nor suit Israel; it needed to break Palestinian unity and fragment the resistance in all possible ways. Israel knew that diluting its secular character by dividing the resistance along religious lines would diminish the global appeal of the Palestinian cause. For Israel, the icing on the cake would have been the transfer of the leadership of the Palestinians’ struggle to a religious extremist group as the west too was wooing such elements in its cold war with the Soviet Union. Israel was looking for an opportunity to arise.

When Israel first encountered the so-called Islamists in Gaza in the 1970s and 1980s, the Israeli government officially recognised a precursor to Hamas called Mujama al Islamiya, registering it as a charity. It allowed Mujama members to set up an Islamic university and build mosques, clubs and schools. When the so-called Islamists and their secular left-wing Palestinian rivals battled for influence in both Gaza and the West Bank, Israel tactically stood aside even if the clashes became violent. In Gaza, Israel hunted down members of Fatah and other secular PLO factions but removed restrictions imposed on the so-called Islamic activists by the territory’s pre-occupation Egyptian rulers. In Gaza, the Muslim Brotherhood, led by Sheikh Yassin, was free to spread its message openly. Thus, in addition to launching various charities, Sheikh Yassin collected money to reprint the writings of Sayyid Qutb, an Egyptian member of the Brotherhood who is the founding ideologue of so-called Islamic militancy. After it failed to oust secularists from the leadership of the Palestinian Red Crescent (globally the Red Cross) in Gaza, Mujama staged a violent demonstration, storming the Red Crescent building. These so-called Islamists also attacked shops selling liquor and cinemas, while the Israeli military mostly stood on the sidelines as a spectator. Till after the first Palestinian intifada in Gaza, Israel perceived the so-called Islamists as an ally against the PLO. While chasing the PLO, it let Hamas grow into what it is today as a perceived ally.

Israel’s efforts to find a pliant Palestinian partner that was both credible for the Palestinians and willing to cooperate with it backfired as its would-be partner turned against it. Israel’s experience replicates that of the US, which, during the Cold War, looked towards the so-called Islamists as an ally against communist advance. The same anti-Soviet forces that were allied to the US after Moscow’s 1979 invasion of Afghanistan later mutated into al Qaeda. Hamas released its charter in 1988. The portion concerning Israel is a very interesting read. Under part III, ‘Strategies and Methods, Article 11’, it reads: “The strategy of Hamas: Palestine is an Islamic Waqf. The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. No Arab country nor the aggregate of all Arab countries, and no Arab King or President nor all of them in the aggregate, have that right, nor has that right any organisation or the aggregate of all organisations, be they Palestinian or Arab, because Palestine is an Islamic Waqf throughout all generations and to the Day of Resurrection.”

While this portion of the Hamas charter negates the likelihood of durable peace in the region, fuel to such a position is provided by Israel’s discriminatory attitude towards non-Jews. It allowed Gaza to become a ghetto under its total control while Israel developed its own towns and settlements on occupied lands on the most modern lines. This discrimination is not confined to living alone as Israel’s treatment of the non-Jewish dead is also discriminatory. Media clippings showing most respectful treatment of the Jewish victims and the stark difference when it comes to the mortal remains of non-Jews is too visible to be ignored. The sanctity of a person by virtue of being a human is compromised by such discriminatory treatment. Until Israel recognises the sanctity of all human life, non-Jewish and Jewish equally, the problem will remain. If it does that, its response to any action by militants would be proportionate and not involve civilians. Israel claims its current action in Gaza to be a response to the firing of rockets by Hamas. Even if this argument is accepted, its disproportionate response and targeting of civilians substantiates the findings recorded earlier. Innocent Palestinians are being used as trading chips by both Hamas and Israel.

All parties to the conflict deserve peace. The long-term solution to the Middle East problem will always elude the parties as long as the Israeli constitution is not radically modified to make the country truly secular. Were it to happen, people of all faiths and races that have a stake in the land and have contributed to its cultural development over centuries, will have a reason to live peacefully together. Then, one day, Israel may have a Palestinian as its president with Jewish votes and a Jew as the prime minister elected with majority votes by the Palestinians.

Living in fear of war should not be the future for the children of the region. It needs to be understood that freedom, justice and equality cannot be maintained in isolation. Israel is a democracy and, in this respect, has an edge over many of its neighbours. It needs to become truly secular as well. If it becomes secular in substance, the basis of hostilities in so many places will evaporate. The parties to this conflict are not answerable for what may have been done centuries ago but are indeed answerable for what they do today. It is time all sides show wisdom and take action for the common good of mankind.

The writer can be reached at thelogicalguy@yahoo.com