Humanitarian

by David Baake

2005/3/27

The Incoherency of the Pro-Israeli Narrative

@ 10:00 PM (56 months, 21 days ago)

           Often, the pro-Palestine movement becomes so caught up in debates over disputed historical facts, fending off claims that pro-Palestine left is anti-Semitic, or arguing over the definition of key-words such as ‘terrorism’ or ‘occupation’ that it fails to expose and exploit fundamental incoherencies and inconsistencies in the Zionist narrative about the situation.  If the situation is viewed from the perspective of an Israeli citizen, for example, these incoherencies become apparent.

          Key to the Israeli Narratives, as I have argued in the article ‘Reflexive Racism in Israel and America,’ is the erroneous assertion that all Arabs intrinsically hate Jews and that they are incapable of every living in peace with Arabs.  While this idea completely disregards the fact that anti-Semitism is an entirely European concept, and that the Ottoman Empire was quite a bit more tolerant of Jews than those in Europe, it is still quite affective in convincing Jews, who rightfully fear those who wish to annihilate them, that the Palestinians are racist and villainous.  In complete denial of historical facts, the narrative often attempts to portray Palestinians as the modern day equivalent to the Nazis.

          However, even if this extremely offensive and completely incorrect version of the situation is accepted, Israel’s actions are still far from coherent.  Why for instance, does it continue to send settlers into Palestinian territory?  By the far-right Israeli narrative, despicable and hateful as it is, would this not be the equivalent of sending Jews, proudly displaying the Star of David, into Nazi strongholds?  If Palestinians are so racist and dangerous, why does Israel insist on sending its citizens to occupy their territory?

          What about the apartheid wall?  The original plan would have enclosed 200,000 Palestinians within the de facto Israeli border?  How can anyone maintain that this wall is for security, when 200,000 of the very people it is supposedly securing Israel against are actually enclosed within Israel?  Wouldn’t it be much safer to build the wall on the 1967 border, and then have the settlers return within the border?

          By asking these simple questions of Israel’s version of the situation, questions that any Israeli citizen might want to ask about his or her own security, the cynical nature and incoherency of the Israeli narrative becomes apparent.  Israel continues to make decision that put its citizens in more danger and cause more suffering among both Israelis and Palestinians.