| Frequently
asked questions
Do
the Palestinians really want peace?
What's
the difference between the Warsaw Ghetto and the Gaza Strip?
Is
Israel an apartheid state?
Is
Israel guilty of genocide?
Do
the Israelis really want peace?
Is Israel guilty of ethnic cleansing?
Do
the Palestinians really want peace?
“The
teachings of Islam is the sole reason why no peace agreement
on earth can bring lasting peace between Israel and the Arab
and Israeli worlds.” (Source: The Wall by Ramon Bennett).
Muhammad
made a peace treaty in 628 AD with a Kuraish tribe. Two years
later when Muhammad was considerably stronger he broke the
peace treaty and slaughtered every male tribal member.
This became known as the Truce of Hudaybiyyah and is recorded
in the Hadith, the book of Muhammad’s sayings, acts and teachings.
This truce or Hudna then went on to become a precedent in
Islamic law for all agreements with infidels, a device to
allow the Muslim to regroup its resources before renewing
hostilities. The Hudna is never to survive for more than 10
years (Umdat as-Salik, o9.16).
For
example, a couple of days after signing the Oslo “Peace” agreement
Yassar Arafat, in a South African mosque referred to the agreement
as, “[the same as] that signed between Muhammad and the Kuraish
tribe - a despicable truce.” It was a peace that was never
meant to last.
Hamas
also draws its inspiration from Islam: “The Islamic Resistance
Movement [Hamas]: The Movement's programme is Islam. From
it, it draws its ideas, ways of thinking and understanding
of the universe, life and man. It resorts to it for judgement
in all its conduct, and it is inspired by it for guidance
of its steps.” Source: Hamas Charter Article One.
Peace
is not Hamas’ ultimate goal but genocide: “...the Islamic
Resistance Movement [Hamas] aspires to the realisation of
Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The
Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems
fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide
behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems,
O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only
the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would
not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."”
(related by al-Bukhari and Moslem). Source: Hamas Charter
Article Seven.
A
hudna brings only a temporary respite before hostilities are
renewed.
(Top)
What's
the difference between the Warsaw Ghetto and the Gaza Strip?
John
Minto, among others, has compared the Gaza Strip with the
Warsaw Ghettos. Based on this comparison he has justified
Hamas' policy of violence and advocated that New Zealanders
should support the Palestinians in their endeavours.
While there are some similarities between the two situations,
there are also some important differences between them. These
differences are:
* The Germans created the Warsaw Ghettos as a precursor to
exterminating the Jews altogether. Gaza is not a ghetto created
by Israel. It is a piece of land captured by the Egyptians
when they declared war on Israel immediately after the UN
mandated Israel's creation. Egypt administrated the territory
from 1947 until 1967. Israel no longer governs Gaza. Gazans
have their own elections, organise their own coups and fire
their own rockets.
* The walls of Warsaw were built to contain the Jews to more
efficiently stage their transportation to the Camps. The Walls
of Gaza were built to prevent the large number of suicide
bombings occurring at that time. After the Gazan walls were
built, suicide-bombing numbers fell by over 90%. The Warsaw
Walls were built for death; the Gazan walls preserve life.
* The Jews of Warsaw did not have the stated aim of destroying
the nation of Germany. Hamas has a stated aim of destroying
the State of Israel.
* The Jews of Warsaw were predominantly pacifists and most
did not take up arms. The Warsaw uprising only started after
less than 50,000 remained; the remainder either died in the
Ghetto or the Death Camps. Violence was an action of last
resort. Hamas openly advocates taking violent action against
Israel.
* The population density of the Warsaw Ghetto was 129,412
per sq km; the population density of Gaza is 4,117.
* Israel has no extermination camps. If Israel could believe
that these Palestinians might be trusted to become responsible
participants of a democracy then some believe citizenship
would be offered. However because a culture of resistance
and hatred is so deeply ingrained within Gazan society, such
an action is unlikely.
* The blockade of Gaza is a result of Hamas' ongoing policy
of violence. When the level of violence was low, Israelis
have allowed Gazans to find employment within Israel and commerce
has been allowed to develop. Despite offering the Germans
no resistance, Jews were not allowed to be employed outside
of the Ghetto and any commerce was clandestine in nature.
Instead of comparing Gaza with the Warsaw Ghettos, it might
be more sensible to compare the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
with the relationship between India and Pakistan. The formation
of Pakistan bears some similarity with the formation of Israel.
Minto also draws comparisons with Apartheid but the South
African authorities did not face an ethnic group which wished
to impose a second class citizenship on non-negro South Africans.
On the other hand, Hamas wishes to create a Muslim state which
would result in the supremacy of Sharia Law over any other
and the imposition of a Dhimmi tax on all non-Muslims. Hamas
expressly holds to Koranic writings that foretell the eventual
hunting and extermination of all Jews. Jews do not have an
equivalent theology.
The existence of the Palestinian refugee is a direct outcome
of the first Arab-Israeli war. A war that started when the
neighbouring Arab states rejected the UN declaration and declared
war on the newly formed Israel. Their economic deprivation
and low living standards are deplorable but if their society
could focus on economic development instead of diverting much
needed resources to their war effort, the well-being of their
people would be greatly advanced.
Sometimes the population density of Gaza is used as an argument
that economic sustainability is impossible. However, there
are many societies who have achieved economic sustainability
and even prosperity, despite having a greater population density
than Gaza:
Pop density
(per sq km)
--------------------------------------
Tel Aviv
7,445
Hong Kong
6,352
Singapore
6,252
Moscow
4,900
London
5,100
Gaza
4,167
-------------------------------------------
For a local comparison:
Central Auckland
2,326
Auckland
989
-------------------------------------------
The difference is a state of peace and rule of law.
During the six month "ceasefire" that ended on 19
December, Gazans fired 329 rockets and mortars. Most of these
attacks went unreported in the West. Israel acted with restraint
throughout this period. Yet when Israel acts decisively to
address the safety of its citizens it is accused of reacting
disproportionately. How does one act proportionately in such
a situation? Are we in the West seriously suggesting that
Israel should emulate the Gazans and take random pot shots
into Gaza?
It would be nice to think that Jews and Palestinians could
participate as equal citizens in a nation building process.
But how can a sustainable society be maintained if a significant
proportion finds secular democratic rule with Jews an ethnically
and religiously repugnant prospect? Many, including the UN,
have come to the conclusion that it is not possible and settled
on a two-state solution as the only sustainable one. Unfortunately
even after two states are formed, if one of them continues
a policy of belligerence towards the other, then we are not
much further ahead.
John Minto calls for New Zealanders to support the Palestinians.
New Zealanders pride ourselves on being fair-minded people.
Let's not easily take sides in a complex, long-running and
deep-seated conflict, if at all, until we have familiarised
ourselves with all the facts, thought through the issues and
seen the matter from both perspectives.
(Top)
Is
Israel an Apartheid State?
Israel
is often likened to an Apartheid state because it has refused
to allow the Palestinians to return to their original lands
following each Arab-Israeli war. What most people have
forgotten was that the relocation of people had always been
a part of the peace plan set out by the Peel Commission way
back in 1937 when the idea of a two-state solution was first
mooted.
The
Peel Commission drew its inspiration from the League of Nations
mandated peace plan developed for the Greeks and Turks.
In that plan 1.2 million Greeks and 400,000 Turks were relocated.
The plan was hailed as a success in bringing comparative peace
although it has not ended the emnity between the two peoples.
In
the original plan, Israel was to be formed out of 20% of the
region's land. All the Arabs living in the new land
of Israel would be relocated to the other 80%. Any Jews
living in the Arab quarter would be relocated to Israel.
The Peel Commission advocated relocation of peoples because
they recognised that the nascent Israel would not be viable
if a significant proportion of its populous were going to
be disloyal and seditious. This is why Israel will not
allow the Arab refugees to be admitted as Israeli citizens.
The
concept was also applied in the partitioning of India to form
the nation of Pakistan.
In
an Apartheid state, racial discrimination within society is
endemic and entrenched. Usually people are treated as
different classes of citizens with each class enjoying different
rights, obligations and privileges. This is not so in
Israel. All Israeli citizens have equal rights to resolve
issues through the justice system, Jews and Arabs serve in
the defence forces, pay the same tax rates and sit on the
same bus seats.
Israel
is a multi-racial and multi-colored society, and the Arab
minority actively participates in the political process. There
are Arab parliamentarians, Arab judges including on the Supreme
Court, Arab cabinet ministers, Arab heads of hospital departments,
Arab university professors, Arab diplomats in the Foreign
Service, and very senior Arab police and army offi cers. Incitement
to racism in Israel is a criminal offence, as is discrimination
on the basis of race or religion.
The accusation is made that the very fact that Israel is considered
a Jewish state proves an “Apartheid-like” situation.
Yet the accusers have not a word of criticism against the
tens of liberal democratic states that have Christian crosses
incorporated in their flags, nor against the Muslim states
with the half crescent symbol of Islam. For a Western state,
with Jewish and Muslim minorities, to have Christmas as a
national holiday is permissible, but for Israel to celebrate
Passover as a national holiday is somehow racist. For various
Arab states to denote themselves as Arab
Republics is not objectionable.
Zionism is perhaps the only national movement that has received
explicit support and endorsement both from the League of Nations
and from the United Nations. It was the League of Nations
that approved the mandate for Palestine with its ringing endorsement
of “the historical connection of the Jewish people with
Palestine and
to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that
country. Read
More.
(Top)
|
