Recognize Israel? Recognize Palestine!
Byrnzie
Posts: 21,037
Why does The Times recognize Israel's 'right to exist'?
Saree Makdisi, a professor of English and comparative literature at UCLA, writes frequently about the Middle East.
Saree Makdisi
Los Angeles Times
March 11, 2007
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/rte.html
'As soon as certain topics are raised," George Orwell once wrote, "the concrete melts into the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech that are not hackneyed: Prose consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse." Such a combination of vagueness and sheer incompetence in language, Orwell warned, leads to political conformity.
No issue better illustrates Orwell's point than coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the United States. Consider, for example, the editorial in The Times on Feb. 9 demanding that the Palestinians "recognize Israel" and its "right to exist." This is a common enough sentiment – even a cliche. Yet many observers (most recently the international lawyer John Whitbeck) have pointed out that this proposition, assiduously propagated by Israel's advocates and uncritically reiterated by American politicians and journalists, is – at best – utterly nonsensical.
First, the formal diplomatic language of "recognition" is traditionally used by one state with respect to another state. It is literally meaningless for a non-state to "recognize" a state. Moreover, in diplomacy, such recognition is supposed to be mutual. In order to earn its own recognition, Israel would have to simultaneously recognize the state of Palestine. This it steadfastly refuses to do (and for some reason, there are no high-minded newspaper editorials demanding that it do so).
Second, which Israel, precisely, are the Palestinians being asked to "recognize?" Israel has stubbornly refused to declare its own borders. So, territorially speaking, "Israel" is an open-ended concept. Are the Palestinians to recognize the Israel that ends at the lines proposed by the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan? Or the one that extends to the 1949 Armistice Line (the de facto border that resulted from the 1948 war)? Or does Israel include the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which it has occupied in violation of international law for 40 years – and which maps in its school textbooks show as part of "Israel"?
For that matter, why should the Palestinians recognize an Israel that refuses to accept international law, submit to U.N. resolutions or readmit the Palestinians wrongfully expelled from their homes in 1948 and barred from returning ever since?
If none of these questions are easy to answer, why are such demands being made of the Palestinians? And why is nothing demanded of Israel in turn?
Orwell was right. It is much easier to recycle meaningless phrases than to ask – let alone to answer – difficult questions. But recycling these empty phrases serves a purpose. Endlessly repeating the mantra that the Palestinians don't recognize Israel helps paint Israel as an innocent victim, politely asking to be recognized but being rebuffed by its cruel enemies.
Actually, it asks even more. Israel wants the Palestinians, half of whom were driven from their homeland so that a Jewish state could be created in 1948, to recognize not merely that it exists (which is undeniable) but that it is "right" that it exists – that it was right for them to have been dispossessed of their homes, their property and their livelihoods so that a Jewish state could be created on their land. The Palestinians are not the world's first dispossessed people, but they are the first to be asked to legitimize what happened to them.
A just peace will require Israelis and Palestinians to reconcile and recognize each other's rights. It will not require that Palestinians give their moral seal of approval to the catastrophe that befell them. Meaningless at best, cynical and manipulative at worst, such a demand may suit Israel's purposes, but it does not serve The Times or its readers.
And yet The Times consistently adopts Israel's language and, hence, its point of view. For example, a recent article on Israel's Palestinian minority referred to that minority not as "Palestinian" but as generically "Arab," Israel's official term for a population whose full political and human rights it refuses to recognize. To fail to acknowledge the living Palestinian presence inside Israel (and its enduring continuity with the rest of the Palestinian people) is to elide the history at the heart of the conflict – and to deny the legitimacy of Palestinian claims and rights.
This is exactly what Israel wants. Indeed, its demand that its "right to exist" be recognized reflects its own anxiety, not about its existence but about its failure to successfully eliminate the Palestinians' presence inside their homeland – a failure for which verbal recognition would serve merely a palliative and therapeutic function.
In uncritically adopting Israel's own fraught terminology – a form of verbal erasure designed to extend the physical destruction of Palestine – The Times is taking sides.
If the paper wants its readers to understand the nature of this conflict, however, it should not go on acting as though only one side has a story to tell.
Saree Makdisi, a professor of English and comparative literature at UCLA, writes frequently about the Middle East.
Saree Makdisi
Los Angeles Times
March 11, 2007
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/rte.html
'As soon as certain topics are raised," George Orwell once wrote, "the concrete melts into the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech that are not hackneyed: Prose consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated henhouse." Such a combination of vagueness and sheer incompetence in language, Orwell warned, leads to political conformity.
No issue better illustrates Orwell's point than coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the United States. Consider, for example, the editorial in The Times on Feb. 9 demanding that the Palestinians "recognize Israel" and its "right to exist." This is a common enough sentiment – even a cliche. Yet many observers (most recently the international lawyer John Whitbeck) have pointed out that this proposition, assiduously propagated by Israel's advocates and uncritically reiterated by American politicians and journalists, is – at best – utterly nonsensical.
First, the formal diplomatic language of "recognition" is traditionally used by one state with respect to another state. It is literally meaningless for a non-state to "recognize" a state. Moreover, in diplomacy, such recognition is supposed to be mutual. In order to earn its own recognition, Israel would have to simultaneously recognize the state of Palestine. This it steadfastly refuses to do (and for some reason, there are no high-minded newspaper editorials demanding that it do so).
Second, which Israel, precisely, are the Palestinians being asked to "recognize?" Israel has stubbornly refused to declare its own borders. So, territorially speaking, "Israel" is an open-ended concept. Are the Palestinians to recognize the Israel that ends at the lines proposed by the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan? Or the one that extends to the 1949 Armistice Line (the de facto border that resulted from the 1948 war)? Or does Israel include the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which it has occupied in violation of international law for 40 years – and which maps in its school textbooks show as part of "Israel"?
For that matter, why should the Palestinians recognize an Israel that refuses to accept international law, submit to U.N. resolutions or readmit the Palestinians wrongfully expelled from their homes in 1948 and barred from returning ever since?
If none of these questions are easy to answer, why are such demands being made of the Palestinians? And why is nothing demanded of Israel in turn?
Orwell was right. It is much easier to recycle meaningless phrases than to ask – let alone to answer – difficult questions. But recycling these empty phrases serves a purpose. Endlessly repeating the mantra that the Palestinians don't recognize Israel helps paint Israel as an innocent victim, politely asking to be recognized but being rebuffed by its cruel enemies.
Actually, it asks even more. Israel wants the Palestinians, half of whom were driven from their homeland so that a Jewish state could be created in 1948, to recognize not merely that it exists (which is undeniable) but that it is "right" that it exists – that it was right for them to have been dispossessed of their homes, their property and their livelihoods so that a Jewish state could be created on their land. The Palestinians are not the world's first dispossessed people, but they are the first to be asked to legitimize what happened to them.
A just peace will require Israelis and Palestinians to reconcile and recognize each other's rights. It will not require that Palestinians give their moral seal of approval to the catastrophe that befell them. Meaningless at best, cynical and manipulative at worst, such a demand may suit Israel's purposes, but it does not serve The Times or its readers.
And yet The Times consistently adopts Israel's language and, hence, its point of view. For example, a recent article on Israel's Palestinian minority referred to that minority not as "Palestinian" but as generically "Arab," Israel's official term for a population whose full political and human rights it refuses to recognize. To fail to acknowledge the living Palestinian presence inside Israel (and its enduring continuity with the rest of the Palestinian people) is to elide the history at the heart of the conflict – and to deny the legitimacy of Palestinian claims and rights.
This is exactly what Israel wants. Indeed, its demand that its "right to exist" be recognized reflects its own anxiety, not about its existence but about its failure to successfully eliminate the Palestinians' presence inside their homeland – a failure for which verbal recognition would serve merely a palliative and therapeutic function.
In uncritically adopting Israel's own fraught terminology – a form of verbal erasure designed to extend the physical destruction of Palestine – The Times is taking sides.
If the paper wants its readers to understand the nature of this conflict, however, it should not go on acting as though only one side has a story to tell.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
www.myspace.com/jensvad
Why don't you read the article before commenting? You may learn something.
and based on that, I have to agree with PaperPlates assessment...
Care to elaborate?
sure...
from what I've seen on their news coverage, neither is willing to work with the other side, each blame the other for their situation and ills....
it's a cycle that has gone on for a very long time, and those in charge on both sides don't seem to really want a solution outside of total removal of the other side...
http://www.linktv.org/mosaic
I did. Not much different from the thousand other articles you post my friend.
Careful, 4 out of 5 doctors agree that agreeing with me can be bad for your health.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
You posted approx 5 - 10 seconds after I did. It takes longer than that to read 500+ words!
But there have been countless U.N resolutions calling for a two-state solution, and which have been backed by the Palestinians and the majority of the International community. They have all been vetoed by the U.S.
Not for someone of my superior intellect.
I read what you quoted. I assumed you quoted what you felt was important to your point.
Smile Byrnzie, sunshine is good for your teeth.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
Actually, jlew ( I like to refer to him affectionately as lou lou
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I took several courses in speed reading. Ill not apologize if my reading comprehension to speed ratio is higher than the average bear.
Speed reading is a collection of reading methods which attempt to increase rates of reading without greatly reducing comprehension or retention. Such methods include using various psychological techniques such as chunking and eliminating subvocalization. It is important to understand that no absolute distinct "normal" and "speed-reading" types of reading exist in practice, since all readers use some of the techniques used in speed reading (such as identifying words without focusing on each letter, not sounding out all words, not sub-vocalizing some phrases, or spending less time on some phrases than others, and skimming small sections). Speed reading is characterized by an analysis of trade-offs between measures of speed and comprehension, recognizing that different types of reading call for different speed and comprehension rates, and that those rates may be improved with practice.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
yup..
and this has nothing to do with my opinion that both sides are to blame...
as I said, I've watched some local news shows from Palestine...and from what I've seen, they are not advocating a two state solution...they like to use the word Zionists and do place a lot of blame on the US...
Actually, I'm not really as serious as this politics shit may lead you to believe. The day I think I'm losing my sense of humour is the day I'll quit the M.T for good.
Exactly what I was saying. UN resolutions are useless. Its easy for a group to TALK about wanting to resolve a problem. But actions speak louder than words, and BOTH sides actions are wrong. Period. But its easier for some to just pick a side because the other side has the big bad US's favor. Someone's backing Palestine. Someone's supplying them. Training them. Etc. So one sides "muscles" are bigger. Big deal. Doesn't make one side more right or more wrong than the other.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
Have you been hobnobbing with Ahnimus lately?
Oh I have no doubt you're a fun guy off the MT. In fact I've always found you amusing. I just like to rattle cages when I can.
BTW both sides are wrong.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
LOL nah, he's not my type. I only hobnobb with pretty blondes.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
This article from the front page of the website doesn't seem to be too bi-partisan...
Selling Gaza to Egypt???
Please login or register to add a comment.
Grassroots
March 31, 2008
10:16 AM PDT
Well,what's going on here?
Israel is discussing with Egypt the possibility of 'casting' Hamas controlled Gaza 'adrift' in an Arabian 'sea' called the Sinai? And Egypt is supposed to be the NEW 'LANDLORD'? Providing all the power resources???
Is Israel daring to consider putting Gaza up for 'adoption'by the Egyptians in these moves that include Egypt beginning to supply ALL ELECTRICAL POWER TO GAZA,instead of the Israelis doing it?
What next? All Gazan Palestinians will be MADE TO BECOME EGYPTIANS?
Is Israel going to give all the 'slap-on-the-back' favours,jobs,food,medicines,invitations to come for tea etc to the West Bank and COMPLETELY OUST Gaza because it HAPPENED to hold a LEGAL election in favour of a party that America and Israel STILL LABEL AS "TERRORIST"? Yeh Right!
Israel is one of the most hypocritically brutal 'terrorist' States AROUND!
Of which fact,half of Israelis ARE ALREADY SOULFULLY aware of,and embarrassed by!
It has NO RIGHT TO condemn others FOR ACTIONS which are a tenth,in strength,to their own DAILY ASSAULTS on their neighbours!
Israeli Nuclear weapons,white phosphorous,and 1 ton bombs,against Chinese fire-crackers(comparably)?
A very 'gentlemanly' fight,what?
I suppose that's Israels way of PUSHING GAZA,and it's Palestinians INTO THE SEA without a raft!
Except,it wants to:
-push Palestinian people into the Egyptian desert,(get them back for the Jewish 'Exodus'),
-take land which IS NOT ENDIGENOUSLY THEIRS!
-demolish the Palestinian homes in total,with people(including foreign activists) STILL INSIDE!
-revamp a disgracefully neglected sewage system that's ALREADY spreading disease,
-open up a few nice coffee shops,restock the STARK empty shelves of abandoned stores and open up stylish salons,and discos where their Israeli kids can get stone-arsed drunk,or high on DRUGS as they do NOW!
-AND,BUILD NICE NEW 'Jewish only' billionaire 'TRUMP-STYLE' condominiums/villas,along a valued sea-side location, to sell to any other NATIONALITY as long as they be Jewish!!!
Sounds just like the plan for the devastated Katrina area,right here in the lil'ole' U.S.OF A!
Israel should be ASHAMED OF ITSELF. I am ashamed of it!
Doing to others as others did to them previously? SINFUL AND VERY UN-"CHOSEN"!
Looks to me like Israel is EVEN MORE SO collectively punishing the people of Gaza for the actions of Hamas,(which are negligable in comparison to the size and damage of Israeli IDF/GSS 'terrorist' ATTACKS),and DEEPENING the divide between the Palestinians of the 'well-behaved' Abbas PA West-Bank and their Palestinian brother and sisters in Gaza!
It's like watching apartheid and ethnic cleansing in SOUTH AFRICA all over again,but the Jewish people who lived in South Africa then SHOULD REMEMBER THAT NIGHTMARE!
Israel,you are playing God,by staging a re-run of the Cain and Abel story,SHAME ON YOU!
And now,Israeli agrees to remove a WHOPPING 10% of check-points between West Bank and Israel.
WOW! All done on George Dubya's "watch"? I guess he's still after that purty lil' Nobel Peace Prize!
PUKE!
Big deal! That should leave ONLY 480-ISH checkpoints left,with MORE NEW ONES ON THE WAY!
Not to mention the INCREASING ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS on Palestinian land!!!!
Oh,I'm sure the 'West Bankers'will fall to their knees in GRATITUDE and ADORATION!!
YAWN!!!!'
hehe...was that a copy and paste?
Some of the fastest speed readers in the world can do about 5000wpm, doing the approximate math, you're claiming roughly 4000wpm....hmm ok..
edit: Ok the article has 805 words (using an online counter) in approx 7.5 seconds... that's 6440wpm...
wow impressive... Call Guinness book of world records... it happened right here on the train..
lol
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Um, those "chinese firecrackers" kill women and children too.
And if the people of Gaza are disgusted by the actions of their 'leaders', THEY should take action and oust them. It shouldnt even need be done by an outside party. THEY should punish them.
Isn't that what so many here reccomend the US citizens to do about their leadership?
www.myspace.com/jensvad
um...that was a post on a forum....like this one...
do yourself a favor...watch a few shows....then let me know what you think...
Glad to hear it!
The message pit ain't big enough for another Stephen Hawking/C3P0 Crossbreed.
hehe.... just cuz he said it was 5 seconds doesnt make it so. hehe.....I read the damn article, hehe.....it was only a few paragraphs, hehe....and I commented on it. hehe....Whats your point Roland?
Check the times of the posts. 7:18 Original Post.
7:19 My reply. That leaves a possible time to read 3 or 4 paragraphs of 1:59.
hehe.......... anything else?
www.myspace.com/jensvad
On that we can agree.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
I'll check it out tomorrow. I'm needing to sleep now.
I'll let you know what I think. But I can't promise I'll come around to thinking that the best option is to wash my hands of the issue by claiming that both 'countries' are 'fucked and wrong'. In case you don't know it already, I'm a stubborn bastard!
there's no point really...I'm just f-ing around, but the server rounds up to the nearest minute
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
www.myspace.com/jensvad
sleep well...:)
please note, I'm not washing my hands of the issue, I'm just saying there is more to it that blaming one side...
This is why I post so many videos instead
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
people cant read... they watch tv...
and this is the result of it..
there news sources consist of
Colmes
Hannity
Blitzer
Matthews
Oreilly
Limbaugh
a nation of morons is the result of this..