The Washington Post’s Griff Witte, takes a device from Reuters and focuses on two men who, like Israel, were born in 1948. One is Israeli and one is Palestinian. In Born at the dawn of a new state
Witte is careful to emphasize the success of the Israeli with the haplessness of the Palestinian. But I guess it comes to the final two paragraphs:
With Nablus under Israeli military siege, Zaharan rarely leaves the city, and he has not been inside Israel since 1980. But if he had the chance, he knows exactly what he would say to any of his former Jewish neighbors about the past 60 years.”I would say to him, ‘Your life hasn’t changed in the way my life has. You’ve made it. You’ve succeeded,’ ” he said. “And I would want him to say back to me, ‘I recognize your rights.’ “
As if Israel hasn’t recognized his rights. Maybe not to return to Jaffa from where his family fled as it waited for the mighty Arab armies to destroy the nascent Jewish state so it could return. But certainly Israel has made greater efforts to create a Palestinian state than any other country in the world, only to find its efforts dismissed as not enough.
In the end there will be no Palestinian state unless the Palestinians choose to create a functioning government and society.
Update: The article contains the words “checkpoints” and “siege” but not “terror.”
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
“Maybe not to return to Jaffa from where his family fled as it waited for the mighty Arab armies to destroy the nascent Jewish state so it could return.”
Heck, even those rights are not sufficient. He would demand restoration of the land to the condition it was in when he left, or rather how he imagines it, ten million billion hojillion acres of olive trees and marble homes, with streets paved with gold and rivers of honey and ambrosia, and the war must continue until Israel provides all these things.
If they cannot be at your throat, they will imagine themselves under your heel.
The article doesn’t mention terrorism explicitly but at least it mentions the intifada. I wouldn’t call the article an insult, though; it simply describes how the Palestinian refugee sees himself. Whether he really is a righteous victim or just a self-pitying old coot is left to the reader.
I do wonder if Israel should just admit the first-generation refugees. There can’t be that many of them alive anymore, and if Zaharan is representative, they wouldn’t pose much of a security risk.
Barak actually made that offer, as part of President Clinton’s last-ditch attempt to rescue the Camp David accords. Arafat rejected it, because the first-generation refugees alone wouldn’t present a security risk to Israel.