Antony Loewenstein

Gaza, 26 July 2009:

What Palestinian Nakba, asks neo-con Daniel Pipes?

Following our recent video shot in Jerusalem on Americans, Jews, settlements and bigotry, one of the makers, David Jacobus, responds on Mondoweiss to some of the criticisms directed at us:

As a contributor to the film Cruel but Necessary: Israeli Opinions about the Settlements and Obama, I wanted to add some perspective on the debates that have developed on Mondoweiss.

With an afternoon of filming interviews, we had to exclude a higher percentage of those that had what most would identify as a “Zionist” perspective compared to perspectives critical of Zionism (but this should be obvious, no?). The two critical perspectives you see in this video come out of a total of three that we heard – and these were the only responses that lacked qualifications, i.e. usually pro-Zionist catches or exceptions. We had three responses by hippies, as one might call them, and they were excluded because they’re nonsensical and often contain qualifications. That being said, we have more Zionist responses sitting in the film bin – if a second video was made of unaired footage, it would be even more unevenly Zionist.

Those who find the interviews unfair seem to fit into two categories: the first disagree that the views shared in the video are representative of Israelis, and the second agree that they are, but think these perspectives should be kept private. I want to respond to both of these.

With respect to the first group, I think these people need a wider education, perhaps more experiential, or their arguments are just failing to win me. As someone who has worked with Americans in Israel who have been exposed to the reality and begun to change their minds, I’ve noticed the hermetic character of the information bubble most American Zionists hold. Barely anything else gets in besides self-supporting arguments and where there exist openings on fundamental issues of justice that force American Jews to ask questions about Zionism, there is a fudge-ton of “team sport” type propaganda, imagery, and mythology that fills in.

The following article recently appeared on Mondoweiss:

Antony Loewenstein and Joseph Dana write:

With all the current rhetoric out of Washington regarding an Israeli settlement freeze in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, we wanted to gauge public opinion on the streets of Jerusalem on a sunny, Sunday afternoon last weekend. What we found was shocking but unsurprising. The ease with which most Americans and Israelis, young and old, spouted racist and uncompromising comments about Arabs, settlements and Israeli conduct was a raw manifestation of the barriers to the peace process.

We chose the most central and trafficked area of West Jerusalem to conduct random interviews with passers-by on the street. Most people were willing to express their views, unafraid to display Zionist chauvinism in its most blatant form. Palestinians aren’t real human beings in this world. Engagement with Arabs is treasonous. Barack Obama should butt out of Israeli affairs. Illegal, West Bank settlements are necessary to secure the Jewish state.

The aim of this video isn’t to mindlessly demonise Israel but to reveal the side of a country, and its frequent visitors, that is too rarely discussed in the West. It’s a place that is all-too-often, conveniently ignored in the Jewish Diaspora. These bigoted attitudes are only growing in Israel, as American Jews increasingly support Obama to pressure Israel to change its self-destructive course.

The American-Israeli relationship is in serious need of re-assessment.

(The story was also re-published on Talking Points Memo).

My following article recently appeared on Mondoweiss:

Antony Loewenstein writes from East Jerusalem:

“Signs of Hope Emerge in the West Bank” was a headline in the New York Times on 16 July. On the same day, the London Guardian headlined a similar story, “Allure of normal life triumphs in West Bank ‘ghost town‘”. Both pieces featured the same photo, a new cinema in Nablus.

The message was clear. Reduced checkpoints, major cities encouraging business and greater freedom of movement have lifted the spirits of the Palestinians. Nader Elawy, manager of the Nablus Cinema City, told the Times: “We now have law and order. You can really feel the change.” At least the Guardian included some skepticism. “Israel is always trying to make it look as though the occupation has ended, rather than actually ending it”, said Nablus resident Farouq al-Masri.

My time in Bethlehem confirms that such concerns are justified.

Traveling from Jerusalem to Bethlehem is a relatively short distance but booming checkpoints increase the travel-time. The separation wall suddenly appears on the horizon and although it no longer intimidates many of the Palestinians with whom I converse, it’s humiliating to have to present an ID card and hand to be scanned every time you want to return to your hometown. Internationals are of course regarded as irrelevant, being waved through after a brief glance at the passport.

Much has been written about the checkpoints, their dehumanising effect, the metallic glow of metal walkways, the cold stares of the bored Israeli soldiers and the blank looks of the disheveled Arab workers and women coming and going in their daily lives. The checkpoint’s permanence, its warehouse effect, does not indicate a structure being dismantled any time soon.

Emerging on the Palestinian side is revelatory. Watermelon sellers, piled garbage, putrid smells and colourful graffiti splashed across the wall hit you immediately. A number of prized Banksy images are located near the checkpoint and places across Bethlehem. The taxi driver pointed them out to me as we rode into town at warp speed.

Bethlehem University is striking institution in the heart of the city; cobbled stones and striking views of the surrounding area. It’s Catholic and co-educational and during my visit I saw countless women dressed in traditional Muslim garb alongside girls in tight jeans and t-shirts. Two thirds of the student population are female. It was founded in 1973 as the first university on the West Bank and has been closed twelve times during its history by the Israeli military. As their website says:

“The curfews, travel restrictions, military checkpoint harassment, and the negative impact of the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank, are factors faced by the University’s enrollment of 2,936 students, most of whom are full time, and 10,816 graduates, most of whom are serving the Palestinian society in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza in various professions and leadership positions.”

I met with the Vice Chancellor, New Zealand Brother Peter Bray, senior staff members and a number of Palestinian students. The unemployment rate is 17 percent, the highest in the territories. I heard stories of student homes being demolished by the IDF on the day before exams. One woman’s brother had been shot dead by the Israelis. Others had to daily negotiate the checkpoints (some telling me that occasionally upon return from another town or Israel, the IDF would show them pictures of relatives and family members.) Seeing the security wall every day, they all said, made them feel angry, especially when it was late at night. Missiles even hit the campus during one of the Israeli incursions. “A mistake”, they were later told by the Israelis. “The problem is not with the Jews”, one said. “It’s with Israel.”

Bray said that the main reasons for the institution were teaching, research and community outreach. Tuition was kept to $3,600 each year to allow as diverse a student population as possible. The Vatican, Palestinian Authority and private donations contribute to the running of the university. Building deep and long-lasting relationships between Christians and Muslims was a key theme of the day.

One student, Stephanie Nasser, a 22 year-old IT graduate, remains unable to find work. She can’t apply for jobs in Jerusalem because she doesn’t have the necessary Israeli work permit. “I won’t apply for Jewish jobs”, she said. Later she told me that her family, as Christians, were pressuring her to only look for work in Christian firms, not in the Muslim community.

It is virtually impossible for Muslims under 45 years of age to get a Jerusalem ID card. Furthermore, as the Palestinian group explained to me, receiving permission of entry into Israel does not mean automatic permission to enter. Often they would arrive at the checkpoint, show their papers and be told that the documents were invalid. This was code for obfuscation, as often such papers took months to secure. The disdain for the Israeli “matrix of control” in the West Bank was painful to hear.

As I listened to the articulate, nearly perfect English of the various Palestinian students, I wondered how representative they were. Stephanie wore tight jeans and a tight top and spoke with an American accent. Her friend, Dimak, eloquently explained her desire to stay in Bethlehem and contribute productively to society. It’s easy to forget in the West, with the constant stories about terrorism in the Middle East, the extremely high level of education amongst the Palestinian population. It’s currently going largely to waste.

When I asked the Palestinians about the famed “economic development” touted by the New York Times and Guardian, they laughed simultaneously. “The Palestinian economy is directly related to Israel”, one said. “Products in a Bethlehem super-market are often Israeli because, for example, Palestinian ice-cream can’t get through a checkpoint from Nablus. Everything imported must come via Israel and receive Israeli permission. There is no economic development without justice, fairness and political negotiation.”

The group was moderately hopeful that Hamas and Fatah would stop bickering – a view reinforced by a recent editorial in The National – and reconcile their differences. “The Israelis want a way to distract us from occupation”, one woman said. “But the Palestinians should be united. We need freedom, human rights, children’s rights and women’s rights.”

Although they were all happy with Barack Obama’s election win, they weren’t optimistic anything would change on the ground. “His Cairo speech talked about Iraq and Afghanistan and the violence of Palestinians, but nothing about the violence of Israelis”, a woman said. “Where’s the responsibility for US actions?”

Everybody agreed that the Western image of Palestinians was in dire need of improvement. They praised writer Naomi Klein’s recent pronouncements in Ramallah and her call to loudly explain the justness of the Palestinian cause. Bray acknowledged the effectiveness of the Israeli narrative but “when the US puts seven to eight million dollars into Israel every day, trying to reduce that is the only thing that could make a difference. The two-state solution is really not viable anymore. The university is contributing to building a society for a state that is yet to be established.” Bray was convinced that Israel could not continue surviving in its current form, “casting itself as the eternal victim.” He quoted the recent Breaking the Silence report and Avraham Burg as signs of moral collapse and hope.

The Pope’s May visit to Bethlehem was praised by the whole group. Bray said that the organisers had wanted to build an amphitheater with the security wall behind it but the Israelis refused permission. “The Pope gave us [Christians] hope”, Stephanie said, not least because he talked about the wall, Palestinian suffering and self-determination. She didn’t like the fact that the city had been partly renovated to impress the foreign visitor, because “we don’t normally have flowers and nice roads; we have occupation.”

Highlighting the Christian minority in Palestine, an issue that rarely gets traction in the West, was an additional benefit of the Pope’s visit. One Palestinian said he had recently visited the US and heard a Jewish, American talking about the Muslim oppression of Christians in Bethlehem and even named individuals who were involved. The man had never been to the city and had his facts completely wrong. I was told that the IDF often oppress Muslims more than Christians and attempt to cause trouble between the religious groups. “We are worried that Christian holy places will become museums”, one lamented.

Bray and the others took me to the highest point of the university, an amphitheatre overlooking the entire city (photo left). The Muslim call to prayer could be heard and the separation barrier in the distance. It was early Friday afternoon and the streets were relatively empty. The sun glistened on the concrete pavement, momentarily blinding us all.

Bethlehem was a thriving town, desperate for Jesus tourists and alternative types looking for life in the West Bank under occupation. The university was an oasis. I must admit my bias. I expected a scruffy campus with few facilities. In fact, despite the onerous difficulties, the institution sees its role as thriving in extraordinarily tough circumstances. They’re always on the lookout for more funds, but the students told me they found the place calming. Unemployment was rife in the city but education was still seen as essential to development. It’s unsurprising that PhDs and Masters degrees are increasingly popular; anything to postpone the unemployment queue.

As we walked around the city, Stephanie said to me: “We Palestinians are known globally as trouble-makers and we’re proud of that.”

I suspected she wanted her people to be recognised for many other achievements.

An interesting piece in the Guardian about the ongoing illegal, expansion in East Jerusalem and the American Zionist behind it:

For the winning punters chancing their luck at Hawaiian Gardens’ charity bingo hall in the heart of one of California’s poorest towns, the big prize is $500. The losers walk away with little more than an assurance that their dollars are destined for a good cause.

But the real winners and losers live many thousands of miles away, where the profits from the nightly ritual of numbers-calling fund what critics describe as a form of ethnic cleansing by extremist organisations.

Each dollar spent on bingo by the mostly Latino residents of Hawaiian Gardens, on the outskirts of Los Angeles, helps fund Jewish settlements on Palestinian land in some of the most sensitive areas of occupied East Jerusalem, particularly the Muslim quarter of the old city, and West Bank towns such as Hebron where the Israeli military has forced Arabs out of their properties in their thousands.

Over the past 20 years, the bingo hall has funnelled tens of millions of dollars in to what its opponents — including rabbis serving the Hawaiian Gardens area — describe as an ideologically-driven strategy to grab land for Israel, as well as contributing to influential American groups and thinktanks backing Israel’s more hawkish governments.

But the bingo operation, owned by an American Jewish doctor and millionaire, Irving Moskowitz, has taken on added significance in recent weeks as President Barack Obama has laid down a marker to Israel in demanding an end to settlement construction, which the White House regards as a major obstacle to peace. “Moskowitz is taking millions from the poorest town in California and sending it to the settlements,” said Haim Dov Beliak, a rabbi serving Hawaiian Gardens and one of the Jewish religious leaders in California who have campaigned to block the flow of funds to the settlers.

The following story was recently published on Mondoweiss:

Joseph Dana, Mairav Zonszein and Antony Loewenstein report from occupied East Jerusalem:

Today [19 July] roughly one hundred people gathered to protest the eviction of the Palestinian Hanoun family from their home in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem. They are the latest target of the increasing push to populate the area with Jewish settlers, hindering any possibility for a future Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem.

According to their website, the Hanoun’s are one of 27 families in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood that are facing home eviction as part of a plan to establish a new Jewish settlement in the area. The Hanoun family was displaced from their home in Haifa after the Nakba of 1948 and currently consists of 18 people, including six children. They have lived in Sheikh Jarrah since 1956, when the Jordanian Government and UNRWA gave them houses as part of a project to help Palestinians forced to flee their properties.

International press and every major Israeli news outlet including the Jerusalem Post were on hand to hear the press conference held inside the Hanoun family home. This is not surprising given news today of the US State Department informing the current Israeli envoy that Israel must halt all settlement construction in East Jerusalem. Prime Minister Netanyahu responded that Jerusalem will always be the united capital of Israel.

Later on, Hagit Ofran of Peace Now gave protesters and the media a brief history of another sign of Israel’s takeover in Sheikh Jarrah, the Shepherd Hotel. The hotel was bought by millionaire and close friend of Ehud Olmert, Irving Moskowitz, in the 1980s, with a plan to create a massive apartment complex for Jewish settlers. The city of Jerusalem has until recently denied permission to build such a complex.

Last month, permission was granted by newly instated mayor Nir Barkat to continue construction at the Shepherd Hotel, placing yet another portion of disputed land in Jewish hands and sending a message to Palestinians and the world that Israel is not a genuine partner in any bilateral, peace process.

What is so perplexing and enraging is that by continually implanting Jewish neighborhoods in the midst of Palestinian communities, Israel is sabotaging its own determination to be a permanent, Jewish-majority, internationally accepted, democratic state with defined borders.

Below is footage (shot by blogger Joseph Dana) and interviews (by yours truly) from a protest on 19 July outside a house in Shiek Jarrah (East Jerusalem) which is slated to be demolished to make room for Jewish settlers. Then nearby, Peace Now’s Hagit Ofran talks about the plan by billionaire Irving Moskowitz to turn the famous Shepherd Hotel into an apartment building for Jewish settlers:

Gideon Levy describes an Israel I am seeing and hearing:

The Israelis don’t pay any price for the injustice of the occupation, so the occupation will never end. It will not end a moment before the Israelis understand the connection between the occupation and the price they will be forced to pay. They will never shake it off on their own initiative, and why should they?

The following piece appeared recently on Mondoweiss:

Mairav Zonszein, Antony Loewenstein and Joseph Dana write:

The occupation can seem predictably mundane from a distance. To most Israelis the settlement project is seen as a problem, but a problem happening “over there” and utterly removed from their lives. Rampaging settlers are viewed occasionally on television. Violent Palestinians are seen to resist for no apparent reason. The international community and Barack Obama are protesting the illegal outposts and ongoing colonial project in the West Bank with polls suggesting that many Israelis are opposed to this apparently unfair pressure.

They should spend a day in the West Bank.

For the last three months, Israeli Ta’ayush activists have been accompanying Palestinian farmers from Safa to their lands just below the settlement of Bat Ayin. Since a child from the settlement was murdered in April, settlers have been consistently attacking Palestinians when they attempt to work in their fields, as well as burning the fields themselves – all under the nose of the IDF, which has done nothing to prevent the crimes or punish them.

The scenes from Safa in this period have been grim. If it is not the settlers aggressively driving out the local farmers, it is the army, which acts in complete disregard of Israeli Supreme Court rulings. After weeks of confrontations and brutal arrests, the army seemed to realize that we would not go away, and they would have to change their tactics.

Two weeks ago the army issued a 45-day closed military zone order on the agricultural land of Safa for all Israelis and internationals, asserting that our services would not be needed any longer, as they would ensure the Palestinians could work their land with the army’s protection. In these two weeks, Ta’ayush decided to respect the order and see if the army would indeed deliver on what it promised. However, during this time, the settlers infiltrated the agricultural land of Safa and cut down fruit trees and burned crop fields. Thus, despite the area being a closed military zone for all Israelis, somehow the settlers managed to get past the IDF and commit crimes.

This morning we went back to Safa. As Palestinian Ta’ayush activist Issa Slevi told us later, “The soldiers are settlers but in uniform. They both symbolize the occupation.”

After a local family gave us a sugary glass of tea under a blackberry tree, a large group of Ta’ayush activists and internationals from the International Solidarity Movement and Palestine Solidarity Project walked through the village of Safa towards the fields. The town itself is dusty, with some homes half-finished while other structures have circular staircases on the outside. “I Love Hamas” was sprayed in English on a wall. Children pointed and waved while the women stood together and smiled. Some men led the procession of around 50 people, including the Palestinians. Accredited journalists, from Reuters and Lebanese media, followed. One even held a gas mask, expecting tear-gas.

It was Saturday and the settlers on the nearby hill were virtually invisible. Their houses and caravans sat illegally nearby. A number of IDF soldiers soon appeared on a horizon and approached from the other end of the dirt track. A confrontation was inevitable. The aim was to accompany the Palestinian farmers to their land in the gorge to protect against settler attacks. In the past, activists were physically assaulted and beaten with batons by the IDF so we expected the worst. We didn’t predict two hours of heated debate and political discussion.

The soldiers announced that the Palestinians were allowed to pass on their own and tend their fields. The farmers were highly skeptical because settlers would likely attack them. Some activists pushed the IDF to join the Palestinians but they were denied access. Minor scuffles ensued. Supreme Court orders were produced to explain a 2006 ruling that refused the military being able to impose a “closed military zone” to prevent Palestinians working their fields. The IDF regularly breaks the law of its own country, let alone international law. Activists see it every week.

Unlike previous encounters, the IDF commander seemed like a reasonable man, urging restraint from his men and trying to avoid contact. It was a fruitless task, as the soldiers seemed incapable or unwilling to understand the Palestinian hesitance to farm on their own. One old Palestinian farmer, the owner of the area, arrived. He rode down the path on a donkey, alighted, and walked with a stick. He was highly agitated and screamed at the soldiers. He lifted his shirt after a while to show bruise marks caused by settlers.

Eventually Palestinians decided to pass, both men and women, while a number of activists sat down in front of the soldiers. Others milled around. Video cameras and cameras were in abundance, possible explaining the less aggressive approach of the soldiers. This didn’t stop them from arresting 10 people, who were all detained briefly and released soon after. The activists – who did not resist arrest – knew that if brought before a judge, the army would have been found to have acted illegally. This explains why so often the army releases them before it can happen.

The location of the encounter was actually beautiful. A gorge sat at the bottom of a valley, with green fields and olive groves dotting the landscape.

As we waited and sat under a tree to find some shade, an IDF soldier approached us “to talk about the issues.” He was an American Jew around 30 who had made “aliya” to Israel in 1997. He was not a religious fanatic but argued rationally, despite the confused nature of his argument. He initially acknowledged the Palestinians were under occupation then later said the land was “disputed” and had been given by Jordan. He said the IDF was a “humanitarian model” to the world.

We asked if he’d read the recent Breaking the Silence report on alleged atrocities in Gaza. He said he had not but criticized the soldiers for staying anonymous. When challenged about the use of white phosphorous in civilian areas, he replied that it was not illegal to do so. In fact, it is illegal to use the destructive weapon for anything other than flares and certainly not in civilian areas. Countless human rights groups have accused Israel of using the weapon during its war against Gaza in December and January.

The soldier said he saw himself as protecting the settlers, Palestinians and activists, though we reminded him that the IDF usually only protects the settlers and covers their crimes. We agreed that the potential for confrontation between all parties was high. But why remove the peaceful non-violent leftists? The settlers were the most violent party in Safa. Why doesn’t his unit bar them from entering the gorge and allow us to farm with the Palestinians? He dismissed this question outright. Although he didn’t reside in a settlement, he mumbled something defensive when challenged why the Israelis hadn’t prevented the burning of the fields in the last days and weeks.

He seemed a little conflicted about his role in the territories, despite his arrogant air. He defended the killing of civilians – “you know what Colin Powell said during the invasion of Panama? In war, there’s always collateral damage” – but he was open to alternative views. We joked that it would take a while doing drugs in India to get over his conscience after the things he’d seen and done in the West Bank.

It was a strange discussion, though largely friendly and slightly accusatory. A case-study of the soldier would probably reveal a deep-seated need to defend his actions. He constantly talked about “protecting Israeli democracy” though his main job is protecting the settlement project. Palestinians despise their presence, even if violent resistance is relatively uncommon these days.

We disagreed amongst ourselves to the importance of engagement with IDF soldiers. Joseph wasn’t convinced of the necessity, believing the actions of the man spoke far louder than words. Ultimately, he defended the occupation. Antony was more circumspect and wondered if such encounters could contribute to a slow, changing attitude within the soldiers. Joseph argued that things were desperate when even the seemingly decent Israelis were finding ways to defend the situation.

After we left Safa, we briefly visited Issa Slevi’s home in Beit Umar, a long-time believer in non-violent action, in a room with a high ceiling. As we drank hibiscus juice and then piping, hot tea, he told us about the reality of constant IDF harassment of towns and fields. “The media presents the Palestinians as murderers and terrorists and the Israelis as victims”, he said. “The whole world identifies with the Israelis.”

Slevi spoke of a time when his hope for a resolution in the early 1990s had inspired him to distribute flowers to soldiers. But today he was despondent about Fatah – “an Oslo puppet regime” – and damned the “peace process” of the 1990s. It has produced nothing more than settlements and settler violence. He compared the situation in Palestine to the Jim Crow period in the US, “when there were signs that were for ‘dogs only.’ Today, the situation is the same for the Palestinians but there are no signs.”

Despite all the abuse and violence, Slevi was fundamentally opposed to violence. He never spoke to settlers. He wanted a country where both peoples could interact and mingle freely, regardless of religion and political affiliation.

The day was relatively normal in an utterly foreign reality.

An interesting blog I’ve discovered in Israel, Occupied, written in the city of Jaffa.

My latest column for New Matilda is about the realities on the ground here in the Middle East:

In Palestine and Israel, Antony Loewenstein is finding that facts on the ground offer little hope for any solution soon, despite optimism elsewhere that change is on the way

A few nights ago in Jerusalem I met with some of the few peace activists in Israel. Members of the group Ta’ayush, young and old, sat and discussed politics and the future of the Jewish state. Their prognosis was mostly pretty grim.

Joseph Dana, an Israeli Jewish American who moved here a few years ago, said that he saw no hope because the occupation was so deeply entrenched and only growing in size. “Israel is a country directed by the military”, he told me, “a dictatorship with relative freedom of speech, but virtually no debate about the behaviour of the IDF.” He seemed to despise Israeli society itself: the racism, the bubble in the major cities and the abuses committed by the IDF. He desperately wanted to hope, I think, that Jews could somehow change things from within, but “sometimes I believe we’re not changing anything at all,” he said.

Another activist, Mickey, who had previously served as a commander in the territories, was more hopeful. He said it was positive that Likud and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had finally uttered the words “two-state solution”. He said he would never leave Israel, despite having an American passport, because he wanted to remain and improve the society. He was saddened to hear Dana’s despondency.

Yakov, another member there who described himself as having formerly been a “fascist”, told me that his society was sick with delusion and racism and that weekly actions in the West Bank, protecting Palestinians or confronting settlers, was the only way to keep sane and make a difference.

Certainly activists like Yakov are doing something, and the effect of their actions may be greater than it appears, but right now the power of the Israeli Left more broadly is at a real low, and in party-political terms the Left is virtually insignificant. Nobel Peace Prize nominee Jeff Halper told me a few days ago that there was profound disorganisation between the various peace groups, little or no co-ordination and apathy and exhaustion.

I was last in Israel and Palestine in 2005 and four years has made a colossal difference. Hatred of Palestinians is on the rise — witness Max Blumenthal’s latest video on the phenomenon (which may be hard to view on Blumenthal’s blog due to the site’s having apparently reached its “banwidth limit”, perhaps as a result of its popularity). Similarly astounding is a recent Israeli mobile phone advertisement, demonstrating how effectively Israeli citizens have been kept in the dark about the worst excesses of their own colonial expansion.

Even the somewhat positive signs from the new US Administration are all significantly undercut by what’s actually happening in the area. US President Barack Obama met with many Jewish American leaders this week and told them that Israel must “engage in serious self-reflection” if his stated goal of a two-state solution is to be reached. It’s a nice sentiment, but it has no connection to facts on the ground — one of those facts being the continuing problems associated with the US-backed and internally divided factions within the Palestinian political elite.

If a two-state solution is supposed to be the best hope we have, it’s not looking like much hope at all at the moment, for many reasons. Jonathan Cook writes in the National that colonial dependency is being fostered between the Palestinian Authority, Israel and Washington, “creating a culture of absolute Israeli control and absolute Palestinian dependency, enforced by proxy Palestinian rulers acting as mini-dictatorships.” It is an illusion of independence.

I’ve been struck during my time here by the profound disconnect between the attitudes and delusions of many in the West versus the realities in Israel and Palestine. It’s a conflict mired in myths, not least the one that credits the “security wall” with saving Israeli lives, when, in fact, the truth is far murkier.

The difficulty of even imagining a viable peace treaty under these conditions was clear during my visit this week to many West Bank settlements and outposts. They are dotted across the landscape, expanding and stealing Palestinian land. They are largely backed by the state and tacitly supported by the vast majority of the Zionist Diaspora. All of the earnest conversations currently going on over the possibility of a two-state solution are not going to move them by themselves.

One of the places I visited was on Palestinian land next to the settlement of Susya in the southern West Bank. I was accompanying some Ta’ayush activists, and the plan was to have a picnic in the middle of an illegal outpost. The outpost on a hill featured a synagogue (thrown together with sticks), in the knowledge that the IDF are reluctant to knock such structures down, and a house with a cement base. It is not currently inhabited by settlers, but is protected by IDF soldiers stationed nearby. The buildings, erected on private Palestinian land, are illegal under both Israeli and international law.

Around 20 of us climbed the small mound, unfurled plastic sheets on the summit and pulled out watermelon, hummus and frozen drinks. It was a non-violent, though provocative, act in the middle of a colony. The IDF soon appeared, declared the area a “closed military zone” and instructed us to leave or we would be arrested. The activists clapped and cheered and kept on eating and drinking. The point of the event was to film the proceedings, spread the world on the web and hope that embarrassment over the illegal outpost would oblige Israel to address the situation properly.

The IDF soon moved in, nabbed a few activists and forced the rest of us to retreat. It was surreal watching a 50-something Israeli academic being dragged away with a slice of watermelon still in his hand. Video of the action can be seen at Dana’s site.

A few hours later the activists visited another illegal outpost near the settlement Kiryat Arba and met a handful of religious fundamentalist teenagers with sparse moustaches inhabiting a hut made of tin and plastic and sitting on decrepit couches. Although this time the IDF finally forced the settlers to temporarily leave their outpost, the activists told me that this is a regular game played like kabuki theatre. As soon as the activists leave the area, the settlers will return, in as little as 10 or 15 minutes. The outpost has already been “demolished” a number of times.

How to establish peace in these circumstances is beyond me. I spoke this week to Palestinian journalist Ata Qaymari, once jailed by the Israelis for 15 years in the 1970s and 1980s for resisting the occupation. Today, however, he supports a two-state solution, arguing a one-state answer is an illusion that would only foster further hatred. He now runs a business daily translating Hebrew media into Arabic. He told me that the divisions between Fatah and Hamas, the expanding colonies and the rampant racism in Israeli society and newspapers makes any settlement years away, if ever.

“We will continue to live here and we will survive”, he said. “There will not be a solution, we will continue to suffer. This country is one of continuous suffering and war.”

It was a horribly bleak picture, but completely understandable. If there is to be hope then it must be founded in reality, not wishful thinking or pretty speeches. And that reality needs to include a Palestinian perspective also. Far too often at the moment, the Palestinians aren’t even being consulted about the settlement question and building permits in the West Bank. It’s a conversation being conducted between Washington and Israel.

Optimism is in short supply in the not-so-Holy Land.