 |
| "The Zone of Interest" director Jonathan Glazer (JTA) |
“Our film shows where dehumanization leads at its worst. It’s shaped all of our past and present,”
“Right now we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people, whether the victims of October the 7th in Israel or the ongoing attack on Gaza,” he added. “All the victims of this dehumanization. How do we resist?”
After making these comments, some of the audience applauded rather exuberantly.
I am not surprised because taken out of context his reaction was that of a man who sees a people suffering oppression at the hands of a mighty occupying military force. Same for those applauding. The assumption being that if Israel were not occupying the West Bank, none of this would be happening. That the decades long occupation has dehumanized the Palestinians - eventually causing them to delegitimize us and react with violent resistance.
That’s what it seems like on the surface. Not an unreasonable response.
This event was not about antisemitism. Although there are surely plenty of antisemites that have come out of the woodwork since Israel’s war with Hamas, this was not that. This is about compassion based on ignorance. The kind of ignorance that motivated UN Secretary General, António Guterres to express sympathy for the victims of the Hamas massacre and kidnapping which was followed by his apologetic comment that it didn’t happen in a vacuum. I don’t think Guterres is an antisemite either. He is probably a caring human being that tries to explain the ‘why’ of the massacre.
Empathy for human suffering is also the reason why so many good people are calling for a cease fire. They in fact want what I want. We all want. an end to all the violence and killing on both sides. Looked at in this light, it should be more than understandable why the death of 30,000 Palestinians upsets a lot of good hearted people. Even good hearted Jewish people like Glazer.
I don’t now what it will take to get these good people to understand that Guterres is right. What happened on October 7th did indeed not happen in a vacuum. There is a reason that Israel was attacked and why they had to respond. But the vacuum is not what Guterres was referring to
What all these good people don’t realize is that we Israel is not ‘occupying’ the West Bank in order to subjugate the Palestinian people. It does not treat them harshly for no reason. Israel has no choice in executing hash measures because of it own need for security. Need I remind people about all the suicide bombings that took place before those ‘harsh’ security measures were implemented? The ‘harshness’ is mostly about inconveniencing Palestinians at checkpoints because of suspicions that they might be terrorists. (Based on a history of many Palestinians from the West Bank who committed suicide bombings) A wall was erected along the border of the West Bank to make it more difficult for a terrorist from the West Bank to get through.
After the war for independence ended, the West Bank remained in Arab hands (Trans-Jordan) and became a refugee camp for Palestinians that fled Israel during the war for independence. Whether they were chased out or left out of fear that was exploited Arab nations is beside the point. Had the Arab nations accepted a two state solution then, there would be no refugees today.
During the 19 year period of Jordan’s occupation of the West Bank, the Arab world did nothing to alleviate their status as refugees. Using them as pawns to show the world what the existence of Israel has caused. The Arab nations never gave up on the goal of driving the Jews into the sea and finally decided to do something about it in 1967. Long story short Israel did not allow that to happen. and six days after the was broke out, Israel recaptured the West Bank. Those refugees were now Israel’s problem.
The idea of restoring all of Israel to its ancient glory by annexing the West Bank was not an unreasonable position for a nation victorious in war to take. But it eventually became an unachievable goal because of those refugees and world opposition..
Refugees were thatwere used as pawns before 67 were still being used after 67. The purpose of which was eventually liberating all of Palestine. The PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization was founded on that principle.(Think about what the word ‘liberation’ means’) The PLO was founded in 1964, 3 years before Israel had anything to do with the West Bank. It has been responsible for numerous deadly attacks against Israel before and after 67.
The PLO (now the PA) has never disavowed its goal to free Palestine form the river to the sea.and has rewarded the families of terrorists who died trying (Pay for slay). While still harboring the belief belief that some day, they will get it back.
In that vein they continue educate their kindergarten children to hate us. And to consider killing us when the can.(I’ve seen the video).
This is where Hamas comes in, They do not take their mission lightly. Which is why they have built a literal fortress of underground tunnels from which to attack Israel and hide. They will brook no compromise on the goal of destroying us. Doubling down on educating their children to kill us. There is no stopping them. There is no convincing them about the immorality of their massacre and kidnaping on October 7th. They consider it a religious duty to keep doing it. One can hear declarations of Alahu Akbar (God is great) in videos of that event taken by Hamas.
One cannot ignore the real source of the conflict. It is not because we don’t want a state. Its because they don’t.
Israel does not want to be occupiers. But they have no choice considering all these facts. That Palestinians are dehumanized may be true. But not because Israel wants to dehumanize them. But because it is the consequence of protecting its citizens.
That good people like Glazer might want a two state solution is not a bad thing in and of itself. But considering the above-mentioned context Israel’s security would be at serious risk if it came to pass.
As it would if Israel loosened its security measures. As it would if they were to agree it a cease fire.
As much as good people like Glazer thinks that Israel’s occupation and the attendant dehumanization of Palestinians is the direct blame... that a cease fire would end the hostilities... and a two state soultion would end the hostility on both sides, I don’t think he realizes that it would be a one way cease fire. Hamas will rebuild and reconstitute their forces and do it al over again. As they promised they would. Nor does he realize that a two state solution would multiply those odds exponentially.
If only they would agree to sop hating us... to stop teaching their children to hate and kill us, then a two state solution would be possible.
I know that there are right wing extremists in Israel that would never agree to a two state solution – even if it would truly bring peace. But I also believe that the vast majority of Israelis would agree to it if it were only possible. Not without Palestinians abandoning their antisemitic curriculum.
Without that, anyone that believes that a two state solution - thinks that way out of ignorance and wishful thinking.
I don’t believe it is possible to change the minds of those wishful thinkers. Because I don’t believe they are actually thinking. They are blinded by the daily carnage and don't know the context or refuse to consider it.