Archived entries for Palestine

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Leaving with hope

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Marie-Noelle Loewe reflects on the experience as the trip draws to a close.

It’s been one week exactly since the Young Fabians Delegation left for our trip to Israel and Palestine, and coincidentally, we return from our trip on the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. At Ben Gurion Airport, security is tense, but this time no one from our delegation has been asked for further questioning.

It is hard to say what the outcomes of our trip will be. Every delegate came from a different background and with different expectations. Although all had approached the trip with an open mind, they had brought certain preconceptions about life in the conflict with them. The one thing that has become clear is that these have been challenged and often dispelled.

Nothing about the Middle Eastern conflict is black and white. After an intensive week of meetings, field visits and socialising, we have barely scratched the surface of the conflict.

The one thing that seems to have become clear to me is that time is running out. Palestinian statehood is crucial on order to support the moderate forces within Palestine. Before this trip, I was under the impression that only a small and extreme minority was still questioning Israel’s right to exist. I was shocked to find out that this view is far wider spread that I had expected.  The current Palestinian leadership is committed to a peaceful and stable two state solution, but they need a success soon to placate extreme forces within their ranks.

The outbreaks of violence and the resulting ascent of Hamas after Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 make its reluctance to unilateral withdrawal from further settlements partly understandable. However, Israel’s continued presence in Hebron, which does not seem to be supported by a majority within Israel, continues to not only violate Palestinian human rights, but is a symbol of resistance around which anti-Israeli forces can rally.  Israel has to find a way to compensate the settlers and recognize the sacrifices which they will have to make, but Benjamin Netanyahu needs to find the political courage to withdraw from H2 soon.

Palestine’s bid at the UN seems to be based rather on despair than on actual hope of success.  A negotiated solution is certainly preferable, but Israel should use the General Assembly meeting as a chance to engage with the Palestinian leadership rather than categorically oppose their proposal.

A week in the holy land has provided unlimited amounts of food for thought, but the ‘holy grail’ remains elusive.  The obvious strategy is to strengthen moderate forces and condemn violence.

The situation seems often bleak and stalled, but despite this, I leave with a feeling of hope.

Marie-Noelle Loewe is International Officer for the Young Fabians and the organiser of the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Do the answers lie with the youth?

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Young Fabian Chair Adrian Prandle examines the role of young people in the region.

As the Young Fabian Middle East Delegation approaches its final couple of meetings, it is worth reflecting on the role and experience of young people in the region. Over the last five days, the delegation has met with youth representatives from Fateh in Palestine and the Labour Party in Israel, learnt about the (extensive) work of HaNoar HaOved, and interacted with residents of Jaffa at the Arab-Jewish Community Centre to the south of Tel Aviv. It is important to consider their perspective of domestic issues alongside conflict politics.

It’s a relief to report that for the most part there was huge optimism in young activists and amongst those we met. BICOM told us that the recent social protests in Israel have had students at their heart, whilst Nidal Foqahar of the Palestinian Peace Coalition insisted that young people made a difference in the struggle to end the conflict – “taking the lead in developing new realities on the ground.” Social media has been utilised in both countries and apparently Gaza has the highest number of Facebook users per capita in the world. Whilst in Israel the squeezed youth are part of the squeezed middle, often university educated and in employment yet still finding it hard to close the month, in Palestine long-term economic decline has reversed. But youth unemployment remains high and the Office of the Quartet Representative continue their capacity-building work to counter enormous dropout rates and the 1000 classroom shortage in the Palestinian education system.

Having opportunity to talk with users of the Arab-Jewish Community Centre was a welcome opportunity during the trip to try and understand ‘real’ people as well as the activists and high-level meetings that we were fortunate to have through most of the schedule. Living side-by-side in the 5,000 year-old city, the centre helps Muslims, Jews and Christians mix and “understand each other’s narratives”. Despite the commonality of those of Arab descent having to work three jobs to get by (as the financial, social and occupational benefits from serving in the Israeli military were not accessible to them) we encountered just a little frustration and a lot more optimism and pride in working hard and achieving a decent standard of living.

It would be unfair to characterise Fateh Youth by the one voice that dominated our meeting and which others delegates have already posted on – but whilst the radicalism and ideology characteristic of youth politics outside of the UK, may not have been surprising, the unwillingness to empathise with the Israeli situation was disappointing and remains one of the lows of the trip. Not all Fatah Youth colleagues were so dramatic and the ‘older’ politicians we met from their party countered these views with realism, understanding and a desire to find a way through. In contrast, the members of Young Labour in Israel who we went to dinner with last night offered a firm belief in a two state solution on the basis of Israeli compromise. But despite a sense (contrasted elsewhere) that the country is moving to the left, the Labour Party has been waning. We’ll watch the outcome of Monday’s leadership election with interest as to whether rebuilding the party can help rebuild sustainably the two nations’ relations.

A quick word too on HaNoar HaOved – the General Federation of Students and Young Workers in Israel, a fascinating organisation who, like the Fabians, are separate from the Labour Party but historically rooted in the same politics. They are part membership organisation, part think-tank, as well as being the trade union for all young workers in Israel. The latter isn’t that common, and may be something worth exploring in the UK. (I’ve recently written on unions and young people for a Unions 21 publication to be launch at Trade Union Congress this week.) Membership is not just limited to Israeli Jews, HaNoar build relationships in other countries – e.g. Egypt – and educate people of all ages. They see the latter as the solution for both peace and a good society and were keen to emphasise their belief that you can’t really separate socio-economic issues and the conflict.

I look forward to understanding more about what they do and maintaining contact with them post-delegation – it is organisations like this which can make a difference to people’s lives, make a difference to public policy, and thus potentially make a difference to regional conflict and the quest for peace.

‘The people demand social justice’ has been the chant for the recent Israeli protests. If both Israelis and Palestinians can achieve their own social justice as well as understand each other’s domestic pressures, there may just be another critical step towards peace.

Adrian Prandle is a Chair of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Meeting Fateh Youth

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Siobhan Randell reflects on the group’s meeting with Fateh Youth.

Our meeting with Fateh Youth on Wednesday morning proved really great to see young people with similar interests (even if we differed in some opinions). It was good to see Palestinian young men and women engaged in political activity in a peaceful and organised means, which can only be positive to the nation-building of Palestine.

However, a member of Fateh argued that their problem was not with the State of Israel, but with Israel as a Jewish state. They believed religion should be removed from that title and that it should be a state for all religions with equal rights. After visiting Yad Vashem – the living memorial to the Holocaust – later in the day I better understood the need for a Jewish State that as a homeland for Jewish people. One that provides security for a population that has had its people and culture attacked for hundreds of years.

Of course a Jewish state must treat all races and religions with equal rights as is expected of all states, especially of a democracy. However, Israeli Arabs that we spoke to at the Arab-Jewish Community Centre in Jaffa feel that they do not have equal rights and are marginalised in society – for example, because they do not do military service, they cannot receive housing discounts and thus are priced out of the city.

We return regularly to the Palestinian’s quest for statehood via the UN. The reasons why the UN bid is a necessity for Palestine that should be supported by the international community was explained really well by the policy advisors and senior members of the Fateh party to us on Wednesday. I was especially impressed by the compromise Fateh said they were willing to make – demilitarising the country and accepting NATO or UN soldiers to act as security between Israel and Palestine.

However, I can also understand the Israeli worry that as soon as they pull out of the West Bank we may see a repeat of what happened in Gaza where an extremist group took charge and attacks against Israel greatly increased.

I have come to the conclusion that what is really slowing the peace process down are the worry that the Israeli government will use the security wall as a de facto border for negotiations and the issue of settlements, which personally I believe should have been solved a long time ago. The situation in Hebron and the fact that building has continued in Palestinian territories blight Israel’s reputation as a progressive democracy.

Siobhan Randell is a member of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – The Economy, Stupid

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Joel Mullan discusses nationa-building in Palestine.

The two-state solution is one of the shibboleths of the Arab-Israeli conflict, accepted as the end-game (at official level at least) by the Israeli government, by the PLO and by the vast majority of the international community.

Acres of newsprint are expended each week on physical conflict – confrontations between the various sides and analysis of the latest tit-for-tat. Yet very little is reported on one of the great strategic challenges for the region: a two-state solution requires action to be taken to allow for the birth of a viable Palestinian state. This is an obvious, yet oft forgotten or overlooked, truth.

The economic challenges are formidable. Palestinian GDP is equivalent to just 3% of the Israeli economy. A significant wage differential exists between the two countries which provides incentives for people to leave Palestinian territory and attempt to find work illegally in Israel, rather than complete the education that the Palestinian people will need if they are to compete in the new global economy.

Action is needed on the ground to break down the barriers to trade. In Hebron, we saw first-hand row upon row of closed stores. Closed, we were informed, either as the result of military order or in frustration with the conditions.

More broadly, progress needs to be made on improving arrangements for access to the Israeli and foreign markets, as well as movement of goods and services within the West Bank – a view shared by both the Office of the Quartet Representative and by the Palestinian leadership.

This situation is complex, and even the solutions to economic issues often require political answers. The economic success or otherwise of a future Palestinian state has deep repercussions for other dimensions of the conflict. For example, if economic failure results in delays to the pay of Palestinian civil employees, we could see security personnel abandon their posts. Similarly economic problems which worsen civilian conditions run the risk of strengthening more radical elements of the Palestinian political spectrum.

However, there is recognisable optimism. Senior figures in the Palestinian leadership called for the Palestinian diaspora to provide the expertise needed for nation-building and shared with us a vision for a Palestine capable of harnessing new technology to provide services which can compete with the likes of both India and, even, Germany. The Quartet is working hard with the Palestinians in their efforts and the Israeli Government is clear that “we don’t want a failed state.”

An opportunity for the world’s press arises in the next few weeks – on September 20th the UN General Assembly will assess Palestine’s application for membership of the United Nations. The economic situation is ripe for consideration.

Joel Mullan is a member of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Cold hard Israeli interests in the Middle East

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Young Fabian Partnerships Officer Nick Maxwell argues that Israel needs to realise that a change in strategy towards Palestine is in its own best interest.

The status of bi-lateral peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians is somewhere between tired and comatose.

Part of the explanation is that Israeli moderates and enthusiasm for negotiations amongst the Israeli public have both been severely weakened. Following the Israeli Gaza pullout, a consensus view has hardened that withdrawing from occupied territory only increases attacks on Israel. Further, the stagnation has resulted from a belief that the Palestinian leadership has shown that it is not prepared, or not able, to accept even the most generous final offer from Israel. The failure of the Palestinians to respond positively to the 10 month settlement freeze imposed by the current government, at some political cost, reinforced the point.

Lack of confidence in negotiations, coupled with the fact that current security measures seem to be working for Israel (the wall is credited with bringing suicide attacks down by over 90%), has produced an atmosphere where maintaining the status quo can be seen as the best available and entirely acceptable option.

From the Palestinian point of view, a public consensus has also hardened against negotiations, or at least bi-lateral negotiations with Israel. The process of negotiations are felt to have achieved very little, but a worsening Palestinian position. Most critically, every year since the Oslo accords, more settlements have been built in the West Bank. In 1991, 90,000 settlers were in the West Bank, in 2011 there were almost 600,000. This is in direct contravention of the Oslo Accords and to international law governing behaviour in occupied territories.

Israeli hawks draw strength from terrorist attacks, but they also feed off a deep insecurity within the Jewish psyche. The ‘security first’ mentality is hardly surprising. Jewish history is littered with persecution, a minority under threat almost where-ever they settled – culminating in the Holocaust. The day after an Israeli state was declared, it was attacked from all sides by its neighbours.

The story of Israel is one of defiance and survival in the face of existential threats.

However, these are different times and we are entering a critical period. Over the long term, the response to security threats must always include more than containment – particularly when the containment strategy fuels a sense of injustice in the region and the wider world. Israel needs to grow out of a culture of fear and insecurity, and do it quickly.

The status quo should not be acceptable and is not sustainable. The Palestinians remain an occupied people – disenfranchised and disempowered, festering in high unemployment rates and the indignity of externally enforced obstructions to their daily lives.  This has real and long-term security implications for Israel.

With the Palestinian Statehood bid and the Arab Spring, Israel seems to stand on a cliff-edge with only a limited period to orient itself towards a safer and more secure future. This future requires a rejection of the status quo and a strategic shift toward encouraging positive conditions in the Palestinian territories, rather than simply containing negative conditions. In particular, it is important to appreciate three points about Israeli interest:

1) It is not in Israel’s interest to have a failed state on its doorsteps. Over 20% of Palestinian youth are unemployed. State services are generally weak. It is in Israel’s own interest to be doing all it can to promote economic growth and development in the Palestinian Authority (PA) area. Practically, Israel should at least start by stopping the brinkmanship over its threats to suspend payments (of the territory’s own tax yield) to the PA.

2) It is not in Israel’s interest to be hostile to the Arab Spring. Several senior Israelis, including Mark Regev Spokesperson to the Israeli Prime Minister, have voiced concern about the democratisation of the Arab world. It is not sustainable to oppose the cause of freedom and democracy in the Arab world. While it is true that, particularly in Egypt, relations are likely to deteriorate in the short term, a more effective response to the Arab Spring (than wishing it away) will be to demonstrate Israeli commitment to peace and withdrawal from the Palestinian territories. Security and stability in the region will be best served by a dynamic and active hearts and minds exercise across the region, starting with tangible progress for the Palestinians in the bid for statehood.

3) It is not in Israel’s interest for Fateh to fail in its bid for Palestinian statehood. In the words of a prominent Israeli negotiator we met, the current Fateh leadership is “as good as it gets”. The current leadership is committed to peaceful avenues, rather than violence; it respects international law; and is engaged in cross-Arab peace initiatives. But Fateh has a desperate need to show progress, in the peaceful strategy, for the Palestinian people. It has thrown all its political weight and credibility behind the UN bid for Statehood, which comes to a head this month. In its own interests, Israel should do everything it can to encourage the success of this diplomatic route, rather than risk its failure and risk a rejection of diplomacy (bi-lateral or multilateral) and play into Hamas’ hands.

During our meetings, I have heard personal stories, on both sides, of people whose children have been threatened, maimed and killed. The common response is one of resolve to be vigilant against the threat and make the perpetrator pay, never betraying their memory. The more inspirational responses are from people who have taken the same experience and promised to dedicate themselves to finding peace, promising never to betray their memory by encouraging more of the same violence and hatred.

Overall, a security focused consensus and a satisfaction with the status quo in current Israeli politics must be challenged. There is a pressing need to do better, in Israel’s own cold hard interests. There is a need to articulate a new vision of strategic advantage for Israel which sets out ambition and an active intent to improve relations with the Palestinians, and with the region.

Hearts and minds have been the missing components of Israeli military success since 1948.

It will take political leadership, and political creativity, but at this critical juncture when the moderates in the West Bank are threatened, as the Arab Spring starts to present new foreign policy implications, and when the alternative is only the promise of generation after generation of more fear and hatred – is there really a choice?

Nick Maxwell is Partnerships Officer of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – The State of Limbo

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Young Fabian Treasurer Claire Leigh weighs up Palestine’s bid to become an independent state.

Day three of our trip to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory saw us go again into Ramallah. I was struck once more by the journey from Jerusalem to the nearby Palestinian city, which takes you past the looming eight-metre high wall and the checkpoint with aggressive looking soldiers pacing outside. As we have done for the previous two days, we pass with ease, white enough to appear harmless – tourists on a sightseeing tour perhaps. But the experience is quite different for those Palestinians who live the other side of that wall, and who have to pass by these soldiers every day on their way to school, work or to visit family. Palestinians need a specific pass for every crossing, made virtual prisoners in their not-quite-state.

Our morning was spent in meetings with members of Fateh Youth and several of the party’s politicians. They spoke passionately about the issues facing the peace process, the reasons why there has been so little movement in recent years and the upcoming bid for Palestinian statehood at the UN. The latter is a controversial unilateral move on the part of the Palestinian Authorities; controversial because it bypasses the stalled negotiation process and risks raising expectations among the Palestinians that will not be matched by real change on the ground. The move could also make it harder for the Palestinian leadership to bargain for a real resolution in the future. Once the UN statehood is set in stone, its terms become non-negotiable.

But then the fact that Israel is so appalled at the surprise move by their neighbours suggests there is something to be gained strategically by the approach. It also promises at least to shake things up a bit, possibly get them moving again. For decades Palestine has existed in a state of limbo, without territorial sovereignty but with airtight borders. Without the right to hold Israelis to account when they commit crimes within those borders but without the assurance that Israelis will be charged in Israel. Without the right to raise their own taxes but in charge of spending millions to provide (or not) basic healthcare and education for its not-quite-citizens. The situation is untenable and yet has tenaciously persisted for longer than anyone thought possible.

If the Palestinians’ unilateral bid for statehood is unhelpful or unrealistic, it’s at least understandable.

Claire Leigh is Treasurer of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

 

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Understanding Israel

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Young Fabian Vice-Chair Sara Ibrahim reflects on Israel’s politics.

Over the course of the last few days two distinct strands of thought have emerged: that security is paramount for Israelis and the Palestinians want to be liberated. So much is agreed between the parties: a two state solution is best, that any boundaries should be drawn along the 1967 green line and that the Palestinians need to develop the structures for statehood.

That is not to say there is no dissent. There are groups of Israeli settlers who are living in settlements well outside the 1967 boundaries and on the Palestinian side. Hamas dispute the right of the Israeli state to exist. However, if the mainstream can agree on the essentials, why is peace so elusive?

It seems to all comes down to power and powerlessness. Coming from the UK it has been difficult to understand the heavy security presence that is evident in and around Jerusalem and the West Bank. In the UK the need for 12-foot security walls and check-points manned with armed (mostly) conscripted soldiers seems anathema. So what is Israel’s rationale?

Today I came closer to an answer. This isn’t just a personal discovery but an important matter for the international community to understand before the UN vote on Palestinian statehood this September. Jeremy Leigh, an Israeli academic, told me and a group of Young Fabians that it wasn’t all about the Holocaust. The fact he told me this at Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Memorial site, is more surprising. This is because the West and, many Arab states, have interpreted the creation of Israel as some form of consolation prize for the atrocities perpetrated against the Jewish people by the Nazis.

To say that Zionism didn’t exist before this would be a fallacy. The Jewish people have historically been subject to expulsions from areas they had been well established or mis-treatment. There were the Jewish ghettos in Venice, expulsion of the Sephardic Jews in Spain and the exile to Babylon of the original Jewish community in Jerusalem itself. A culture of being outsiders in the states of others has been a reciting motif of the Israeli narrative and consequently its politics.

Without understanding this viewpoint, the Israeli position can appear irrational. It is not.

The apparent excesses of power shown by the Israeli state are borne out of a feeling of powerlessness. Until Israel has genuine grounds to feel free from attack from extremists then it will not have the strength to negotiate a binding peace agreement. We will know that the Israelis feel truly powerful when they relinquish their checkpoints in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and reduce their army.

One thing is certain – we are not there yet. Until the Palestinians understand the rationale behind the Israeli concerns  - I fear we will not get there.

Sara Ibrahim is Vice-Chair of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Palestine’s UN bid

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Roxanne Mashari explains why she now supports Palestine’s UN bid for independent statehood.

September 21st 2011 is not just the day I turn 25, but also the day that the Palestinians will take their bid for independent statehood to the United Nations. You can see faces of the Palestinians that we talk to light up with a sense of hope and energy at the prospect of the bid succeeding and there is a real sense of excitement in the air in the Palestinian Territories.

Dr Sabri Saydam, technology and science advisor to the Palestinian Prime Minister, beamed into our meeting with Fateh Youth this morning clutching a tiny cube in his hand. Taking his seat, Dr Saydam held the cube up for the delegation to see. Inside was a miniature blue chair with a tiny Palestinian flag. The message on the cube reads ‘Palestine’s Right, A Full Membership to the United Nations’.

The overwhelming sense of optimism and pride radiating from Dr Saydam as he speaks is contagious. It’s hard not to get caught up in the energy surrounding the preparation for the bid and sitting here with the Young Fabians, Fateh Youth and Dr Saydam, it becomes difficult to contemplate a down side to the September bid.

We have been reminded throughout our trip of the potential dangers of such a move by the Palestinians. Mark Regev, Spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister, put to us yesterday that the Palestinian bid was unilateral in nature and that granting statehood to the Palestinians in this way would allow them to avoid some of the more tough concessions that would have to be made in order to secure a mutually acceptable bilateral agreement with the Israelis. Peace, Mr Reghev argued, must be secured before Palestinian Statehood and not the other way round

As far as I can see, opposition to the Palestinian bid rests primarily on three main points:

  1. While raising expectations, the bid will do little to change the reality on the ground for the Palestinians.
  2. This is an unilateral move by the Palestinians which seeks to undermine Israel’s role in the peace process.
  3. Any UN agreement for the Palestinians will make negotiations with the Israeli’s far more difficult as the Palestinians will be unwilling to deviate from the UN agreements.

Until yesterday I was intrigued but sceptical of the Palestinian bid for statehood. Today, my doubt turned into support.

Putting our concerns directly to Dr Saydam, Dr Mohammad Shtayyeh and members of Fateh Youth, counter arguments to the bid were refuted in a measured and comprehensive manner.

I was particularly concerned that if the Palestinians were granted statehood via the UN that Israel may be undermined or side-stepped in any future negotiations. Between them, Dr Saydam and Dr Shtayyeh were clear that this bid was in no way a substitute for negotiations with the Israelis, that the reality of any borders would need to be decided face to face with the Israeli authorities, that an independent Palestinian state would be a demilitarised in the interim with an invitation to Nato or the UN to remain within Palestine in order to ensure the security of the Israelis.

The Palestinians believe that the bid this month will ‘transform the nature of the peace talks’ and grant the Palestinian people basic state rights and recognition that will place them in a far stronger and clearer position to negotiate a lasting peace settlement.  A clear narrative behind the reasons for the bid began to emerge throughout our various meetings today. The Palestinians claimed that unilateralism hasn’t worked, bilateralism has failed again and again and so the last port of call must be a multinational route.

The quartet, the UN, America and Israel have all backed the concept of an independent and fully functioning Palestinian state. If the Palestinians are committed to ensuring Israel’s security through demilitarisation and the presence of NATO forces as well as clearly stating that this bid is in no way a substitute for tough talks with Israel (as we heard today) I see no reason why the Palestinians should not take this non-violent multinational route to self determination and statehood.

Dr Saydam said today that he would put off his own daughter’s marriage if it fell in the month of September due to the bid. He is right in his measurement of the scale and unique nature of the opportunity in front of us. Today, every concern we have heard about the bid by the Isrealis was answered and answered convincingly by the Paslestinians we spoke to today.

If this is backed up with action, this bid for statehood could very well be a monumental and non-violent victory for the moderates within the Palestinan Authority and breathe new life into the peace process.

Roxanne Mashari is a member of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Securing peace

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Siobhan Randell reflects on whether Israeli security measures will help achieve lasting peace.

Second day on the delegation, already – by the amount of information I have absorbed – it feels like I have been here a lot longer! I’ve felt impressed by the variety of perspectives, both Israeli biased and Palestinian, we’ve heard so far in the programme. Each one an impressive speaker, I’ve felt like my opinion has altered slightly after every meeting and discussion.

Yesterday, I ended the day with the opinion that, at least for the moderates, there was a consensus that they wanted peace and a two state solution. The Palestinian UN bid did not seem to be the biggest deal, as on the ground it wouldn’t change anything, and would simply act as a motivator for further progress in achieving that two state solution.

However, after today visiting Hebron and hearing from Al Haq (who document Human Rights violations – including through very engaging Youtube/Google Earth presentations), followed by a lively discussion with Mark Regev, Spokesperson for the Israeli PM, I am beginning to understand the complexity of the conflict and the final status of borders in particular.

I found the situation in Hebron really unnerving. It felt as if the Palestinians were secondary citizens, that the security wasn’t there to protect them and that the effort by the Israeli government was completely and entirely dedicated to ensuring the ability for the Jews to live in settlements, regardless of the effects it would have on the lives of the Palestinians.

Palestinian shops and livelihoods were closed down, streets cornered off and Palestinians banned from driving on 10km of road in their own city, and even walking on 800m of road, meaning that some people had to enter their houses through their roofs, or leave their house entirely. Their appeared to be no sympathy towards the Palestinians or recognition of their right to be able to get into their own house, or walk along a route to work that was quicker than the one they were told to use by the Israeli’s. Simple things that made their lives so difficult were imposed, and, yet, I couldn’t see how it helped secure the state of Israel.

The main thing I took from Hebron was that although the Jewish population needed protecting, all Palestinians were treated as ‘threats’ instead of human beings and thus had fewer rights.

And yet, after speaking to Mark Regev, I understood more fully the Jewish narrative, history and need to have security. I learnt that ‘the wall‘ was (justified as) only a temporary measure and that it had reduced suicide attacks against Israeli’s by 90%; Regev claimed this saved Palestinian lives as Israel had reduced need to protect itself using violence and killing. After hearing this, the wall, which infringes internationally recognised borders for the West Bank, isolating Palestinian villages and separating Palestinians from their farmland and each other, seemed almost to be for the best.

In my opinion, the key issue is whether the wall really is temporary or whether it is an attempt by Israel to take land that has internationally been recognised as Palestinian.

I’m looking forward to my opinions being altered, dashed and/or developed over the coming days.

Siobhan Randell is a member of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

Middle East Delegation Travellog – Two sides of the coin

As part of our Middle East delegation 2011 travellog, Natalie Breslaw explores two contrasting opinions of the conflict.

What a day! Following a briefing over coffee, we were taken around the poverty ridden streets of Hebron with Al Haq, a Palestinian human rights NGO, concluding the day with a meeting with Mark Regev, the Israeli PM’s official spokesperson.  As I write this, we’re sitting in the beautiful terrace surrounded by trees and flowers with a gorgeous breeze in the Yitzhak Rabin youth hostel in Jerusalem.

During our time exploring Hebron, Al Haq showed us examples of many human rights violations allegedly being made by the Israelis on an everyday basis to the majority Palestinian population. What they showed us was appalling and shocking, and I say this as a pro-Israeli.

I am certain that the majority of Israelis are not aware of the troubles of everyday life for many Palestinians. For example, to gain access to their own houses, many have to climb the roofs of other housing, or climb through windows, as access to their own front doors has been shut off by Israeli authorities. This is done for the protection of the minority – 1,000 Israelis in the city compared to 200,000 Palestinians.

And the violence between the two groups – with murders on both sides and other attacks, such as rock throwing – shows the urgent need for peace, which is only likely to arise from a two state solution.

I’ve not been convinced by those who argue that Zionism is the problem and with the removal of such a concept the conflict would be solved. My opinion was later reinforced by Mark Regev. Our evening was spent throwing a barrel-load of unanswered questions at the poor man! His answers were direct and honest, and often sympathetic. And bringing together my thoughts for this blog has helped me develop a much clearer opinion following such a busy day.

Time, now, for a drink!

Natalie Breslaw is a member of the Young Fabians and a delegate on the Young Fabian Middle East Trip 2011.

  • You can follow updates from our Middle East delegation via Twitter by searching for #yfmep. And find out more about our Middle East programme by clicking here.

Copyright © 2004–2009. All rights reserved.

RSS Feed. This blog is proudly powered by Wordpress and is derived from Modern Clix, a theme by Rodrigo Galindez.