HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
Primordial
Illogic and Primitive Cruelty
by
Amira Hass
July
24, 2003
There
is nothing more logical than setting arbitrary times of day when a Palestinian
is allowed to leave his home and come back to it. There is nothing more logical
than forbidding him to leave his field in a pickup truck to take his crops
straight to market. It is logical to forbid him to receive guests, to take a
donkey-drawn wagon, to ride a bicycle, to visit his parents a few kilometers
away - or to bring a goat into his house "without coordination" so as
to provide some fresh milk for his
children.
There
is nothing more logical than to fence the Palestinian into his village,
neighborhood, and land, with an electronic barrier, and then set a minimum age
to leave. It is logical to appoint 19-year-old soldiers to watch the gate,
which is sometimes opened on time and sometimes not, and to impose the rules -
29-year-olds are not allowed out, 30-year-olds are, pregnant women are allowed
out, non-pregnant woman are not.
It
is logical to forbid all crossing when the Shin Bet (Israeli secret service)
suddenly requires it, leaving outside a 65-year-old man who went out to buy
something a kilometer and a half away, or a young man who went for dental
treatment, or a mother whose children stayed at home because only children under
the age of 21 are allowed out.
It
is so logical to forbid a Palestinian to go to the beach 300 meters from his
home, and to prevent half a million people from nearby towns from going to the
beach. It is so logical. After all, that's what army commanders and soldiers do,
day in and day out, hour by hour, in Gaza, in the Siafa area in the north and
the Mawassi in the center of the Strip.
It's
logical, because the IDF's mission in the heart of Gaza - which it did not leave
in 1994, despite the Oslo legend - is to guarantee the safety and security and
lives of Israelis whose government continues to encourage in moving to occupied
territory. It is logical because Israeli governments since the 1970s and on,
Labor and Likud, decided to settle Jews in the main open areas in the narrow
Gaza Strip, in the prettiest area of dunes and on the most spectacular beach,
in an area blessed with fresh water compared to the rest of the Gaza area.
It
is logical to lock people up in their homes and villages, and to sabotage the
farming of their land because it is logical to subsidize the Jewish settlement
in the land of the forefathers of Gush Katif and northern Gaza. It is logical
to connect Jewish settler homes to electricity and water while forbidding Palestinian
neighbors from connecting to the electricity grid and the water and sewage
lines.
It
sounds cruel to lock people up in their homes and uproot their groves and
orchards that they spent decades nurturing. But it's a logical cruelty, Israel
is convinced, if that is what it takes to foil the cruelty of others - to
prevent an armed Palestinian attack on a nursery school or a plant nursery or
to plant a landmine on the route of a tank that is patrolling to protect the
nursery school and the plant nursery.
During
the Oslo years, many good Israelis made do with the logical thought that "eventually"
the settlements in Gaza would be dismantled. Logic and policy are two different
things. Meanwhile, even before the bloodshed broke out in September 2000, the
settlements in Gaza expanded, their infrastructures were improved and their
security required the army to dictate various Draconian prohibitions of movement
for a million Palestinians.
The
northern Gaza Strip, with its minuscule settlements, was cut off from the rest
of the strip and de facto annexed to Israel. Palestinian representatives tried
to speak to the logical minds of their Israeli counterparts at the negotiating
table. It didn't work. On the contrary, the number of settlements in Gaza only
grew.
With
subsidizes and expanding infrastructures and good roads and an expanding market
for their worm-free lettuce - why should they leave? And why should the
government dismantle the settlements when the Palestinians themselves signed
the agreements that did not require the settlements to be dismantled? The quiet
that most Palestinians kept most of the time proved to Israelis that it was
possible to get peace with the settlements.
That
quiet relieved the Israelis of the duty to deal with the primordial illogic,
the primordial cruelty – establishing the settlements. The governments used the
Palestinian quiet to continue developing the settlements. And after September
2000,
what the appeals to logic did not accomplish, the armed attacks certainly won't
accomplish. After all, Israel will never give in to terror.
Even
before any Qassam rockets were fired at Sderot, the army shot to death people who
dared approach settlements and the fortifications that protect the settlements.
Some were armed, but many were simply shepherds and peasants and their
stone-throwing children. All the farmland around the settlements was shaved
down to nothing - raked, flattened and demolished, to improve the vision of
soldiers preserving the settlements. How logical.
Amira Hass is an
award-winning Israeli journalist who lives in Ramalla in the West Bank. She is
author of Drinking the Sea At Gaza: Days and Nights In A Land Under Siege (Owl
Books, 2000). She writes for the Israeli daily Ha’artez, where this article
first appeared (http://www.haaretz.com/).