Why I don’t think a one-state solution is a solution

Standard

From a comment on—  Jewschool thread, I thought I’d harvest this thought I have whenever I’m talking to advocates of a one-state solution:

A one-state solution would still be a two-state solution: the Jewish Israelis have all the wealth and representation in every national governing body. The Palestinians would continue as second-class citizens facing entrenched discrimination. Both peoples, deeply married to the concept of self-determination, would have to do an about face on a hundred years or more of nationalism.

The entire legal codes and national symbols of the country would have to be rewritten and voted into effect, which I can only imagine as problematic as what is happening in Iraq now. Violence would continue as terrorists and settler extremists continue to espouse ethnic domination and revenge. Riots between Jews and Arabs would be commonplace over each ill-executed (or resisted) attempt at integration of two peoples into one government, military, police force, education system, et al.

With open borders to the Arab world, I can only assume that fear of terrorism from abroad would result in the Jewish sector retreating into private security enclaves. Parts of the elite of both groups would leave the country, meaning Jews who fear their safety and Palestinians seeking better opportunities than minimum wage labor.

The Jews would find themselves as top dogs in a country still killing along ethnic lines; Palestinians would find themselves still fighting tooth and nail for equality. The journey to “peace” would be another 60 years in the making and quite possibly a retreat back into nationalism and a renewed two-state solution.

For the sake of preserving lives instead of intellectual consistency, I don’t think a one-state solution brings us closer to peace. In fact, I think it puts us further from it.

Parshat Chayei Sarah: Reconsecrating Hebron means giving it up

Standard

(To better understand the Jewish scriptures cycle and my approach to my sermonizing versus my blogging, see my explanation. Genesis 23:1 – 25:18)

Hevron, the holy city. The city full of holiness and holes, birthrights and burials. The coins dropped by Abraham into the palms of the Hittites in this parsha echo down the halls of history; and we audit what he purchased for us. We inherit so much.

Hevron is one of the four Jewish holy cities, where legend has it Jews have lived continuously for our entire history. Adam and Eve are said to be buried there. All of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs, except Rachel, are buried there. We don’t know what its name means. It could mean “four” after the four pairs of ancestors, or the fourth holy city, or the four other names its held. It could mean “unity” or “fellowship” for the partnership between Abraham and the Hittites. Or because estranged brothers of two generations – Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau – put aside their years of enmity in order to bury their fathers there. It is the reward that Caleb the spy requests for his truthful reporting. Under Joshua, Hevron is designated as one of six cities of refuge where those accused of murder could flee for asylum. It was the city assigned to the Cohanim and Aaron’s priestly descendants. It was King David’s first capital city and his parents are said to be buried there. In the Middle Ages, beautiful poems were composed to “sleepers of Hevron,” all those buried there, awaiting the day of redemption when they would awake, rise and join us in the Messianic Day. The Arabs call it Al-Halil – “the friend of God” – and we share with them the mosque built atop the cave, the Machpela.

Refuge, city for priests, meeting ground of reconciliation, family ties, reward for truthfulness, seat of authority. Not so bad for four hundred silver shekels.

It is because Hevron is so holy place that we are so disappointed in it. A legacy as rich as this in shining precepts is despoiled by its recent history and present-day morass.

How should one behave in a holy place?

In holy places, we speak quietly, respectfully, in hushed voices, awed and appreciative. We listen for the whisper of the still, small voice against stones ancient and strong. And we hear It.

On August 24, 1929, Hevron was anything but quiet as nationalist tensions erupted in Hevron’s most infamous massacre. In the words of Aharon Rueven Bemzweig, who survived that night, “Right after 8 in the morning, we heard screams. Arabs had begun breaking into Jewish homes. The screams pierced the heart of the heavens. They were going from door to door, slaughtering everyone inside…The screams and moans were terrible. People were crying Help! Help! …As we lay on the floor of the cellar, we heard the screams as Arabs were slaughtering Jews. It was unbearable.” 67 were killed, 60 wounded.

On February 28, 1994, who could have heard the still, small voice in the cave of the Patriarchs as the mosque filled with the sound of automatic gunfire, which Dr. Baruch Goldstein unleashed on Muslim worshippers. As the New York Times reported of survivor Katem Kafisha, “When I saw Goldstein, he was running toward the hall where everyone was saying prayers. I was taking off my shoes by the door. He could have shot any one of us who was outside, but it was clear he only wanted to open fire on the worshippers so he could hit as many people as possible. He didn’t say a word.” The IDF reported that Goldstein emptied 111 rounds from 3 —½ clips in two minutes, killing between 39 and 52 and wounding 125.

In holy places, pilgrims bustle and bring in bushels their hopes, reverence, faith, and search for wonder. From all over the world a holy place collects more holiness, layers of it like the sedimentary record.

There are few pilgrims in Hevron today. A trickle. Within its center, a diehard cluster of 300 Israeli settlers sit protected by 1,500 Israeli soldiers. Some 20% of it is under near-constant curfew and military patrol, shops are shuttered and sniper lookouts dot the rooftops. It is a ghost town, closed off and shut down. The most recent layers here are laid by the mountain wind swirling desert dust in empty marketplaces.

In holy places, witnesses are inspired to holiness themselves – a welling up within, an electrifying of expectation, a surge of hope, the feeling that God really stands just barely concealed beyond the curtain of reality. A battery sizzling with Divine renewal.

We fear in Hevron that God has abandoned earth, thrown up His hands and found more fertile soil for cultivation. Walking the empty streets or meeting wary-eyed settler devotees or wary-eyed Palestinian residents, you feel not a welling up within but weight, hallowed out, lonely.

Hevron is deep in the West Bank, recognized in every negotiation iteration as a city that will not be kept by Israel. Whether Israeli citizens – or Jews at all – will be able to visit this fourth of our holiest cities is not certain. But it must happen or there will be no democratic Jewish state at all.

How then – after all of this history – can we give up this city? Charged with meaning and power and symbolism, how can we hand over this tiny plot of land and risk never seeing it again? (It’s not so much we hand over really, barely the side of this shul! [Congregation Beth Elohim])

Because if Hevron is a “holy city,” it was once a holier city. Exactly because today it is so hard to feel the layers of holiness buried beneath still-fresh layers of pain, we must act as if it still inspired us to the strength, the charity, the hope and generosity, the reverence and the spirit of rapprochement. We must summon those feelings from our texts and our experience of sacred spaces elsewhere if we are to reconsecrate this city as holy.

Giving away what is valuable to our people is not easy. But we want Hevron to be holy once again. Of all the acts of repairing the world that are possible to us, this act of dusting off the soot and revealing the shine beneath – surely there are fewer more sacred acts! If all of Jewish law is to bring out the holy sparks in every movement and act, how great this mitzvah is! We relinquish because we revitalize. Solomon built sacred space; the Maccabees rededicated sacred space; now it is our turn.

We must see making peace, and its hard, hard compromises, as part of the most powerful act of creating holiness our people has ever endeavored. We will infuse our kavannah, we will invite God back amongst us, we will inspire pilgrims. And when it is done we will inhale the silent, awed, hushed aura of a city of holiness, of refuge, of priestly acts, of bearing truth, of reconciliation. Hevron has so much possibility.

I wish you a Shabbat shalom and hope soon, despite all the politics, to consider the hope still latent in dire situations. We have only up to go from here. If you’re interested in investing a little time in this issue, then some of us are working very very hard, very very seriously on that future day in Hevron.

11/14/09

“Are you here for community, or to build an effective lobby?”

Standard

JJ Goldberg asked this question Tuesday morning at a much-reported J Street conference panel with Matt Yglesias and Jonathan Chait. Navelgazing afterwards, it’s clear to see that two conversations were occuring in parallel:

  1. How do we solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
  2. Can I have some “oppressed Jewish left and— happy to be out of the closet” therapy time?

And I don’t blame these people for holding conversation #2 and I don’t blame them for finding their way to the J Street conference. Having done this work for 5+ years and found my own community (built it, actually) I do not need the therapy for myself. But I beleive it is unavoidable as we open up the conversation. People whose political views— never been validated before will absolutely need that space to be excited, thankful, and giddy.

As an aftereffect, people who are ecstatic to be around a more open conversation will need to search their heart and soul for the willpower to belong to an organization. One organization is not a movement — which is why there were 20 official conference sponsors and a plethora which came anyway: Tikkun Magazine, Jewish Voice for Peace, CODE PINK, and others. The conference belonged to an organization, although it was attended by a movement.

Since this was the first conference, there will be plenty of people who come, hear the conversation, and discover that they’re not comfortable coming again. These will be the ardently pro-Palestinian, the one-staters, those who can’t stand the I-love-Israel credential vouching, or those who squirm at speaking as American Jews. And those who stayed away waiting to see the results may stay away for another conference (or two) until J Street has time to prove it will not suddenly endorse Hamas.

I don’t need the therapy anymore, but I benefited from my own community’s giving to reach this point. Overcoming victimhood viz a viz being a political minority took some time, some whining, some chances to buck up, and some finding of places to channel my righteous indignation. We cannot look down on the attendees of JJ Goldberg’s workshop who clearly used the event to work through their own allegiances.

However — I believe it vastly important to channel that relief into productive actions. Thus it irked me a little bit that of the 1200 conference attendees, some 500 went home early and skipped the visits to legislator’s offices on Capital Hill. The lobby visits are the manifestation of political power and every body counted. It is now the task of J Street’s new grassroots field program — formerly Brit Tzedek v’Shalom — to sift through these one-time attendees and find leaders for the local chapters.

So I’m agreeing with JJ Goldberg’s retort to his audience full of whiny, label-haters. I— too rolled my eyes with impatience and disagreement as I listened to them. For those who can’t abide J Street’s parameters (pro-Israel, pro-peace) then there are other organizations for you (see above). But I also defend the role of community in our organization.

The 1967 borders with minor adjustments: a visual primer

Standard

For all those who ask me from time to time what my solution is, this is it: the 1967 borders, with 1-for-1 land swaps to bring the bulk of major settlements within Israel, territorial contiguity for the Palestinians, and a shared Jerusalem. Palestine might be demilitarized to a small extent, but not without control over it’s own air and waterways. The settlements by and large come down, and if it takes economic incentives to bring the settlers home, then it’s a price more affordable than blood.

Regarding Hamas, a unity government may be necessary, otherwise Fatah would appear to be leaving 1.2 million of its people behind. Hamas needn’t sing the Israeli national anthem, it need only hold its ceasefire reasonably. Once a negotiated final agreement is signed, the fuel for daily villianizing Israel will be greatly undercut.

It’s not that simple, but these are the broad strokes. Those who don’t agree likely don’t believe (a) Arabs can ever be trusted, (b) Fatah is a moderate Godsend to the—  conflict, (c) Hamas’ leaders are pragmatic even if they’re fundamentalist, or (d) the occupation is bad enough but soon it will unite world opinion against Israel as an apartheid state.

geneva-initaitive-map