A Cultural Gulf Between Israel and Palestine. By Jonathan S. Tobin. Commentary, October 30, 2013.
Tobin:
Last
night there was a big party in Ramallah. As the Times of Israel described it,
the gathering at the Muqata, the Palestinian Authority’s government compound in
the city, was festive as people gathered to welcome home 21 of the 26 convicted
terrorist murderers who were set free by Israel this week as part of the deal
that got the Palestinians to agree to peace talks. Loudspeakers blasted songs,
friends and relatives of those released danced, and PA leader Mahmoud Abbas
proudly held their hands aloft in a victory gesture.
By
contrast, the mood in Israel was somber as the relatives of the people who had
been killed by those treated as heroes in Ramallah mourned anew. The New York Times described the difference
between the two reactions as “an emotional gulf” and that is, to some extent,
certainly true. One group of people was happy as murderers went free while
others wept. But the gulf here is more than emotional or merely, as the Times
seemed to describe it, a difficult process that is part of the price Israel
must pay for the chance of peace. In fact, the “emotional gulf” is indicative
of a vast cultural divide between these two peoples that explains more about
the absence of peace than any lecture about history, borders, or refugees. Simply
put, so long as the Palestinians honor murderers, there is no reason to believe
they are willing to end the conflict.
The
accounts of the aftermath of the release sought to balance the embarrassing
ceremony in Ramallah by highlighting the decision by Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu to allow the building of 1,500 apartments in Jerusalem.
There’s no question that the move was motivated by a desire on Netanyahu’s part
to pacify the anger felt by many of his supporters about the release of terrorists.
Even members of his coalition called it cynical and they are probably right
about that, even though they, like most Israelis, see nothing wrong with Israel
building in 40-year-old Jewish neighborhoods in their capital that would remain
in the Jewish state even if there were a peace treaty that created a
Palestinian state. Some would have preferred a building freeze to the disgrace
of allowing the killers out of jail and that, too, is understandable.
But the
lesson here isn’t so much about whether Netanyahu is playing political games or
the false charge that building in Jerusalem is any way an obstacle to peace. It
is that the two peoples in this conflict seem to be driven by values that are
not merely at odds but which represent a gulf between civilizations.
The
focus of Palestinian nationalism is not on building up their putative state,
making it a better place to live, or even in creating a political process that
would allow them to express their views freely. None of that was on display in
Ramallah as a “president” serving the ninth year of the four-year term to which
he was elected did his utmost to identify his political fortunes with people
who had stabbed, shot, and blown up Jews in cold blood. Abbas did so because
the political culture of the Palestinians still venerates the shedding of blood
as the essential bona fides of any patriot. That is why terrorists are
Palestinian heroes rather than shameful remnants of a violent past that is
supposedly finished. He successfully demanded the release of the killers
because that is something that makes him more popular.
Among
Israelis, there is a debate about the wisdom of West Bank settlements even
though few dispute the right of their country to build in any part of their
capital. But Israelis don’t treat that tiny minority of Jews who have committed
acts of lawless violence against Arabs as heroes. They are punished, not
cheered. Until the same is true of the Palestinians, peace is nowhere in sight.
