No neo-colonialism for Gaza Strip
The received wisdom about Gaza and Hamas is always a fascinating tour of illogic.Ben-Dror Yemini: The new Palestinian people
Why do the people who want to “help” Gaza have so little interest in the input from the people there? In the old days they relied on the “strongman” Dahlan, even as they claimed Hamas benefited electorally from allegations that Fatah was corrupt. The one thing you will never hear from a Gaza “saver” is the concept that perhaps Gazans supported Hamas because of its religious and extremist chauvinist militarist appeal. It’s always because it was “progressive” and “built hospitals” and was part of the global Left, or even because it was supposedly founded and supported by Israel. If it was founded by Israel and it is part of the global Left, then isn’t Israel part of the global left too? No, of course not.
People want to rewrite history so that Israel “gave” Gaza to Hamas. No one wants to remember the war between Hamas and Fatah, the people thrown off buildings, or dragged to death behind motorcycles.
The answer to Gaza’s problems are always some sort of ill-conceived colonization of the place, as if Israel hasn’t done enough for the Strip in that regard.
The fact is Gaza cannot be saved. Its people cannot be turned into something they are not. Hamas is not a progressive movement, it is an extremist, right-wing fundamentalist religious movement. The Strip is caught in a brutal cycle of war with Israel, and Hamas’ relations with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has isolated it further. All of this is a tragedy for civilian life in Gaza.
Why aren’t Gaza’s friends in the Gulf suggesting the Strip look more like their societies? Because they want to use it against Israel? Good-natured “saving” of the Strip won’t help, it has to be confronted as an adult, not an object, and a way must be found to present it with alternatives for the future. Involving Turkey or the Gulf in that discussion would be good. But pretending it’s run by the socialist party and needs re-colonization is not a path forward. It’s not Singapore. It’s Gaza. Get used to it.
MK Anat Berko says there is no such thing as a Palestinian people, and MK Azmi Bishara calls Palestinian nationality 'a colonial invention'. It may be historically true that there once was no such thing as a Palestinian people, but that doesn't mean there isn't one now.PMW: How to properly beat your wife, according to the PA Mufti in Gaza
Needless to say, a Palestinian state was not established. Why? There was no occupation. King Hussein of Jordan made it clear during those years that “Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan," and that “Jordan in its two parts is the homeland of all the Palestinians."
Actually, the Six Day War and the Israeli conquest were the biggest catalysts for the development of a separate Palestinian national identity. The fact that there was no Palestinian people in the past does not mean that there is no Palestinian people today. Indeed, it is not clear what the difference is between Jordanians, Palestinians and the Syrians themselves. They have same language, religion, culture, and often shared tribal or familial kinship. But identity is a flexible matter sometimes. In any case, it is self-defined.
Logic says there is no need for a separate Palestinian state. Jordan already exists. And the one-state solution is unworthy of Jews and Palestinians. It is worthy of both banks of the Jordan River, east and west. Palestinian leaders, even the last two decades, have made every effort to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. So Berko is right about the past. At present there is no need to deny Palestinian nationalism, because whoever denies it now will find themselves in a binational state in the future.
During a weekly Palestinian Authority TV program on social issues, the Mufti of Gaza Hassan Al-Laham discussed divorce in Islam. He explained that Allah directed men to take four steps to resolve conflicts with one's wife before resorting to divorce:PA Mufti of Gaza explains how to hit your wife: "Not hitting that will bring the police
"Allah said: Warn them [the wives], and separate from them, and hit them, and bring an arbitrator from his family and an arbitrator from her family." [Official PA TV, Feb. 8, 2016]
His essential message is that while "she became your wife, and she is under your command," nonetheless, hitting is to be used only after warning her and separating from her "in the bedroom" has failed to achieve the desired result. And then, when hitting is being used at the proper time, it should not be a severe beating:
"Not hitting that will bring the police, and break her hand and cause bleeding, or hitting that makes the face ugly."
Indeed, the hitting should "be like a joke," even reinforcing "the love and friendship" between the couple:
"This hitting is a kind of reminder that the love and friendship that Allah commanded, is still found between us (i.e., the couple)."