Peace Throughout the Land

There's an amazing thing about Jerusalem, specifically the Old City, and even more specifically, the Western Wall itself. If you don't have at least one spiritual experience while at the Kotel and at least three realizations as a whole while you're in Jerusalem, you're doing something wrong. I myself had three, but I'm going to talk about one right now. While in the United States, we only really see one type of Orthodox Jew. They all wear the same hat, they wear suits and look like Orthodox Jews from Crown Heights, New York. If you go to Israel however, you see all sorts of Orthodox Jews. The facial hair, the payot, the hat, the clothes, everything. There are variations and I always wondered what these meant. At first, I thought that the different view on how your supposed to look had something to do with different interpretations of Judaism. But then I asked an orthodox Jew who lives in Jerusalem and it actually has nothing to do with that. It's simply about where they're from. Each of these Jews who live in Jerusalem dress differently to show pride and show their individuality of their origins and their own heritage. But here's the greatest part. As I was praying at the Kotel I looked around at the different minyans and you just have to take one look and notice that any group of men praying do not consist of one type of Jew. Any minyan consists of multiple types of Jews with big furry hats, with long payot, no payot, black hats, beards, no beards, suits, long black coats, long white coats, long white cloaks, modern orthodox, and even Jews like me. But the amazing thing is that no matter where we are from, what our beliefs are, how strictly we follow Jewish law, Kosher laws, Shomer Shabbas, or anything else, in the end, we are all Jews and when the time came to dance and sing, no one cared where I was from or asked me how much I follow Judaism, they welcomed me into their circle. Think about this for a moment: Here are a group of people that live in a single place and share something that is important to all of them. They all come from different parts of the world with different customs and who all look differently. These people are different in so many ways, but because they are all JEWS, they not only tolerate each other, they not only accept one another, but they welcome and embrace one another without question. 

     Seeing and thinking about this, I realized that is what we all need; communities, states, countries, and the world itself. It's not just about tolerance anymore. Before this, I believed that in order to have peace, we all needed to simply tolerate each other. I didn't believe that we needed to get along, we just needed to tolerate one another. As long as beliefs are tolerated, then we will all be equal. After seeing this, I don't believe that anymore. I don't believe that it's about tolerance, but acceptance. When someone asks you, "Do you like that person?" and you respond with, "Well… I tolerate him." That seems different than simply answering with a yes. The idea of tolerance implies that you allow them to exist around you, but you don't truly embrace them as equal. This is what we must push in our communities, in our country, and in our world. We can no longer just "tolerate" one another, but embrace each other as equals using our similarities to bind us together rather than using our differences to separate us. There are so many things that differentiate the Jews in Jerusalem and yet, they emphasize the commonality of Judaism to not just tolerate or accept one another, but welcome everyone with open arms. We must do the same. If we want peace between us, we can no longer emphasize the differences between us as Jews and Christians and Atheists and Muslims and Republicans and Democrats, but as Americans and move forward as such. And in this world, we cannot emphasize our differences as Jews, Christians, and Muslims or as Americans, Israelis, Saudis, Iranians, but as HUMAN BEINGS. And if we move forward as such, peace will reign throughout our planet and we can make this a better world for our children and our children's children.

Photos of the Desert

The Settlement Issue

Today in class, as my mind wandered from the mundane class discussion, I started to think about the settlement issue. It's an extremely complicated issue no doubt, but the main argument AGAINST settlements is the idea that they are obstacles to peace. Up until now, I have believed the same. I am not quite certain anymore. There are two issues: One is why is Israel allowed to settle there and are they actually an obstacle to peace? Throughout history, the issues that war was fought have evolved. The most basic issue was the issue of land. The more land you had, the more power you had. Without going into a shallow history lesson of war, land is not something that is fought over anymore, except in the case of Israel and Palestine. The crux of the issue is that of land and who does it belong to? Does it belong to the Jews? Does it belong to the Muslims? Does it belong to the Palestinians? In 1948, the a peace treaty was presented and was basically all about which land belonged to whom. The Jews had some land and the Palestinians had some land. The Jews accepted it and the Palestinians rejected it and fought the Jews. When you have land and you fight to gain more land and then you lose, you lose the land you originally had. This is the basic concept of war. It has happened throughout history. If the issue you're fighting over is land and you lose, you've made yourself vulnerable to lose your own and sometimes you do. So why is it an issue for Israel to build on land that it rightfully won? Jordan and Syria and Egypt were parties to the war in 1967. Their goal in participation of that war was to eradicate Israel and reclaim the land for Arabs. They lost. Their goal was to gain more land and in return, they lost their own. That's how war works. If it didn't, then there would be no risk for a government to go to war. Egypt lost the Sinai and then was returned to them for peace. Jordan gave up the West Bank to Israel and got peace and yet Syria and Palestinians believe that Israel should just give up their land because they asked. So my first question is: If Israel rightfully won the land in war, why should they not be able to build on it? Do you believe that if Jordan or Syria or Egypt had won the 1967 War, they would've said, "Oh now that we've successfully massacred you, you can have the land and we'll go home." No. Of course not. If Palestine had won the war in 1948, would they have welcomed the Jews with open arms? No. Because that's not how war works. You win, you get the land. You lose, you find somewhere else to go. But that's no longer the issue because even if Israel has the right to build settlements, the issue is: Should they build settlements and should they evict people from the West Bank? 

     Now obviously I do not believe that they are good for peace, but I wonder if they should be an issue at all. My question is, "Why are the West Bank settlements an obstacle to peace?" Why do the Jews who live in the West Bank need to leave and Israeli settlements need to stop? Now I don't believe that Israel should continue to build settlements in the West Bank, but I would think that the Palestinians would enjoy the free construction. By Israel building in the West Bank, all that does is create more areas for Palestinians to live at the cost of the Israeli government and no cost to the Palestinians once a Palestinian state is created in the West Bank. Aside from that argument, which is not that serious, there is an underlying issue in the request of removal of all settlers from the West Bank: The refusal of acceptance of a minority within the state of Palestine. Does Palestine believe that they cannot have a state with minorities living there? It seems that Palestine only wants a state for themselves if no one else lives there, but Palestine. Why does this matter? Some of you are probably asking me, "Well doesn't Israel want to remain a Jewish state?" Of course it does, but it does this with minorities within it. There is a secular minority, a Christian minority, a Muslim minority, an Arab minority, along with many other smaller ones. Every single country lives with at least some of its population (however small it may be) being a minority and yet Palestine believes that it cannot survive with a Jewish one… This is the real issue. From this we can conclude that it is not the settlements that are the obstacle to peace. No they do not further the peace process by any means, but they should not be a condition of peace. The only thing that should be a condition of peace is the removal of the IDF from the West Bank, but peace can be attained without the settlements becoming an issue.

A Questionable Decision

As of five minutes ago, I had the opportunity to attend a documentary about the occupation of Israel from a militaristic legal point of view. After reading a quick synopsis online, I decided not to attend with my friends. The interesting thing was that right before I decided not to go, I said to myself, "I probably should go." I implied to myself that I should go as a courtesy to myself to become more informed on the subject because I should be as informed and educated as I possibly can on an issue as crucial as this and as it will be my future occupation. The reason I decided not to go to the documentary was because from the synopsis, I felt that the militaristic legal point of view was already skewed. It kept saying the "Occupied Territories" or Israel as an "occupier." The main question it was trying to ask was: "Is it possible for a state to be an occupier while retaining its democratic values?" And I think this is absolutely ridiculous. I could not bring myself to attend a movie when its premise is not based on fact. Israel does not occupy the West Bank. But this is not about the debate between occupation or no occupation or the legal ramifications or anything else in the matter. This is about me and whether or not I choose to not educate myself because something does not fall in line with my beliefs. Am I so arrogant that I believe myself to know more than legal scholars? Am I so ignorant to actively choose not to educate myself because I do not agree with the premise of the opposition? Should I not choose to educate myself on the other side or on a different perspective so that I may know all sides if I continue to argue my own perspective? Maybe it's ignorance. Maybe it's arrogance. Maybe it's conviction. I don't know. 

PURIM!

Republicans are not good for Israel

One of the things that I'm constantly challenged with is this notion that Republicans are better for Israel than Democrats. Historically, Republicans are more pro-Israel and support Israel more in their battle with Arab countries. This is normally true. Without going into the specifics as why I believe Republicans tend to be more pro-Israel than Democrats. In the recent past I have been asked how can I support Obama when his track record is not as pro-Israel as much as a young Zionist like myself would like it to be. Well in this upcoming election, my very first presidential election, I will have to cast a vote for Barack Obama or the Republican candidate. Now on one hand, my beliefs on domestic issues fall right in line with Barack Obama and the Democratic Party. Even foreign policy wise, I adhere more to Barack Obama's tactics more than Republicans' tactics. But the one stickler is always Israel. Now I am not a one issue voter, but Israel always becomes a heavily weighted issue when it comes to my representatives. What I have realized, as I saw at AIPAC's Policy Conference was that the biggest issue concerning Israel is really not the peace process or the settlements or anything of the sort, but Iran. Iran Iran Iran. Nothing else matters. The peace process is stalled and is going to be stalled and the settlement issue is so insignificant compared to the issue of Iran that is no longer a large concern in my eyes. Right now, when people go to the voting booth and make Israel a big reason why they vote one way or the other, they should not looking at which candidate will support Israel in the next four years through their various dealings with the Palestinians and other Arab countries. Instead, we, as Zionists, should be looking at which candidate is going to manage the Iran issue the best. And in my opinion, Republicans are only going to perpetuate war as is their custom. Each candidate has stated in their campaign that a military option is going to be prominent and most likely, not the last resort. I don't believe that any Republican candidate can rally the international community to use other options (economic/diplomatic) as well as Barack Obama and I don't believe that the international community is as likely to support a Republican president more than President Obama. In these most unstable times of time we cannot look to the past to see which candidate has supported Israel more and which will support them in the future. We have to look to the future and wonder... which President is the one that's going to stop Israel and Iran from going to war? Which candidate is going to make sure that even if and maybe even when Iran gets a nuclear weapon, is going to make sure they never use it... and that man is President Barack Obama.

A Weekend on the Kibbutz

So I just spent the weekend at a kibbutz in Ramat Hanegev. It's a group of five kibbutzim down in the desert. Not only was it amazing to see old friends who I haven't seen since I came on IST, but it's amazing how a kibbutz works. My friend Gal is the manager of pub on the kibbutz and his father is pretty high up in the factory. This factory is the main product of the kibbutz and yet... they are paid the exact same amount of money. The most interesting concept. Obviously that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. The difference is what the kibbutz gives them. Gal is given a little apartment for himself with the basic necessities. He has a small bathroom with a shower, toilet, and sink. He has enough room for his bed and a couch and a TV and a computer and then he has a small kitchen with a refrigerator and sink and closets and stuff. None of these things are glorious in any way, but none the less work great and a perfectly reasonable. On the other hand, his father is given a two floor house with many more things and some perks along the way... all decided by the government of the kibbutz who also make the same amount of money. And this kibbutz has existed for quite some time and will continue to exist with this same basic concept. It really is communistic at its core. And although this type of system couldn't work for an entire country it does work for a community because in the end, these people are okay with making the same amount of money regardless of what they do because it keeps the community running. Everyone does what they're supposed to do, get paid, and simply live. It's a very simple life, but most of the people that I've known never have anything to complain about and a few even intend to live on the very same kibbutz that they grew up on. Absolutely amazing sense of life. Absolutely fantastic way of life. Nobody cares about how much one has because in the end, it doesn't matter... as long as the community continues to exist.