Klein’s article did a really good job describing exactly what the wall was and its function. Along with that, reading about people’s reactions gave insight to how difficult it is for some to cope with the presence of the wall.
I found it really interesting that some people have such an easier time to get from one side of the wall to the other. There are some exceptions that are made that don’t completely consider everyone fairly. More than anything, I think that having a wall such as this one in a city is a shame. Being a Jewish girl raised in a rather reform family, I am a full supporter of Israel’s existence and I support almost everything they are doing in order to maintain a homeland for the Jewish people, because it is much required and deserved. But in addition to all that, I am someone who supports a peaceful environment for the three religions who have built a history in Jerusalem. They are all entitled to having a presence in the city in which they have such a deep connection to.
I can see why both sides would be opposed or supportive of the wall being put up. A lot of Israelis argue think and argue that it is necessary in order to protect Israeli citizens from any potential danger that could occur. By building the wall, the number of attacks has decreased substantially from the time when the Second Intifada occurred. So by building the wall, it serves as a protective barrier, protecting Israeli citizens.
Those that are against the wall tend to argue that it claims too much territory for Israel, when in reality they believe that land is Palestinian land. Essentially, it violates a code that was established after the 6-Day War. By building this wall, opponents of the wall have shown that it considerably limits their access to the restricted, protected parts of the city and this is true. But then again, I see it from the other side where they have no other choice but to build this wall for the safety of their own citizens.
How can this be resolved when there are such different, opposing viewpoints? By taking away the wall it puts innocent civilians lives in potential danger, but by keeping it, it’s just continuing this everlasting issue.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
An Item that Describes Me...
Looking around my apartment I find it rather difficult to find just one item that can sum up my entire person. There are quite a few things that my roommates and I share that define us all in different ways. Walking into my own room... I have a Hamsa hanging in the middle of one of my walls that I purchased in Israel, Jerusalem specifically. I love the fact that I purchased it in a place that's halfway across the world, also in a place that means to much to me. I've been to Israel twice now and going back to study for an extended period of time. I cannot wait to submerge myself in the culture and just experience life there. So, having an item hanging in my room (actually multiple things, but I just chose to pick the Hamsa...) from there reminds me of the connection I feel to to that land. It's special and unspoken, but I smile subconsciously every time I think about it or look at it.
There are so many different models and looks for a Hamsa. It can be ingraved, gold, silver, colorful, big or small. But it tends to have a common meaning for everybody.
More than anything, I like what a Hamsa represents. The Hamsa hand is popular in both Arabic and Jewish cultures; I like that fact because it brings the two different groups together with a common object. Hamsa translates to "five" which represents the five fingers that are on the hand. Most Hamsa's have an "eye" in the middle of them which represents a sort of protection against the "evil eye." I'm a strong believer in Karma and I try my absolute hardest to only treat people in the fairest and best way possible, just the way I would want to be treated. The Hamsa is a token item in the Middle East, for all cultures. I have a necklace with a Hamsa a poster with one, and this one that hangs in the middle of my wall.
Three Questions:
1. When you first became involved with this movement, what were people's perceptions of you? How did they react?
2. Has the environment improved at all? Have people responded to the efforts that are being made to make people more tolerant of different sexual orientations?
3. Has there every been a situation in which you personally were discriminated against?
Final Project
For my final paper, I think I've come to the conclusion that I'm going to research and put together as many different peace groups and organizations that have been developed to promote a peaceful solution in the conflict. After elaborating on numerous groups, I will talk about their effectiveness and what may need to change or stay the same in order to promote their main message. Honestly, I still haven't narrowed down exactly what I am doing. This is just one of my ideas. I'm trying to narrow my paper topic down to something more specific, I just haven't decided what I want to do yet.
There are so many different models and looks for a Hamsa. It can be ingraved, gold, silver, colorful, big or small. But it tends to have a common meaning for everybody.
More than anything, I like what a Hamsa represents. The Hamsa hand is popular in both Arabic and Jewish cultures; I like that fact because it brings the two different groups together with a common object. Hamsa translates to "five" which represents the five fingers that are on the hand. Most Hamsa's have an "eye" in the middle of them which represents a sort of protection against the "evil eye." I'm a strong believer in Karma and I try my absolute hardest to only treat people in the fairest and best way possible, just the way I would want to be treated. The Hamsa is a token item in the Middle East, for all cultures. I have a necklace with a Hamsa a poster with one, and this one that hangs in the middle of my wall.
Three Questions:
1. When you first became involved with this movement, what were people's perceptions of you? How did they react?
2. Has the environment improved at all? Have people responded to the efforts that are being made to make people more tolerant of different sexual orientations?
3. Has there every been a situation in which you personally were discriminated against?
Final Project
For my final paper, I think I've come to the conclusion that I'm going to research and put together as many different peace groups and organizations that have been developed to promote a peaceful solution in the conflict. After elaborating on numerous groups, I will talk about their effectiveness and what may need to change or stay the same in order to promote their main message. Honestly, I still haven't narrowed down exactly what I am doing. This is just one of my ideas. I'm trying to narrow my paper topic down to something more specific, I just haven't decided what I want to do yet.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Amiry and Hasan-Rokem Articles...
I thought that reading these excerpts for today allowed us to have a bit of a different and more optimistic perspective on the conflict. Some of the reading had subtle humor and language that a lot of our other articles did not have. It allowed us to view the article in a different light. I liked that about it. It was light-hearted, yet it still proved certain points through that kind of language. The fact that these stories were so much more personal than other historical accounts, really allowed the viewer to connect to the message that the author was trying to convey.
In “A Dogs Life” chapter, it really shows how being a dog in that society can be easier than being a citizen. The fact that the dog is able to attain a citizenship, where it’s owner is not, seems rather strange. The Jerusalem dog is able to pass through checkpoints way easier than a human is able to! How is it so easy for a dog to get across a border, but then when a human tries, they fail? The fact that it was so much easier for the dog to get the ID, just goes to show how divided Jerusalem has become. Israelis are making it incredibly difficult for Palestinians to make their way around Israel’s capital. It’s sad that the Palestinians are facing such issues in their daily life.
In the article, “Not the Mother of All Cities,” it really stuck me in a different way and gave me a completely different perspective of Jerusalem. I’ve never really made the connection and realized that men seem to have the dominant hand in a city such as Jerusalem. In the article, the woman says that Jerusalem has been overpowered by men. Her husband has a sense of control over her and it is because of this that she is not completely able to show who she truly is. He is limiting her to what he views as the right way for a woman to act. But a husband’s relationship with his wife should not be like this in any way. If anything, he should be more supportive of his wife and allow her to show her true colors. Through this analogy, you can see how Jerusalem should be as a city. Jerusalem should be able to accept and provide for people of all different cultures, races, and religions. Everybody should be able to come together in harmony while expressing and practicing what they believe in a peaceful manner.
Questions:
1) In your opinion, what do you see for the future of Jerusalem? Within the next 2 years? 10 years?
2) Do you think your personal views regarding women and feminism affect your view of the conflict as a whole?
3) What should be the biggest change seen between Israeli/Palestinian women/relationships with men?
In “A Dogs Life” chapter, it really shows how being a dog in that society can be easier than being a citizen. The fact that the dog is able to attain a citizenship, where it’s owner is not, seems rather strange. The Jerusalem dog is able to pass through checkpoints way easier than a human is able to! How is it so easy for a dog to get across a border, but then when a human tries, they fail? The fact that it was so much easier for the dog to get the ID, just goes to show how divided Jerusalem has become. Israelis are making it incredibly difficult for Palestinians to make their way around Israel’s capital. It’s sad that the Palestinians are facing such issues in their daily life.
In the article, “Not the Mother of All Cities,” it really stuck me in a different way and gave me a completely different perspective of Jerusalem. I’ve never really made the connection and realized that men seem to have the dominant hand in a city such as Jerusalem. In the article, the woman says that Jerusalem has been overpowered by men. Her husband has a sense of control over her and it is because of this that she is not completely able to show who she truly is. He is limiting her to what he views as the right way for a woman to act. But a husband’s relationship with his wife should not be like this in any way. If anything, he should be more supportive of his wife and allow her to show her true colors. Through this analogy, you can see how Jerusalem should be as a city. Jerusalem should be able to accept and provide for people of all different cultures, races, and religions. Everybody should be able to come together in harmony while expressing and practicing what they believe in a peaceful manner.
Questions:
1) In your opinion, what do you see for the future of Jerusalem? Within the next 2 years? 10 years?
2) Do you think your personal views regarding women and feminism affect your view of the conflict as a whole?
3) What should be the biggest change seen between Israeli/Palestinian women/relationships with men?
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Music...The Heart Beat Project
If there could me more projects out there such as this one, it would really help bring the Israelis and Palestinians together. By drawing a common link we are able to bridge a gap between the two opposing groups of people. Right when I started reading about this project it reminded me a lot of the Orchestra that Barenboin and Said put together. Putting aside the logistics of the conflict, I think having projects such as this one can only help raise awareness and teach others about bringing together groups of people who have never been able to agree upon
I really respect the fact that the Jerusalem Music Center tries it's hardest to encompass both sides of the conflict yet I feel as if they fail to do so. I feel like they give an unequal opportunity to Israelis. They give them the opportunity to meet experienced musicians and learn from them in a way that will aid their musical careers. I feel like they may be excluding the Palestinian students/musicians, whether it is intentional or not. I think they need to be careful about how they word what they say about the Music Center and everything that it does and stands for.
The Heartbeat project serves to bring Palestinian and Israeli youth together in a great way. Once again, in this case, music serves to bring people together. It teaches other tolerance in a way that is different than anything else.
I really respect the fact that the Jerusalem Music Center tries it's hardest to encompass both sides of the conflict yet I feel as if they fail to do so. I feel like they give an unequal opportunity to Israelis. They give them the opportunity to meet experienced musicians and learn from them in a way that will aid their musical careers. I feel like they may be excluding the Palestinian students/musicians, whether it is intentional or not. I think they need to be careful about how they word what they say about the Music Center and everything that it does and stands for.
The Heartbeat project serves to bring Palestinian and Israeli youth together in a great way. Once again, in this case, music serves to bring people together. It teaches other tolerance in a way that is different than anything else.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Salim Tamari...
After reading the articles by Dr. Salim Tamari, I got a really got idea of his perspective of modern day Israel. I enjoyed it more than anything because he wasn't basing his writing off of anybody else's experience but his own. By chance, I ended up picking the first two articles: "Lepers, Lunatics, and Saints" and "Ishaq Shami and the Predicament of the Arab Jew in Palestine". His hand-on experience allowed me to see the situation from a different perspective. I am always so interested in reading other people's perspectives, even if they aren't ones that I agree with. No matter what, they have some kind of reason for their opinions and it's always interesting to see where others' are coming from.
Anyways, in the first article I read, "Lepers, Lunatics, and Saints," I found myself getting a little confused throughout the article; I wasn't confused because of what was being talked about, but because of the fact that I didn't know about a lot of the things that Tamari mentioned.
Prior to reading Tamari's article, I had heard of leprosy, but never really knew what it was. It was interesting to read about how it affected those people fighting for the same land at the same time. Leprosy has been around since biblical times, and the fact that it came back to the surface at such a crucial time is pretty fascinating yet paradoxical to me. I thought it was absolutely ridiculous that when this group of people came down with leprosy, they were still separated, as Jews and Palestinians. Even at this crucial time, they couldn't come together to try and cure their people. I wish that this had been a breaking point for the two groups of people in the way that they would have been able to set apart their differences and come to a common resolution--a resolution which would bring them together to try and cure this terrible disease that had spread to both of their "communities." That's all just wishful thinking though.
Growing up as a Jew, my opinion was that Jews all around the world had to be strong supporters of the Zionist movement, or else who would support them? We are the ones that should be the strongest supporters. Anwyways, it came as a really big surprise to me that there were Jews residing in Jerusalem/Israel who were not full supporters of the Zionist movement. It's a given that Palestinians would not be, but Jews?
Potential questions for Dr. Salim Tamari:
1) What is your opinion on how the United States portrays the conflict to the public? How different is it then the media coverage in the Middle East? What do you think makes this difference?
2)Has your opinion of the conflict changed over time? How do you see it progressing in the future?
3) Where do you stand politically?
Anyways, in the first article I read, "Lepers, Lunatics, and Saints," I found myself getting a little confused throughout the article; I wasn't confused because of what was being talked about, but because of the fact that I didn't know about a lot of the things that Tamari mentioned.
Prior to reading Tamari's article, I had heard of leprosy, but never really knew what it was. It was interesting to read about how it affected those people fighting for the same land at the same time. Leprosy has been around since biblical times, and the fact that it came back to the surface at such a crucial time is pretty fascinating yet paradoxical to me. I thought it was absolutely ridiculous that when this group of people came down with leprosy, they were still separated, as Jews and Palestinians. Even at this crucial time, they couldn't come together to try and cure their people. I wish that this had been a breaking point for the two groups of people in the way that they would have been able to set apart their differences and come to a common resolution--a resolution which would bring them together to try and cure this terrible disease that had spread to both of their "communities." That's all just wishful thinking though.
Growing up as a Jew, my opinion was that Jews all around the world had to be strong supporters of the Zionist movement, or else who would support them? We are the ones that should be the strongest supporters. Anwyways, it came as a really big surprise to me that there were Jews residing in Jerusalem/Israel who were not full supporters of the Zionist movement. It's a given that Palestinians would not be, but Jews?
Potential questions for Dr. Salim Tamari:
1) What is your opinion on how the United States portrays the conflict to the public? How different is it then the media coverage in the Middle East? What do you think makes this difference?
2)Has your opinion of the conflict changed over time? How do you see it progressing in the future?
3) Where do you stand politically?
Final project idea
For my final project, I'm planning on writing the 10 page paper-- I just can't decide what I want to write it about. Within the next couple days I'll figure out exactly what I want to write it about and post it in my blog for Tuesday night. I have a lot of friends who are very active in the Israel groups on campus and I am curious to see what they have to say about the conflict, along with other people. I'm thinking maybe I would be able to conduct some interviews making my paper a little more "hands on." I just need to figure out an actual focus for my paper... :)
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Steps to peace occurring in the Middle East...
At this point in time, I feel like it would be very difficult to propose any type of solution that would lead to a peaceful and successful resolution that fully satisfies both sides. Although I believe both sides of the conflict need to compromise in some way, the Palestinians have made it very difficult for the Israelis to make any type of compromise for peace.
Israel has signed independent peace treaties with both Egypt and Jordan on separate occasions. Each time they gave away either land, water, settlements, or strategic military advantage in order to achieve a peaceful agreement. Israel has given the Palestinian Authority land, money, weapons, training, and intelligence, all in the hope that the PA would reciprocate with an end to terror and incitement.
All in all, Israel wants peace and has proven it in so many different occasions by giving up land. They need to have a partner for peace in order to move forward in any way.
Once again, I am aware that both sides are not perfect. Israel has done it's fare share of harm yet they have spoken and reached out to prove that they have hope for some kind of peaceful future because they have actually taken some kind of actions. In 1917, 1937, 1947, 1956, and 1993 Israeli leaders established a pattern of accepting the handover of land in exchange for peace agreements with its Arab neighbors. These actions have proved to be measures that promote peace between the two conflicting groups of people.
Israel is the only real democracy in the Middle East. Hamas is the obstacle to peace. If Hamas and more Arab countries would adopt a democratic agenda like Israel has done, it allows for hope for a peaceful future. I am a strong supporter of Israel because it promotes these principles that the United States has worked so hard to implement to the point where it actually works! Israel and the United states share the fundamental principles of freedom and equality. Both of these nations were established by immigrants who sought freedom from oppression, and both are rooted in the tenets of democracy, human dignity and religious freedom.
Israel happens to be the only country in the entire Middle East where all citizens, INCLUDING Arabs, are able to have representation in the government, freedom of religion, freedom of speech and women's rights. By implementing some of these valued principles in an Arab Country, they have a chance to be able to live in a way that masks Israel's democratic government--which allows Israel to be a continuous ally to the United States by supporting their international policy.
There are some obstacles that need to be overcome in order for some kind of peace to be established: Israel needs to actually be recognized as a state, religious wars need to stop occurring, and support and glorification of terror and violence needs to end. There are actually Palestinian schools that are teaching their young students that Israel does not exist. Yes, they're actually showing them maps of the Middle East where the state of Israel is not included. How can that be spreading any type of tolerance and acceptance when they are being taught from a young age that Israel needs to be wiped out. All evidence of Israel and its cities has been eliminated and replaced by "Palestine." I have seen numerous Palestinian media where they celebrate terrorism by celebrating bombings which teach children to view death as martyrdom.
This website (http://www.memri.org/subject/en/331.htm) highlights so many instances in which young Palestinian children are succumbed to watching TV shows where the act of killing is glamorized. Which leads me to my next point--educating children with accurate and meaningful facts that establishes a sense of desired peace in their minds rather than continued war violence. The conflict will never improve if both sides are teaching their young children about the atrocities that the others may have committed. The situation will continue to be exactly as it is--never reaching a point where the conflict will improve in any way. Children cannot see the "opposing side" as enemies; they need to have empathy and realize that they are all people with emotions and desires. Acceptance needs to be preached.
I wish I could offer a direct solution but before that can even be thought about, there are changes that need to occur and I have only hit on a handful of them.
Israel has signed independent peace treaties with both Egypt and Jordan on separate occasions. Each time they gave away either land, water, settlements, or strategic military advantage in order to achieve a peaceful agreement. Israel has given the Palestinian Authority land, money, weapons, training, and intelligence, all in the hope that the PA would reciprocate with an end to terror and incitement.
All in all, Israel wants peace and has proven it in so many different occasions by giving up land. They need to have a partner for peace in order to move forward in any way.
Once again, I am aware that both sides are not perfect. Israel has done it's fare share of harm yet they have spoken and reached out to prove that they have hope for some kind of peaceful future because they have actually taken some kind of actions. In 1917, 1937, 1947, 1956, and 1993 Israeli leaders established a pattern of accepting the handover of land in exchange for peace agreements with its Arab neighbors. These actions have proved to be measures that promote peace between the two conflicting groups of people.
Israel is the only real democracy in the Middle East. Hamas is the obstacle to peace. If Hamas and more Arab countries would adopt a democratic agenda like Israel has done, it allows for hope for a peaceful future. I am a strong supporter of Israel because it promotes these principles that the United States has worked so hard to implement to the point where it actually works! Israel and the United states share the fundamental principles of freedom and equality. Both of these nations were established by immigrants who sought freedom from oppression, and both are rooted in the tenets of democracy, human dignity and religious freedom.
Israel happens to be the only country in the entire Middle East where all citizens, INCLUDING Arabs, are able to have representation in the government, freedom of religion, freedom of speech and women's rights. By implementing some of these valued principles in an Arab Country, they have a chance to be able to live in a way that masks Israel's democratic government--which allows Israel to be a continuous ally to the United States by supporting their international policy.
There are some obstacles that need to be overcome in order for some kind of peace to be established: Israel needs to actually be recognized as a state, religious wars need to stop occurring, and support and glorification of terror and violence needs to end. There are actually Palestinian schools that are teaching their young students that Israel does not exist. Yes, they're actually showing them maps of the Middle East where the state of Israel is not included. How can that be spreading any type of tolerance and acceptance when they are being taught from a young age that Israel needs to be wiped out. All evidence of Israel and its cities has been eliminated and replaced by "Palestine." I have seen numerous Palestinian media where they celebrate terrorism by celebrating bombings which teach children to view death as martyrdom.
This website (http://www.memri.org/subject/en/331.htm) highlights so many instances in which young Palestinian children are succumbed to watching TV shows where the act of killing is glamorized. Which leads me to my next point--educating children with accurate and meaningful facts that establishes a sense of desired peace in their minds rather than continued war violence. The conflict will never improve if both sides are teaching their young children about the atrocities that the others may have committed. The situation will continue to be exactly as it is--never reaching a point where the conflict will improve in any way. Children cannot see the "opposing side" as enemies; they need to have empathy and realize that they are all people with emotions and desires. Acceptance needs to be preached.
I wish I could offer a direct solution but before that can even be thought about, there are changes that need to occur and I have only hit on a handful of them.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)