RSS
One Palestinian, one Jew, and two very different impressions of ‘Golda’
(JTA) — Like many other Diaspora Jews, I was curious to see the film “Golda,” which dramatizes Israel’s first female prime minister’s handling of what for Israel was the nearly disastrous Yom Kippur War of 1973. But I wanted to know what it would be like to see it with a Palestinian American.
So I called up my friend and colleague, Omar Dajani, professor of law at the University of the Pacific and a legal adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team in peace talks with Israel from 1999-2003. We agreed to see the film the same night in our respective cities (he in San Francisco and me in Ottawa) and compare notes the next morning.
On the film’s artistic aspects — for instance, the excellent casting of Helen Mirren as Golda Meir and Liev Schreiber as U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger; the less successful portrait of Moshe Dayan by Rami Heuberger, who missed the boat on the defense minister’s well-known charisma — our agreement was deep and broad. (And I succeeded in getting Omar on board with my favorite Israeli actor, Lior Ashkenazi, who plays David “Dado” Elazar, the IDF’s chief of staff.)
But finding common ground on the framing of the Yom Kippur War, the focus of the film’s narrative — proved much harder.
Most of the Israeli criticism of its country’s handling of events in October 1973 has focused on the Israeli intelligence failure in the lead-up to Egypt and Syria’s surprise attack. Israeli analysts refer to this blindspot as the “conceptzia.”
Talking to Omar, I soon realized that I, too, had been caught up in a conceptzia, albeit of a different sort.
I was only a baby when the Yom Kippur War broke out. But so much of my life was indirectly shaped by those three weeks in 1973. My first boyfriend had come to Winnipeg with his Israeli parents in part because of that war. Same with my seventh-grade crush, in Vancouver. Born two days apart, both were exactly a year old when the war changed things for so many Israelis. My husband had the reverse family story; he moved with his parents and sister to Israel a few months before the war broke out before they returned to Canada 18 months later. And my kibbutz “dad” (some youth movement-raised young adults, like I was, are gifted an “adoptive” family on kibbutz to connect with as they spend time in the country) served on the front lines in 1973. Just two months ago, we talked about his battle memories — still raw and unfiltered — until the wee hours of the night.
All these personal connections have meant that when I think about the Yom Kippur War, I feel instinctively protective. Protective of Israelis who were forced to endure the insult of being attacked on their holiest day of the year (for Jewish Israelis at least) — even if that holiness extends, for many, to simply bike riding on empty streets. Protective of the memory of the 11 boys who were killed on my aunt and uncle’s kibbutz — for whom a stunning tune to the Yom Kippur Prayer “Unetaneh Tokef” was written, and which I’ve led at my synagogue on High Holidays past.
Though I’m ashamed to admit it — given her comments denying the existence of the Palestinian people — I was also protective even of Golda’s legacy as a Jewish stateswoman.
But talking to Omar I was forced to consider another perspective. “As a film about the 1973 war,” Omar told me, “I found it infuriating. The film did almost nothing to set up the fact that the Egyptian offensive against Israel was taking place to a great extent on Egyptian territory.” Egyptian President Anwar Sadat was trying to get back the Sinai, after all.
Omar also stressed that Meir refused to entertain various opportunities for Israel-Egyptian peace in the years leading up to the war, a point made in a recent Jewish Telegraphic Agency article about the film. Sadat “was dying for a peace opening,” Omar said to me. “The film claims that Israeli-Egyptian peace in 1979 was a result of what Meir did, while I would argue that the peace agreement was in spite of what she did.”
I challenged Omar on the idea of the war being started on “Egyptian territory” given that the Sinai was (legally) occupied by Israel following the Six-Day War of 1967; he countered with a view of that war as having resulted from an offensive attack by Israel. I drew on the idea that Egypt’s closure of the Straits of Tiran and expulsion of United Nations peacekeepers may have justified Israel’s pre-emptive strike; he referenced Article 51 and Article 2 of the United Nations Charter regarding acceptable uses of force.
After 90 minutes of back-and-forth, I carefully strode across the proverbial debate stage and asked the question most often considered taboo in academic circles.
“Do you think,” I asked gingerly, “that our respective debating positions are a function of our ethnic allegiances?”
“Yes and no,” he offered. “On one hand, opposing Israel taking others’ land and holding it indefinitely whenever it feels it will serve its security purposes is not about being Palestinian; it is about believing in the international rule of law, and I’m an international law scholar.
“On the other hand,” he continued, “I’ve lived in Egypt and so I certainly recognize that my sympathies affect my tendency to see some acts that are unlawful as being justified. And so while I see how some people defend Israeli acts as justified even if they are unlawful, the same goes for me and Egypt. For instance, Sadat violated the ceasefire in the first place.”
Where does all this leave me? I suppose it served as a healthy reminder that we — analysts, scholars, writers, and human beings — have a set of complex commitments that stem from our understanding of how things are and how they ought to be. While we hope that those commitments are free of tribal ties, sometimes that’s just not possible.
At least Omar and I both agree that the most pressing contemporary humanitarian issue in Israel-Palestine is that of the grinding occupation and the human rights abuses that flow from it. We also both see Israel’s current judicial crisis as in part a reflection of those circumstances. And ultimately we agree that to be human is to care deeply about both one’s own and about the other, whoever they are. I suppose that’s a start.
—
The post One Palestinian, one Jew, and two very different impressions of ‘Golda’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
RSS
Biden: Israel Should Mull Alternatives to Striking Iran Oil Fields
US President Joe Biden speaks during a campaign rally in Raleigh, North Carolina, June 28, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
JNS.org – US President Joe Biden suggested on Friday that Israel should consider alternative targets rather than attacking Iranian oil fields in response to the Islamic Republic’s massive ballistic missile attack on the Jewish state earlier this week.
“The Israelis have not concluded what they’re going to do in terms of a strike, that’s under discussion. If I were in their shoes, I’d be thinking about other alternatives than striking oil fields,” Biden said during a rare appearance at a White House press briefing.
“No administration has helped Israel more than I have—none, none, none. I think Bibi should remember that,” added the president, using Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s nickname.
A day earlier, Biden said that the possibility of hitting Iran’s oil assets and infrastructure was “in discussion,” while noting that Jerusalem maintains freedom of action.
“First of all, we don’t ‘allow’ Israel. We advise Israel,” he said.
On Tuesday, Iran fired more than 180 ballistic missiles at Israel, leading the entire civilian population of the Jewish state to be ordered into bomb shelters. One Palestinian was killed and two Israelis were lightly injured by the attack.
In April, Iran conducted its first-ever direct attack on Israeli territory, launching some 300 missiles and drones, the vast majority of which were shot down in a multinational effort. One girl was wounded.
On Wednesday, Biden told reporters that he opposes an Israeli retaliatory strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, adding that he was crafting a response with the G7 group of leading democracies.
“The answer is ‘no,’” the president said when asked about targeting the Islamic Republic’s nuclear sites. “We’ll be discussing with the Israelis what they’re going to do, but all seven of us agree that they have a right to respond, but they should respond proportionately.”
Biden declined to say what advice he was giving to the Jewish state and indicated that he had not spoken with Netanyahu since the Iranian attack.
“We’ve been talking to Bibi’s people the whole time. It’s not necessary to talk to Bibi,” he said.
“I’ll probably be talking to him relatively soon,” he added.
Biden spoke with the G7 leaders on Wednesday “to discuss Iran’s unacceptable attack against Israel and to coordinate on a response to this attack, including new sanctions,” per a White House readout.
Biden and the G7 “unequivocally condemned Iran’s attack against Israel,” the White House added. “President Biden expressed the United States’ full solidarity and support to Israel and its people and reaffirmed the United States’ ironclad commitment to Israel’s security.”
Meanwhile, Republican presidential candidate and former president Donald Trump said on Thursday that Iran’s nuclear infrastructure was fair game.
“They asked [Biden], what do you think about Iran, would you hit Iran? And he goes, ‘As long as they don’t hit the nuclear stuff.’ That’s the thing you want to hit, right?” Trump said during a town hall-style event in Fayetteville, N.C.
“I think he’s got that one wrong,” Trump said of Biden. “Isn’t that what you’re supposed to hit? I mean, it’s the biggest risk we have, nuclear weapons. …
“The answer should have been: Hit the nuclear first, and worry about the rest later,” Trump added.
The post Biden: Israel Should Mull Alternatives to Striking Iran Oil Fields first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Nasrallah’s Possible Successor Out of Contact Since Friday, Lebanese Source Says
Smoke billows over Beirut’s southern suburbs after overnight strikes, amid ongoing hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, as seen from Sin El Fil, Lebanon October 5, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Joseph Campbell
The potential successor to slain Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has been out of contact since Friday, a Lebanese security source said on Saturday, after an Israeli airstrike that is reported to have targeted him.
In its campaign against the Iran-backed Lebanese group, Israel carried out a large strike on Beirut’s southern suburbs late on Thursday that Axios cited three Israeli officials as saying targeted Hashem Safieddine in an underground bunker.
The Lebanese security source and two other Lebanese security sources said that ongoing Israeli strikes on Beirut’s southern suburb – known as Dahiyeh – since Friday have kept rescue workers from scouring the site of the attack.
Hezbollah has made no comment so far on Safieddine since the attack.
Israeli Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani said on Friday the military was still assessing the Thursday night airstrikes, which he said targeted Hezbollah’s intelligence headquarters.
The loss of Nasrallah’s rumored successor would be yet another blow to Hezbollah and its patron Iran. Israeli strikes across the region in the past year, sharply accelerated in the past few weeks, have decimated Hezbollah’s leadership.
Israel expanded its conflict in Lebanon on Saturday with its first strike in the northern city of Tripoli, a Lebanese security official said, after more bombs hit Beirut suburbs and Israeli troops launched raids in the south.
Israel has begun an intense bombing campaign in Lebanon and sent troops across the border in recent weeks after nearly a year of exchanging fire with Hezbollah. Fighting had previously been mostly limited to the Israel-Lebanon border area, taking place in parallel to Israel’s year-old war in Gaza against Palestinian group Hamas.
Israel says it aims to allow the safe return of tens of thousands of citizens to their homes in northern Israel, bombarded by Hezbollah since Oct.8 last year.
The Israeli attacks have eliminated much of Hezbollah’s senior military leadership, including Secretary General Nasrallah in an air attack on Sept. 27.
The Israeli assault has also killed hundreds of ordinary Lebanese, including rescue workers, Lebanese officials say, and forced 1.2 million people – almost a quarter of the population – to flee their homes.
The Lebanese security official told Reuters that Saturday’s strike on a Palestinian refugee camp in Tripoli killed a member of Hamas, his wife and two children. Media affiliated with the Palestinian group also said the strike killed a leader of its armed wing.
The Israeli military did not immediately comment on the strike on Tripoli, a Sunni Muslim-majority port city that its warplanes also targeted during a 2006 war with Hezbollah.
Israel has meanwhile staged nightly bombardment of Dahiyeh, once a bustling and densely populated area of Beirut and a stronghold for Hezbollah.
On Saturday, smoke billowed over Dahiyeh, large parts of which have been reduced to rubble sending residents fleeing to other parts of Beirut or of Lebanon.
In northern Israel, air raid sirens sent people running for their shelters amid rocket fire from Lebanon.
ISRAEL WEIGHS OPTIONS FOR IRAN
The violence comes as the anniversary approaches of Hamas’ attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which killed 1,200 people and in which about 250 were taken as hostages.
Iran, which backs both Hezbollah and Hamas, and which has lost key commanders of its elite Revolutionary Guards Corps to Israeli air strikes in Syria this year, launched a salvo of ballistic missiles at Israel on Tuesday. The strikes did little damage.
Israel has been weighing options in its response to Iran’s attack.
Oil prices have risen on the possibility of an attack on Iran’s oil facilities as Israel pursues its goals of pushing back Hezbollah militants in Lebanon and eliminating their Hamas allies in Gaza.
US President Joe Biden on Friday urged Israel to consider alternatives to striking Iranian oil fields, adding that he thinks Israel has not yet concluded how to respond to Iran.
Israeli news website Ynet reported that the top US general for the Middle East, Army General Michael Kurilla, is headed for Israel in the coming day. Israeli and US officials were not immediately reachable for comment.
The post Nasrallah’s Possible Successor Out of Contact Since Friday, Lebanese Source Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
France’s Macron Says Sales of Arms Used in Gaza Should Be Halted
French President Emmanuel Macron speaks during a press conference in Paris, France, June 12, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Stephane Mahe
Shipments of arms used in the conflict in Gaza should be stopped as part of a broader effort to find a political solution, French President Emmanuel Macron said on Saturday.
France is not a major weapons provider for Israel, shipping military equipment worth 30 million euros ($33 million) last year, according to the defense ministry’s annual arms exports report.
“I think the priority today is to get back to a political solution (and) that arms used to fight in Gaza are halted. France doesn’t ship any,” Macron told France Inter radio.
“Our priority now is to avoid escalation. The Lebanese people must not in turn be sacrificed, Lebanon cannot become another Gaza,” he added.
Macron’s comments come as his Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot is on a four-day trip to the Middle East, wrapping up on Monday in Israel as Paris looks to play a role in reviving diplomatic efforts.
The post France’s Macron Says Sales of Arms Used in Gaza Should Be Halted first appeared on Algemeiner.com.