By KATHLEEN and BILL CHRISTISON
You would think that showing maps clearly
delineating the truncated, obviously non-
You would think that showing maps clearly
delineating the truncated, obviously non-
viable area available for a possible Palestinian
state and showing pictures that define Israel's
occupation of Palestinian territories would have
some kind of impact on an audience of astute but,
on this issue, generally uninformed Americans. We
recently spoke to a small foreign affairs discussion
group and devoted much of our presentation to
these images of oppression -- images that never
appear in the U.S. media -- in the probably naïve
hope of making some kind of dent in the impassive
American attitude toward Israel's 40-year occupation
of Palestinian territory.
state and showing pictures that define Israel's
occupation of Palestinian territories would have
some kind of impact on an audience of astute but,
on this issue, generally uninformed Americans. We
recently spoke to a small foreign affairs discussion
group and devoted much of our presentation to
these images of oppression -- images that never
appear in the U.S. media -- in the probably naïve
hope of making some kind of dent in the impassive
American attitude toward Israel's 40-year occupation
of Palestinian territory.
But our expectations that these people would listen and
perhaps learn something were sadly misplaced. Few
among the elite seminar-style discussion group seemed
concerned about, or even particularly interested in,
what is happening on the ground in Palestine-Israel,
and the event stands as starkly emblematic of American
apathy about the oppressive Israeli regime in the
occupied territories that the United States is
enabling and in many instances actively encouraging.
perhaps learn something were sadly misplaced. Few
among the elite seminar-style discussion group seemed
concerned about, or even particularly interested in,
what is happening on the ground in Palestine-Israel,
and the event stands as starkly emblematic of American
apathy about the oppressive Israeli regime in the
occupied territories that the United States is
enabling and in many instances actively encouraging.
The maps that we displayed of the West Bank, prepared by
the UN and by Israeli human rights groups, clearly depicted
the segmented, disconnected scatter of territorial pieces
that would make up the Palestinian state even in the most
optimistic of scenarios -- Palestinian areas broken up by
the separation wall cutting deep into the West Bank; by
large Israeli settlements scattered throughout and taking
up something like 10 percent of the territory; by the
network of roads connecting the settlements, all
accessible only to Israeli drivers; and by the Jordan Valley,
currently barred to any Palestinian not already living there,
making up fully one-quarter of the West Bank, and
ultimately destined for annexation by Israel.
the UN and by Israeli human rights groups, clearly depicted
the segmented, disconnected scatter of territorial pieces
that would make up the Palestinian state even in the most
optimistic of scenarios -- Palestinian areas broken up by
the separation wall cutting deep into the West Bank; by
large Israeli settlements scattered throughout and taking
up something like 10 percent of the territory; by the
network of roads connecting the settlements, all
accessible only to Israeli drivers; and by the Jordan Valley,
currently barred to any Palestinian not already living there,
making up fully one-quarter of the West Bank, and
ultimately destined for annexation by Israel.
The maps make it clear that even the most generous Israeli
plan would leave a Palestinian state with only 50-60 percent
of the West Bank (constituting 11-12 percent of original
Palestine), broken into multiple separated segments and
including no part of Jerusalem. The photographs, taken
during our several trips to Palestine in recent years,
depicted the separation wall, checkpoints and terminals
in the wall resembling cages, Palestinian homes demolished
and official buildings destroyed, vast Israeli settlements
built on confiscated Palestinian land, destroyed Palestinian
olive groves, commerce in Palestinian cities shut down
because of marauding Israeli settlers or soldiers.
plan would leave a Palestinian state with only 50-60 percent
of the West Bank (constituting 11-12 percent of original
Palestine), broken into multiple separated segments and
including no part of Jerusalem. The photographs, taken
during our several trips to Palestine in recent years,
depicted the separation wall, checkpoints and terminals
in the wall resembling cages, Palestinian homes demolished
and official buildings destroyed, vast Israeli settlements
built on confiscated Palestinian land, destroyed Palestinian
olive groves, commerce in Palestinian cities shut down
because of marauding Israeli settlers or soldiers.
We have shown maps and pictures like these myriad times
before, but have never been received with quite such
disinterest. Here was a group of mostly retired U.S.
government officials, academics, journalists, and
business executives, as well as a few still-working
professionals -- all ranging in political orientation
from center right to center left, the cream of informed,
educated America, the exemplar of elite mainstream
opinion in the United States. Their lack of concern
about what Israel and, because of its enabling role,
the U.S. are doing to destroy an entire people and
their national aspirations could not have been more evident.
before, but have never been received with quite such
disinterest. Here was a group of mostly retired U.S.
government officials, academics, journalists, and
business executives, as well as a few still-working
professionals -- all ranging in political orientation
from center right to center left, the cream of informed,
educated America, the exemplar of elite mainstream
opinion in the United States. Their lack of concern
about what Israel and, because of its enabling role,
the U.S. are doing to destroy an entire people and
their national aspirations could not have been more evident.
The first person to comment when our presentation concluded,
identifying herself as Jewish, said she had "never heard a more
one-sided presentation" and labeled us "beyond anti-Semitic"
-- which presumably is somewhat worse than plain-and-simple
anti-Semitic. This is always a somewhat upsetting charge,
although it is so common and so expected as to be of little
note anymore. What was more noteworthy was the
reaction, or lack of it, among the rest of the assembled,
who never disputed her charge but spent most of the
discussion period either disputing our presentation or
trying to find ways to accommodate "Jewish pain."
identifying herself as Jewish, said she had "never heard a more
one-sided presentation" and labeled us "beyond anti-Semitic"
-- which presumably is somewhat worse than plain-and-simple
anti-Semitic. This is always a somewhat upsetting charge,
although it is so common and so expected as to be of little
note anymore. What was more noteworthy was the
reaction, or lack of it, among the rest of the assembled,
who never disputed her charge but spent most of the
discussion period either disputing our presentation or
trying to find ways to accommodate "Jewish pain."
Our brief conversation with this woman progressed in an
interesting fashion.
We tried to engage her in a discussion about what exactly
was one-sided in our depiction of the situation on the ground
and what she would have liked to see to make it "two-sided."
She did not answer but indicated that she thought whatever
Israel did must be justified by Palestinian actions. "Someone
had to have started it," she said. We laid out a little history
for her, noting that the first action, the "who-started-it" part,
could be traced back to Britain's Balfour Declaration pledge in
1917 to promote the establishment of a Jewish homeland in
Palestine, at a time when Jews made up no more than 10
percent of the population of Palestine. Then we came up
to the 1947 UN partition resolution, which allotted 55 percent
of Palestine for a Jewish state at a time when Jews owned
only seven percent of the land and made up slightly less
than one-third of the population.
interesting fashion.
We tried to engage her in a discussion about what exactly
was one-sided in our depiction of the situation on the ground
and what she would have liked to see to make it "two-sided."
She did not answer but indicated that she thought whatever
Israel did must be justified by Palestinian actions. "Someone
had to have started it," she said. We laid out a little history
for her, noting that the first action, the "who-started-it" part,
could be traced back to Britain's Balfour Declaration pledge in
1917 to promote the establishment of a Jewish homeland in
Palestine, at a time when Jews made up no more than 10
percent of the population of Palestine. Then we came up
to the 1947 UN partition resolution, which allotted 55 percent
of Palestine for a Jewish state at a time when Jews owned
only seven percent of the land and made up slightly less
than one-third of the population.
Her answer was, "Well, but it wasn't Jews who did this."
We disabused her of this and briefly detailed the deliberate
Zionist program of ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian
population conducted during 1947-48 war, as described by
several Israeli historians, including particularly Ilan Pappe,
whose The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine is based on Israeli
military archives. Her eyes actually began to bulge, but
she held her tongue. Apparently deciding that she had
no way of refuting these facts, she finally decided that
going back in history was of no utility -- a common Zionist
dodge -- and that Israel had not been established in any
case to be a democracy but was a haven for persecuted
Jews and as such has every right to organize itself in any
way it sees fit. The moderator finally called on others who
wanted to speak, and the discussion moved on.
We disabused her of this and briefly detailed the deliberate
Zionist program of ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian
population conducted during 1947-48 war, as described by
several Israeli historians, including particularly Ilan Pappe,
whose The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine is based on Israeli
military archives. Her eyes actually began to bulge, but
she held her tongue. Apparently deciding that she had
no way of refuting these facts, she finally decided that
going back in history was of no utility -- a common Zionist
dodge -- and that Israel had not been established in any
case to be a democracy but was a haven for persecuted
Jews and as such has every right to organize itself in any
way it sees fit. The moderator finally called on others who
wanted to speak, and the discussion moved on.
But not very far. The talk now circled, for over an hour, around
what passed for profound discussion: around someone's curious
remarks about Zeitgeist, someone else's equally curious insistence
that there was "something out there that no one would talk about"
that was influencing the situation, a few remarks about
Palestinians as terrorists and how even if Israel made
peace with the Palestinians Hamas would still try to destroy it,
a lot of talk about how to accommodate Jewish pain and,
taking off from this, a psychologist's attempt to draw an
analogy between Jews who live in fear of persecution and
the rape victims she counsels who live in constant fear that
they will be raped again or worse.
what passed for profound discussion: around someone's curious
remarks about Zeitgeist, someone else's equally curious insistence
that there was "something out there that no one would talk about"
that was influencing the situation, a few remarks about
Palestinians as terrorists and how even if Israel made
peace with the Palestinians Hamas would still try to destroy it,
a lot of talk about how to accommodate Jewish pain and,
taking off from this, a psychologist's attempt to draw an
analogy between Jews who live in fear of persecution and
the rape victims she counsels who live in constant fear that
they will be raped again or worse.
A few people did ask interested questions about the situation
on the ground and about various aspects of Israeli policy.
After the discussion had centered for quite a while on
Jewish pain, one person pointed out that Palestinians too
feel pain and live in fear, but no one else picked up on this.
No one challenged the first speaker's personal charge
of anti-Semitism against us, and in the end there was
almost no mention of the destructive Israeli practices
that had been the subject of our presentation.
on the ground and about various aspects of Israeli policy.
After the discussion had centered for quite a while on
Jewish pain, one person pointed out that Palestinians too
feel pain and live in fear, but no one else picked up on this.
No one challenged the first speaker's personal charge
of anti-Semitism against us, and in the end there was
almost no mention of the destructive Israeli practices
that had been the subject of our presentation.
We had occasion to email several of the participants
the next day. In one message, we lodged a mild
complaint with the three group organizers about
the fact that the charge of anti-Semitism was
allowed not only to stand but to set the tone for
much of the discussion, with no refutation of the
substance of the charge by anyone except us.
In another message, sent to a man who had
expressed puzzlement over why the Jewish vote
was thought to be important in U.S. elections, we
forwarded without comment an article from Mother
Jones about Barack Obama's difficulties with the
Jewish community and his concerted effort to
demonstrate his bona fides by pledging fealty to
Israel and justifying Israel's siege of Gaza.
the next day. In one message, we lodged a mild
complaint with the three group organizers about
the fact that the charge of anti-Semitism was
allowed not only to stand but to set the tone for
much of the discussion, with no refutation of the
substance of the charge by anyone except us.
In another message, sent to a man who had
expressed puzzlement over why the Jewish vote
was thought to be important in U.S. elections, we
forwarded without comment an article from Mother
Jones about Barack Obama's difficulties with the
Jewish community and his concerted effort to
demonstrate his bona fides by pledging fealty to
Israel and justifying Israel's siege of Gaza.
Finally, to the psychologist, we wrote a comment on
her analogy between Jews and rape victims,
observing that as a psychologist she undoubtedly
did not encourage her rape victim clients to
perpetuate their fear or adopt an aggressive
attitude toward other people, but most likely
gave them tools to help them regain trust and
move beyond fears for their personal safety.
This kind of restorative therapy for Jews has never
been employed, we noted, but on the contrary
Israeli leaders and American Jewish leaders have
encouraged Jewish fears, along with an aggressive,
militaristic Israeli policy toward its neighbors.
her analogy between Jews and rape victims,
observing that as a psychologist she undoubtedly
did not encourage her rape victim clients to
perpetuate their fear or adopt an aggressive
attitude toward other people, but most likely
gave them tools to help them regain trust and
move beyond fears for their personal safety.
This kind of restorative therapy for Jews has never
been employed, we noted, but on the contrary
Israeli leaders and American Jewish leaders have
encouraged Jewish fears, along with an aggressive,
militaristic Israeli policy toward its neighbors.
These were all gratuitous overtures by us, but they
were not inappropriate or uncivil. Yet not one of
these people saw fit to answer our missives or
even acknowledge their receipt -- indicating,
we can only assume, the general level of unconcern
among Americans about the atrocities being
committed against Palestinians, including the
siege and starvation imposed on Gazans. Then,
too, the lack of response probably reflects feelings
on the part of most attendees that we are somehow
responsible for having involved them in a discussion
that turned out to be fairly unpleasant for them.
were not inappropriate or uncivil. Yet not one of
these people saw fit to answer our missives or
even acknowledge their receipt -- indicating,
we can only assume, the general level of unconcern
among Americans about the atrocities being
committed against Palestinians, including the
siege and starvation imposed on Gazans. Then,
too, the lack of response probably reflects feelings
on the part of most attendees that we are somehow
responsible for having involved them in a discussion
that turned out to be fairly unpleasant for them.
Why is this interesting to anyone but us? Because this
in-depth discussion with a small but representative
group of intelligent, thinking Americans is indicative
of a broad range of U.S. public opinion on foreign
policy issues, and their level of disinterest in the
consequences of U.S. policies is quite disturbing.
The self-absorption evident during this meeting,
the general "don't-rock-the-boat" posture, the
overwhelming lack of concern for the victims of
Israeli and U.S. power amount to a license to kill
for the U.S. and its allies. The same unconcern
allowed the United States to get away with killing
millions of Vietnamese decades ago; it gives license
to mass U.S. killing in Iraq and Afghanistan; it is the
reason Democrats still, after seven years of Bush
administration torture and killing around the world,
cannot fully separate themselves from Republican
militarism. It gives Israel license to kill and ethnically
cleanse the entire nation of Palestine.
in-depth discussion with a small but representative
group of intelligent, thinking Americans is indicative
of a broad range of U.S. public opinion on foreign
policy issues, and their level of disinterest in the
consequences of U.S. policies is quite disturbing.
The self-absorption evident during this meeting,
the general "don't-rock-the-boat" posture, the
overwhelming lack of concern for the victims of
Israeli and U.S. power amount to a license to kill
for the U.S. and its allies. The same unconcern
allowed the United States to get away with killing
millions of Vietnamese decades ago; it gives license
to mass U.S. killing in Iraq and Afghanistan; it is the
reason Democrats still, after seven years of Bush
administration torture and killing around the world,
cannot fully separate themselves from Republican
militarism. It gives Israel license to kill and ethnically
cleanse the entire nation of Palestine.
Kathleen Christison is a former CIA political analyst and
has worked on Middle East issues for 30 years. She is the
author of Perceptions of Palestine and
The Wound of Dispossession. She can be reached
at kathy.bill.christison@comcast.net
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots,
you need JavaScript enabled to view it .
has worked on Middle East issues for 30 years. She is the
author of Perceptions of Palestine and
The Wound of Dispossession. She can be reached
at kathy.bill.christison@comcast
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots,
you need JavaScript enabled to view it .
Bill Christison was a senior official of the CIA.
He served as a National Intelligence officer
and as director of the CIA's Office of Regional
and Political Analysis.
They can be reached at kathy.bill.christison@comcastHe served as a National Intelligence officer
and as director of the CIA's Office of Regional
and Political Analysis.
0 Have Your Say!:
Post a Comment