November 29: Day of Solidarity with....the Palestinians

November 29 is a celebrated day in the history of Israel as it marks the date in 1947 when the UN voted and passed their partition plan, paving the way for the establishment of both Jewish and Arab states in the land of Palestine. The passage of this resolution (33 f0r, 13 against, 10 abstained), gave Israel the legitimacy to declare a state of their own only 6 months later and it is considered one of the most important dates in the modern history of the State of Israel.

Another important note about this date is that in 1897, Theodor Herzl hosted the First Zionist Congress in Basle, Switzerland. At the opening of the conference, he stated that he foresaw that within 50 years, a Jewish state would be established. 50 years after 1897: 1947. Herzl's dream realized.

This was an act of the UN, it was a legitimate political act, and it gave rise to the State of Israel. Why then has the UN decided that November 29th will be used as a day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, and a day in which to literally demonize Israel at the UN General Assembly?? November 29 was not a day of mass uprising in Palestine by the Jewish forces present there, it was not a coup against the British, and it does not mark a day of violence. It literally marks the day of passage of UN Resolution 181.

The very fact that the Palestinians do not have a state is because they rejected the UN Partition Plan of 1947 because they refused to accept the establishment of a Jewish State on any piece of land in Palestine. It therefore seems bizarre that the UN would then take this landmark decision of self determination, an important principle for state building at the UN, and turn it on its head and mourn the establishment of Israel. Yet again, the UN's actions with regard to Israel are entirely transparent, and call it double standard or what you will, this is clear discrimination against Israel.

What is not necessarily known is that on this day of Solidarity every year, the UN embarks on a 2 day marathon of Resolutions aimed to condemn Israel, and of the 20 annual resolutions drafted against Israel, each year on November 29, approximately 6 of them are approved. Last year, the President of the General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto of Nicaragua, specifically called Israel an Apartheid state, and the UN traditionally puts up displays with regard to the Palestinian situation, and shows videos about the issue. Although Israel has naturally boycotted these events in the past, Gabriela Shalev, the current Israeli Ambassador to the UN, is expected to speak to the GA about how ridiculous it is that they memorialize the day that Israel was given a state as a day of mourning.

I'm trying hard to think of some words to describe what is going on. Like a number of issues I have already written about, this sort of defies reality. Unfortunately, this is the state of the international affairs. Not to sound too defeatist, but this is just the sort of thing that we just have to deal with, but do so with dignity. How the UN can spend a day condemning their own decision baffles logic, but I guess this is how it goes.

To be Pro-Palestinian does not mean that you have to be Anti-Israel. I am proud to say that I think I am pro-Both. I am a Zionist, but I also believe that the Palestinians have a right to self-determination, and I think that can only live in peace with Israel with a legitimate state of their own. Unfortunately, when the UN acts in this way, they are perpetuating this idea that you have to choose a side, Israel or Palestine, and it is clear based on their history and actions what side they have chosen. This does nothing to encourage progress, and only hinders any steps that are taken in moving forward. How easily the UN could have simply chosen another significant date on which to mark a day of solidarity with the Palestinians.

In this sense, it is important to stay strong in light of all the outside pressures that affect the situation, to not let the judgment of those on the outside of the conflict cloud the reason of those conducting affairs on the ground, and to ensure that we remain committed to a swift resolution to the conflict such that both sides emerge satisfied, safe, and at peace.

Gilad Shalit and the Concept of Pidyom Shvuyim

At the current time in Israel, a debate is taking place over what to do with the life of Corporal Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier abducted by Hamas and its forces in Gaza on June 25, 2006. For almost 3 and a half years, Gilad has sat somewhere in Gaza awaiting his fate, either death at the hands of Hamas, or a rescue by the Israeli government. For almost all that time, and against all sorts of international human rights laws, no one has known Gilad's fate. For three years no one knew if he was alive or dead, and no signs of life were given until September 14, when Hamas handed over a video of Gilad, in exchange for 20 female Palestinian prisoners. The video showed that he was alive and in surprisingly good shape, and this gave extra energy to the movement to release him, and especially to his parents, Noam and Aviva Shalit.

The reason for sending thismessage out today is that it seems that Israel, Hamas, and the government of Egypt as a mediator, are almost on the brink of deciding on a deal with regard to releasing him. There are differing reports about what may be done, and there is much speculation from both sides. As it stands at the moment, the Hamas leadership in exile in Damascus is deliberating on an Israeli offer to release 450 soldiers in return for Gilad, and the next few days will be particularly telling with regard to Gilad's fate.

In Judaism, there is a concept called Pidyon Shevuyim with regard to the redemption of those held captive. This concept exemplifies the value that Judaism places on the preservation of human life, and our tradition of redeeming captives is an honoured one.

There is a debate about how relevant Pidyon Shevuyim is in a modern setting, and there are arguments for and against the lengths we must go to in order to insure the release of these soldiers. Those arguing that we must negotiate with terrorists and trade prisoners to negotiate the release of our brothers claim that the ultimate value in Judaism is human life, and that all Jewish rules are broken in the preservation of that life. However, those arguing against the idea of a prisoner trade, those who feel that we must not attempt to redeem our soldiers, believe that negotiating with terrorists and capitulating to their demands only gives them ammunition to abduct more soldiers from Israel. If their demands are met, then this unending cycle of kidnappings will continue unabated.

You must naturally form your own opinion regarding what must be done to save these soldiers. The State of Israel has protested these actions, and has sought diplomatic resolutions through international cooperation to respond to such immense and deliberate provocation. There is only so much that can be done, but ultimately, when the game of politics is through, we must believe in the power of humanity, and trust that G-d is protecting these unfortunate souls, and ensuring their safe return.

International Day of Peace, September 21

Though there are a number of ways that today is being marked around the world, few people are actually aware of the fact that today is the United Nations International Day of Peace.

Briefly, this is how the day came into being:

In 1981, a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly was sponsored by Costa Rica to have the third Tuesday in September recognized as an International Day of Peace dedicated to focusing on the ideals and themes of peace. In 2001, a new resolution was passed, sponsored by the United Kingdom, and prompted by the founder of Peace One Day Jeremy Gilley, to give the day a fixed date, and the date chosen was September 21. In 2005, Secretary General Kofi Annan called for a worldwide observance of a 24-hour ceasefire and a day of nonviolence to mark this special day. Every subsequent year as well, to mark this day, the Secretary General of the UN will ring the Peace Bell at UN headquarters in Manhattan, a bell made from coins donated from children from every continent. An inscription on the side reads “Long live absolute world peace.”

Ok, so that is a bit about today, and we can only hope that as today progresses, there are people around the world putting down their weapons at least for a day, to help affirm that there is a dream of peace in some places in the world. We are fortunate that we live at a time of instant communication and that we are able to actually tell combatants to lay down their arms on any certain day. What we can only hope for is their adherence to this young tradition.

I was in Kenya in May and was fortunate to be able to help found an organization there called the Youth Ambassadors for Peace. At the moment there are approximately 25 youths involved, and they are from three different tribes, the Kisiis, Kalejins, and Luos. These were three tribes heavily affected by the civil conflict that gripped Kenya at the beginning of 2008, and this project was the first time these tribes were brought together for a peace building project. Today they came together in a central village called Sondu to celebrate the UN’s International Day of Peace, and they spent time highlighting what is unique about each tribe, trying to increase awareness and tolerance in the various communities. I have recently heard that despite some rainy weather the day was quite successful, going late into the night, and they are extremely pleased with the progress they have made.

The point: anyone can make a difference. Often we are told to petition governments, write letters to politicians, picket outside of offices and organizations, and we expect to get them to pay attention and act. Regardless of how often this may or may not work, we must never forget the potential ability of a single person. All over the world there are groups of people who are desperate for peace. They have come together either through the efforts of a single person, or through a collective will, but they nevertheless have come together to improve the world in which they live. Today we must look not only to governments and corporations who certainly have the ability to change the world, but also to regular people, tribes in Africa, high school clubs throughout the West, grassroots movements in Europe, whose goal it is to create peace. Without these people, there is no need for peace, as they are the ones for whom we are trying to build a better world, and it is for this reason that today, International Peace Day, we must all be reminded that we are each, in our own individual way, able to make a distinct difference.

A Disgraceful Day- April 20, 2009

This afternoon I turned to the news and saw the scenes from the Anti-Racism Conference in Geneva, and saw the inevitable video of Iranian President Ahmadinejad take the stage to address those gathered for the conference. As he began to speak, his words entirely predictable, filled with venom and hatred for the West and for Israel, delegates from the European Union all stood up to leave, followed by applause from the balcony. 

This scene brought tears to my eyes and for a moment I sat there wondering why I had suddenly become so emotional. Was I was happy that these nations had stood up for the truth and for Israel? Did I think that European leaders were finally saying NO to anti-Israel sentiment? Was I saddened by the words of Ahmadinejad? Was I angry at the United Nations for letting this happen? 

I thought for a moment and then realized why I had suddenly become so emotional: I was overcome because I did not believe what I was seeing. This could not be real. The United Nations, the organization created from the rubble of World War Two, the organization meant to bring the world together, not heeding any warnings and not considering their actions whatsoever, went ahead and invited Ahmadinejad to be a keynote speaker at THE Anti-Racism Conference of the year. This revelation may sound quite naive, but deep down I am somewhat of an idealist, and I like to place my trust in mankind and hope that people make the right decisions. Today I was of course proven wrong, and it shattered me. 

A quick parallel story: In my 4th year at York University, the York Federation of Students (YFS) invited me, on behalf of Hillel, to participate in a "Stop the Hate" Campaign, which would focus on stopping hatred on campus. They wanted to focus each month on a different form of hatred (Islamophobia, Racism, Anti-Semitism, Xenophobia, etc.), and have a "launch" in the Student Centre so that each President from each group could stand up and say what their group would do to combat hatred on campus. I spoke about Anti-Semitism and Holocaust awareness, and shortly after I was approached by the President of the YFS,  who told me that the President of the Arab Student Collective would be speaking about Israel. I asked "will he be saying good things about Israel?" She said no. I asked "will he be saying how much he hates Israel (at a stop the hate campaign)?" and she said "probably." I told her about how ridiculous it would be to have him get up at a Stop the Hate campaign and rant about how awful he thinks Israel is. She agreed, and after some shuttle diplomacy on her behalf, she came back to me with "we don't want to censor him," to which I shrugged my shoulders and said "if he ruins this campaign from the beginning and fills this building with hatred, this campaign is over." The President of the Arab Student Collective naturally stood up and jumped into a rant about the devil is on campus (blatantly referring to Jewish students and Zionists on campus), and spoke for 5 minutes, his words filled with seething hatred. Following this entirely foreseeable event, the YFS leadership and I convened, at which point I expressed my utter outrage, they expressed their "shock" at what he said, and they issued a weak apology. The campaign naturally fell apart rather quickly after that. 

Compare this to today. Ban Ki Moon, the Secretary General of the United Nations, invited Ahmadinejad to address the opening of the conference on April 20 (April 20 is also the beginning of Yom Hashoa- Holocaust Memorial Day, and what would be Hitler's 120th birthday). After Ahmadinejad spoke and 23 delegations left the room, Ban Ki Moon issued this statement: "I deplore the use of this platform by the Iranian President to accuse, divide and even incite. This is the opposite of what this conference seeks to achieve." 

My words are lost on this statement. 

It is despicable, and to take a word from David Miliband, "reprehensible", that this occurred at the platform of today's conference, and Ban Ki Moon should be absolutely ashamed, in fact should resign, because of what he has allowed to occur. If those are his honest feelings, if he REALLY didn't think that the events of today would happen, then we are currently faced with the most oblivious Secretary General the United Nations has ever seen. Just like what happened at York, the leadership was suddenly "shocked" by what they saw unfold, and issued a weak apology. Just like the Stop the Hate Campaign at York quickly unfurled, I can only hope that the same will happen with this poor excuse for an international conference.

It bewilders me that such hatred can go unabated, and this was perhaps the source of my emotion. 

Many in the galleries applauded the delegates that left the room when Ahmadinejad spoke. The actions of these delegates were certainly commendable, but not enough. I believe the only delegate that left the room and then left the entire conference was the delegation from the Czech Republic. Every other delegation returned to their seats after Ahmadinejad spoke. If all those other leaders followed in the footsteps of the Czech Republic (to the airport) or followed the actions of countries like Canada, the United States, Italy, Israel, Poland, Australia, etc. and boycotted this farce of a conference from the beginning, THAT would have been impressive. As many have said, following the text of the draft about the Conference from the United Nations, and their invitation to allow Ahmadinejad to speak, this whole conference seemed surreal. 

I have always believed and maintained that people know better, that when it gets down to the grind, people will not REALLY do such stupid things, but I suppose welcome to 2009. When it comes to racism, especially when it comes to Israel, morality, rationality, logic, is all put aside. 

This is why these emotions continued throughout the day when I went to the Jerusalem Post website and saw the headline, "ISRAEL REMEMBERS 6 MILLION WHO PERISHED IN THE HOLOCAUST." Yom Hashoa, Holocaust Remembrance Day, is today as well. Coincidence? G-d, I hope so. Though with the way things are going, probably not. 

There are a few comments that I heard from Israeli leaders at this evening's ceremony that I want to share here.

Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau: "Yad Vashem decided to dedicate this year's ceremony to children in the Holocaust, so that Israel's children might appreciate what we have: A national home. A state. Freedom. Sovereignty. Pride. Backbone. We can and should kiss this country's ground, which enables to live a full life with a Jewish identity in our home,"

President Shimon Peres: "Anti-Semitism is not a Jewish disease, and its cure is incumbent upon those who perpetrate it. We have learned that our spiritual heritage is dependent on physical security. A people which lost a third of its members, a third of its children to the Holocaust, does not forget, and must not be caught off-guard."

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu: "We will not let the Holocaust deniers perpetrate another Holocaust on theJewish people. This is the highest responsibility of the State of Israel and of myself as prime minister. Israel is the shield and the hope of the Jewish People. Here we create for the glory of our people and all of mankind. The country's achievements in every field - culture and science, medicine and security - are groundbreaking. We are a nation small in number but of great fortitude."

Hate is not a form of speech to be protected. It is a form of speech that is lacking in value, is not productive, and has no place at a conference for the civilized world. My shock today came not from Ahmadinejad. The speech he used today was almost verbatim from the speech he used at the United Nations General Assembly in September. This is what he believes, this is what he says, so we should not be shocked everytime we hear him denounce Israel, Zionism, Jews, or question whether the Holocaust did indeed happen. 

Our shock and anger must be directed toward the United Nations, toward this world body that has lost control and has no idea how to tackle fundamental issues like hatred anymore. What occurred today was shocking, appalling, and this surprise must be turned into action. So many people have expressed outrage about what has happened, but what will be done? 

For world leaders to speak is good, but easy. Perhaps all those countries that boycotted this conference should hold their own conference on how to tackle racism. They should come together to teach the world that their values kept them away from this theatre of hatred, and will keep them united in preventing this hatred from being exploited on the world stage. Maybe they should create their own organization, the United Democratic Nations, that upholds values that you will find in a democracy, values that attempt to better the human condition, not worsen it. 

Ahmadinejad is a dangerous force in today's world, but the words he speaks are only given value by those who give him a platform. It is for this reason that today, with a heavy heart, I call on the United Nations to wake up, realize the wrong you have done, and try to accentuate the good in the world rather than perpetuate the bad. 

Our Responsibility for the Rehabilitation of Child Soldiers

300 000. Consider this number. Write it down, say it out loud, imagine its vastness, and place it in your heart. 300 000.

This is the approximate number of child soldiers that are currently used in the various conflicts of the modern world. This number covers the amount of children who are utilized in armed conflict across South America, Asia, and specifically Africa, and is a number so vast that it is almost difficult to comprehend. It is so difficult to comprehend because in your mind you do not just picture ranks of soldiers who have left their wives and children at home to go and fight in a just war. You are picturing ranks of children who have been abducted, intimidated, scared, orphaned, drugged, raped, dragged, and pressured into joining the ranks of corrupt militaries, militias and gangs, and the result of this involvement will scar all 300 000 of them for the rest of their lives. Consider these facts, and ask yourself: what can we do for these children? Should we bear responsibility for them once the dust settles and they are set free?

To answer these questions, we need only to consider the future, and contemplate a world once these former child soldiers have grown up without our help. These children, reared in the midst of warfare, some knowing only how to resort to violence, will grow up and become the leaders of a region that must not know any more bloodshed and death. The consequences of their worsening state are dire, and even though Africa or Asia may seem far away, we must take on a certain responsibility to rehabilitate these former warriors. It is for our own good and the good of the countries and continents these children inhabit.

Ruthie Ackerman, in her article "Scars and Stripes", details the life of former child soldiers who have been severely disabled as a result of their troubled past. There is much information detailing the plight of these former soldiers and why so little is being done to truly rehabilitate them. Money is always a factor, and some countries are simply unable to receive the aid they need in order to set up rehabilitation centers. Military programs often take priority over rehabilitation or civilian programs, and so money is not always spent effectively. People are starving on the streets and desperate to survive on whatever they can find that will give them subsistence. Children are equally susceptible to these needs, and so they turn primarily to institutions that simply give them a means to live, regardless of whether that life is worth living or not. In many cases, especially in war torn countries, these children turn to the military establishment.

Ishmael Beah is but one example of a child soldier from Sierra Leone. In his book A Long Way Gone, he details his experience as a child soldier, and wrote that in a time of war, after the murder of his parents and siblings, he turned to the military for help. The military inherently resumes full control over the destinies of children like Beah. They intimidate them, desensitize them to war, show them how to kill, train them to use AK47s, and heavily drug these children. One need only imagine the consequences of such actions. The children are trained to patrol the streets and territories of war-torn countries, shoot on sight, and if they disobey the commands of a superior, they themselves are killed. This becomes a child's world, and anything that exists outside of it is simply a hallucination or dream.

Suddenly, the conflict ends. There is no more fighting, and the children again must adapt, learning to survive, this time in an unfamiliar, civilized world. Little chance of survival is found on the streets at home and, as Ackerman so brutally details, former combatants look to the conflicts of neighboring countries. They know how to fight, and understand that they can be an asset to either side of the conflict. They also know that fighting, in a twisted sense, means survival, food, shelter and clothing, at least for the time being. So they move to the next conflict, in a new country, and descend into the horrors of war once again, this time seeking economic opportunity.

This is the life of a child soldier, and so naturally if there is no rescue, no rehabilitation, and no chance for them to enter civil society, they will become the warlords of the future. They will be fighters forever, trained with rogue techniques, and with little sense of what is ethical and moral. Furthermore, they will reflect upon their personal histories, and look to recruit other child soldiers as this life seemed to work for them, or at least enable them to get by. It is a cycle that must not be repeated, and can be stopped with our direct intervention. There are already organizations on the ground like UNICEF, who has accomplished an immense amount of work, and they must be given our support for what they are doing. They are, in essence, saving us.

You may think this is a bit over dramatic. How are our lives necessarily endangered by the fighting done by children thousands of miles away in a place that you have likely never heard of? The truth is that what happens in the world is our responsibility. It is our responsibility because we are fortunate to be living at a time when, true, there is more devastation and destruction that we could ever have imagined, but at the same time, our world is rapidly shrinking, and we have the ability to do more now than we have before. We can send money, we ourselves can volunteer, and we can do more to help save these children whose youth was stolen from them to simply aid in the horrific intentions of a warlord, politician, diamond merchant, or an entire state. Our mindset must not be whether or not we should be responsible for rehabilitating these youths. Our logic must be: we can, therefore we will, and we must.

At the Tate Modern Art Gallery in London, England, there is a display of African artwork. One vivid painting shows a child soldier, surrounded by the most beautiful flowers and scenery, in full military attire, with a pistol held by a hand behind him, an AK47 on his other side, and a phone on his belt. His hands are also held up, in a surrender position. Cheri Samba, the artist, has written at his feet, "I am for peace, that is why I like weapons." This is what they are taught, and it is clearly a lesson that must be altered for a peaceful future. This painting so clearly captures why the responsibility to help these children lies in our hands. Our abilities influence our actions, and we therefore have the power to help. Whether that means taking these children into our homes and show them a civil society, bring them to our countries and help them fit into institutions, or to just send money or volunteer at shelters and clinics that are established on their home soil, we must help. The nature of the deed may change, but the fact is unalterable that we must resume the responsibility of implementing such change.

The United Nations has spent much time considering the issue of child soldiers, and the rules are, when possible, enforced. In the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, it is clearly stated that rehabilitation is required for those children affected by participation in warfare, offered by the states from which the children emerge. These states unfortunately will not necessarily abide by these rules. They are either morally or economically depleted, and these children must therefore turn elsewhere. So, what responsibility does the world bear for rehabilitating child soldiers? We bear a huge responsibility so that we can knowingly reflect on the fact that we did not sit idly by while children are trained to hate instead of love, kill instead of nurture, and value war over peace.

300 000 is a number that can bring about peace in our time. When 300 000 children grow up and learn what is morally correct in a life separated from war, they have the potential to generate goodness. Let us, as a global community, bear full responsibility for this number, and strive to help every child with a misguided youth achieve their full potential to help create a peaceful international community.

Peace is York's Only Way Forward

It is a common notion that campus activists often express more extreme viewpoints than those people they claim to represent, and I believe this to be true of the anti-Israel activists on the York campus. 

I would like to point out that those who initiated the rally at York University on February 12, as well as a number of our leaders in the York Federation of Students (YFS) are, based on their actions, anti-Israel, not pro-Palestinian. Although many purport that Palestinian existence is itself necessarily characterized as being anti-Israel, activists on campus who believe in the Palestinian movement should be acting differently to convince us that they actually care about the Palestinian people, and don't just dream of a world without Israel.

 

Rallies consist of people cursing everything about Israel, and pointing out everything that they think Israel did wrong in Gaza. These anti-Israel activists go to lengths to try to proclaim that Israel is an "Apartheid state" when few Arabs in Israel themselves actually believe this as they have equal access to every facility, park, restaurant, bus, etc. that anyone else in the state has, which is evident upon arrival in Israel. Hamas has been killing pro-Fatah Palestinians in Gaza, as has been reported by CNN, the BBC, and Amnesty International in recent studies, and the fact that this has gone unmentioned at rallies and the anti-Israel discourse also demonstrates that these activists are clearly not pro-Palestinian.

 

If they were pro-Palestinian, they would quite simply be seeking peace. It is obvious that the Palestinians have borne the brunt of this conflict and it is sincerely an unfortunate fact that the Palestinians have not yet achieved statehood. Calling for a peaceful solution is the only way to be pro-Palestinian, as calls for "Globalize the Intifada", a common sign in Vari Hall, only further damages the lives of the Palestinian people themselves.

 

In the Territories, we can clearly see that Hamas in Gaza, pushing for war, hatred, and violence, has been an extremely harmful element to Palestinian society, and their tactics both during conflict, and during cease-fires have seen increased Palestinian bloodshed. Contrastingly, Fatah, with its hand extended to Israel, attempting to forge a peaceful solution, has clearly not witnessed the same amount of bloodshed in the West Bank.

A recent poll conducted before the recent war in Gaza by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found that 40% of the residents of Gaza want to emigrate, compared to 25% in the West Bank. This shows that actual Palestinian opinion has demonstrated that the leaders seeking war are not the people they want representing them. 

 

Pro-Israel supporters understand that there are flaws on both sides, and it is rare to speak to a pro-Israel activist who believes that Israel has acted flawlessly. Obviously there have been mistakes made throughout the conflict because no one is perfect. However, speaking to anti-Israel activists, there is no one to blame on the Palestinians side because every single flaw of Palestinian society stems from Israeli actions. Speaking to any of the lead anti-Israel activists on campus, the Palestinian leadership has done nothing wrong. 

 

If there is anything that the events of the last week have demonstrated, it is that there is a serious need for a paradigm shift on campus with regard to the conflict. A positive discourse is required so that both sides, Israel and the Palestinian, are represented, and most importantly, that the facts on the ground be taken into account.

 

Most Palestinians understand that Israel is there to stay, and few ever question whether Israel has the right to exist. Polls conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research do not ask people whether they believe Israel should have the right to exist. They ask practical questions about how peace talks should be held with different Israeli political parties, how people feel about opening the border between Gaza and Egypt, and whether Hamas should be open to talks with Israel. Questioning Israel's right to exist is irrelevant and impractical. Israel exists, now how should the future look? 

Those in the territories have seen enough bloodshed and war; their supporters on campus seemingly have not. Instead of seeking peaceful ways forward, they perpetuate hatred by fueling animosity on campus: issuing one sided press releases condemning Israel, such as the statement drafted by the YFS during the conflict in Gaza that made no mention of Hamas rockets landing in Israel; blaming Zionists for issues on campus they disagree with, such as the Drop YFS campaign which has signatures from a wide variety of students, not only Jewish; attacking and threatening the Hillel office on February 11; and by making this not about what can be done for peace, but how to maintain a state of war.

 

In my experience with the conflict at York, never once have I seen the anti-Israel movement attempt to reach across the table searching for peace. Never once have I attended a rally in which the usual anti-Israel voices call for a step forward in the region and on campus. Contrastingly, the pro-Israel voice has maintained a message of peace and has rarely spoken out negatively against the Palestinians. We do understand the hardship of the Palestinian people, and we absolutely sympathize with them. We believe that their leadership does not always have their best interests in mind, but we know that if the message of peace and understanding is consistent and continuous, then progress will be made.

 

This hatred on campus must stop, and I urge all those who believe in progress to take steps to ensure that this campus does not only see hate, but sees a time when cooperation and coexistence is possible, in line with the dreams of those on the ground in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.

Inauguration Day

I want to quickly get down my thoughts about what has happened today before the day is over and before I lose this feeling that's been building up throughout the day.

Barack Obama's inauguration today was truly a remarkable thing. No one can deny that it was a day that will forever go down in the history of not only America, but also the world. At a time when it seems that the world is at its most fragile, looking the darkest it has been for a long time, and when animosity runs deep through the veins of so many people, today it just felt like the world (well, most of it) came together. 

On the news today, they kept showing people everywhere watching along as Obama became the 44th President. They showed people in the small village in Kenya, where his father was from, sitting in front of a screen, and they showed children sitting in a classroom in Indonesia, where he spent a part of his childhood, also watching along as he took the Oath of Office. The world was engaged and the world is excited that change came to America today, and it was phenomenal to be around to see it. 

There is not much good that we hear about in the world today. Every day we turn on the news and we find war, we find death, we find sickness and disease and corruption and all other things that plague some of the most far reaching corners of the world. It tends to get overwhelming at times and it is disappointing for those of us who are optimistic in humanity and in the potential of the world. We sometimes feel that the world has suddenly lost its bearings, lost sense of its ideals, and lost its identity, and is spiraling into this midst of confusion, chaos and intolerance. It is difficult to think about how much the world has changed in the last few years, and it is becoming increasingly challenging to see change on the horizon. 

I don't want to sound cliche, but today was saw a glimpse of that change. It is not solidified yet, and it is not certain, but you cannot deny that hope is out there. Today was great because today, when you turned on the news on the tv or radio, you saw only good. You saw  the people of the world coming together (FINALLY!) , you saw the culmination of the civil rights movement, and you saw an incredible man rise to a challenge in a position that very few people would actually want. Obama is an amazing person, and after today, it is difficult for anyone, even the staunch skeptics, to deny this.

Many believe that this is too much hype and too much celebrity and that the world is simply getting their hopes up,  and perhaps we are setting ourselves up for disappointment, who knows? I do have a few things to say to those who believe this though.

Hope is a notion that is more powerful than people give it credit for. Hope is something that people can rely on to get them through even the darkest of times, and when it is offered, it must be savoured and treasured. Hope is what Obama seems to have offered to so many people in the world today. To the Black population of America, he has showed that the Civil Rights movement worked, and has achieved something at the end of a process to which so many have contributed with their tears and with their blood. To everyone else in the world who can identify a form of hatred in the world today, he has also given the hope that we need in order to believe that any hatred can be overcome. Fine, it took a long time, but it happened. So many African Americans were asked today, "did you ever think that you would see a Black man elected President in your lifetime?" Though their responses differed (some said yes, most said 'never') the fact that it has happened should give hope to anyone who finds barriers in their lives today that seem difficult to overcome. With time, perseverence, belief, and faith anything can be achieved. That was proven today on the steps of the Capitol. 

Hope is also a powerful tool because even if it is just hype, and you don't want to fall for something that may end up in disappointment, so what? The daily occurrences of the world do not give us much to be hopeful for, and with constantly bleak surroundings why not find that spot of blue in a grey sky and hold onto it. It can lift you up out of the wilderness that the world seems to have become, and can show you that there are those who want good, and that there are so many in this world who personify the greatness that we hope to find when we open up the newspaper in the morning or turn on the news when we get home from work. 

Barack Obama today symbolized that hope, and he knows the sort of world that he is inheriting. His brilliant speech today was sombre and down to earth, and it made me realize that he is already feeling the weight of the world on his shoulders, something that he will not shed for at least the next 4 years. What he did though was unique and special and is the reason why I had tears in my eyes throughout the days events.  He said the word "I" only three times in his speech. He knows that the task he has taken on cannot be tackled alone, and so whenever he said the word "we" or "us" he was asking for the assistance of not only the American people, but of the people everywhere. He called out to our core instincts and ideals, and the principles he evoked were those that we all hope to find in our fellow humans, and that is why we must not be disappointed if the next four years do not deliver everything we think they can, or everything Obama said they would. We must act for ourselves as well, and help ensure that the hope that was created and felt in every corner of the world today was created not just because we were told to hope by a great man on a great day, but because we felt it, embraced it, and fostered its growth to ensure greatness for our collective future.

The Siege of Gaza

Since the Israeli actions against Hamas in Gaza began on the 26th of December, many people have asked me my opinion on what is happening. I have many thoughts about what is happening, but for once, I can happily say that many of my views have been echoed in the media already. Despite the fact that although the world usually aligns itself against Israel, which we can see has already happened in this case, there have been many articles written that support the actions that Israel is taking.

A few of my favourite are as follows:

Matt Gurney, as published in the National Post about so-called Proportionalism: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/01/06/matt-gurney-the-impossibility-of-a-proportional-response-in-gaza.aspx

David Breakstone, from Jerusalem Post, say that he offers no apologies for what is happening: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231167265397&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

2 Bradley Burston articles, one about killing Hamas leader Nizar Ghayan:    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050962.html

and another Burston article with regard to analogies of what is happening today:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1052866.html 

The last great one, is by Lorne Gunter from the National Post:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/01/05/lorne-gunter-gaza-deals-blow-to-palestinian-myths.aspx

Alright, now my opinions:

To begin with, I am extremely proud and relieved in a sense by what Israel is doing, and I stand firm in my conviction of being a proud and passionate Zionist. Though the word Zionist is often tainted by the propaganda and rants by the far left and other opponents of what the Jewish state stands for, I believe that Zionism represents a beautiful, legitimate concept of uniting a people with a land. Zionism represents the Jewish people's yearning for a state of their own, in peaceful and secure borders, something that we remarkably are still struggling for today. Most importantly, Zionism stands for human rights, something that Hamas certainly cannot understand, and something that we take great pride in. What is occurring today is Gaza is Israel's demonstration of their ability to defend themselves when attacked, and it is unfortunate that there are many innocent Palestinian civilians who are caught up in the crossfire.

As always, my thoughts are not only with Israel and the Israelis, but also with the Palestinian people. I dislike when people paint the Palestinians with a broad brush. There are approximately 5 million Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza, 1.5 million living in Gaza. They have certainly made mistakes, but these mistakes have largely been made by their leaders throughout their history, and I have an immense amount of sympathy for them. Nowhere else in the world are there refugee camps that are roughly 60 years old, and nowhere else in the world is purchasing rockets more important than purchasing food. The Palestinian people deserve much better, and they must rid themselves of Hamas. Hamas for years has taken on a dual-role: social organization, and terror organization. It is true that for a while they provided school and social services for the Palestinian people. It cannot however be more clear than it is today that the terrorism wing of its adminstration has overshadowed everything else, and Hamas has turned into the Palestinians' Angel of Death. 

It is very clear today, that the Palestinians have erred once again in deciding to embrace Hamas. One of the primary messages of Hamas has been that they will always win against Israel. For two reasons: If Israel does nothing against them, they will grow and survive, which is in itself a success against the "Zionist Enemy"; the second reason is that if Israel does strike at Hamas, they will shield themselves with the use of either civilians or religious institutions, definitely resulting in the deaths of innocents or the destruction of a mosque, another victory to Hamas since the world will naturally condemn Israel. If you look closely at what is happening today with the rallies, people only hold anti-Israel rallies, and not pro-Palestinian rallies and certainly no pro-Hamas rallies. A pro-Hamas rally would be remarkable to see, because no one can seriously look at Hamas as an organization or political party and believe that they have the best interests of their citizens in mind. 

After the Lebanon War in 2006, I wrote an article that was pretty inflammatory and was not received too well by mainstream Jewish organizations. I stated that perhaps Israel needs to review the way it acted in Lebanon and realize that they are not fighting legitimate, sovereign states. In Lebanon, we were fighting Hizbullah, a terrorist organization, that does not believe in the rules of war, is not a signatory to the Geneva Conventions, and fights dirty. As a result of Israel attempting to play fair and minimize civilian deaths, well over 100 soldiers were killed, and many will say that Israel indeed lost that war (if they didn't lose, then it is certainly unclear who won). I advocated that perhaps when fighting Hamas or Hizbullah, Israel has to change their tactics and not necessarily try to take the moral highground. They need to look at their priorities:

1. Protect Israelis

2. Destroy the enemy

3. Prevent unnecessary civilian death

It seems in this war (let's call a spade a spade) that the Israelis have indeed balanced out their priorities and have changed the way they have conducted themselves. They said no more to the rocket attacks from Hamas, and began to destroy the Hamas infrastructure in Gaza. Hamas does not play by the rules of war, they hide behind civilians in every possible sense, they launch rockets from houses, hide caches of weapons in schools and kindergartens, they put civilians on top of buildings that are being targeted, and they celebrate when Israel kills Palestinian civilians. It is therefore obvious that Israeli airstrikes will witness collateral damage, but that is the fault of Hamas. I will repeat: Hamas is to blame for the high death toll of the Palestinians. Israel has gone to lengths to ensure that civilians are not killed in strikes against the Hamas infrastructure. They have dropped leaflets written in Arabic warning Palestinian civilians to leave specific areas that are going to be bombed. This gives the Palestinians the option to leave and not put themselves in the way of danger, and it also, unfortunately, warns the militants that Israel is going to strike. This demonstrates that Israel is willing to sacrifice the element of surprise in order to minimize the number of civilian casualties because they understand the psyche of Hamas. The other thing that Israel has done is to actually phone Palestinian families in the West Bank and warn them that the area they are living in is going to be targeted. If the family is not home to answer the phone, the Israelis leave a voice message. No one can seriously argue that Israel purposely targets civilians. It is simply unrealistic. Israeli action in Gaza has been much more successful than in Lebanon because they have been careful, but they have weighed their priorities. They know they have to seriously cripple Hamas, and they have the ability to do so. I was hoping that they would not send in ground forces, but there apparently is only so much that the Israeli Air Force can do. Now that ground forces have been sent in, it is clear that Gaza is an extremely dangerous environment, and it is unfortunate that 5 soldiers have already been killed (3 of which unfortunately died from a friendly fire incident from an Israeli tank). Priorities have changed, and we can already see the sucess of this operation. 

An issue that has been addressed by a number of journalists already is this idea of proportionalism. Many people are concerned that Israeli is overreacting, and they note that regardless of the number of rockets that have been launched into Israel, the level of destruction and the number of civilians in Israel pales in comparison to the amount of death and destruction caused by Israelis strikes in Gaza as a response (I would refer you to the article above by Matt Gurney). 

To apply something I have learned in law school: to commit a crime, there must be two factors at play: Mens Rea (guilty mind) and Actus Reus (guilty act). The result can largely be irrelevant if these two factors can be demonstrated. The goal of Hamas is to destroy Israel and kill Israelis. They do not hide this fact, and they declare it proudly every day. They state that their rockets will rain down on Israeli homes and cities and that they will kill Israeli men, women and children, all of whom are seen as the enemy of the Palestinians. They are not interested in speaking to Israel, in dealing with Israel through back channels, and they dream of a world without Israel. They launch rockets to achieve this goal. Unfortunately for them, they rockets are crude, they have poor aim, and only rarely do they hit something significant. This does not mean that the guilty mind is not there (the act is clearly evident). If they had better weapons, they would be firing these at Israel, and I can guarantee that unlike Israel, they would not be targeting Israeli military installations. As they have demonstrated through speech and actions, they would target civilian centers, and try to inflict the maximum amount of civilian death. As Matt Gurney states in his article, Israel fortunate has better weapons than Hamas, and better aim, and that is why there is a higher death toll. It drives me crazy when people only look at the number of people dead. If there is one thing I have learned in law school, it is that intent is an extremely important factor when it comes to actions, and to quote the common analogy floating around these days, if someone comes to you with a gun and tries to shoot and kill you but keeps missing, doesn't mean you should not use everything in your power to ensure that they will stop. If you don't stop them, then there is a chance that eventually they will kill you and this is not a risk that ANYONE would take. 

What makes me the most upset about this conflict is the double standard applied to Israel. I have said this far too many times, and I stand firmly behind my words: this double standard is a result of the fact that Israel is a Jewish state. For anyone looking for cryptic messages, let me be perfectly blunt: I am calling the majority of the attacks on Israel anti-Semitic. 

As I say always, it is crucial to understand the differences between being anti-Israel, anti-Zionist, and anti-Semitic. I usually do equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. Zionism is the right of the Jews to have an autonomous, sovereign state of their own in secure borders. If you do not believe that the Jewish people have a right to a state like Israel, then you are anti-Semitic. Perhaps you don't think it should be exactly where it is today, maybe you think it should be in Uganda, whatever. If you do not believe that the Jews are entitled to a state of their own, then anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism. 

The difference arises with regard to being anti-Israel. Anyone can be anti-Israel. You may not agree with the policies of the Israeli government. You may not like what the state does or what the state stands for, and you may not like that there is a Jewish state with Jewish values and ideals when many people in the state are not Jews. Fine. You may also not like what is happening to the Palestinian people, and you may say that Israel is an enemy of human rights. You have an opinion, and you have the right to criticize anything freely, of course. My problem is when you criticize ONLY Israel. My blood boils when people on the far left, and people who claim that they believe in human rights ONLY direct their criticism at Israel. We are living in a world that is certainly not lacking destruction, and there are many countries to criticize when it comes to human rights such as China, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, to name a few. I adamently believe that if you only criticize Israel for purported human rights abuses and do not mention any other problem in the world, then you are an anti-Semite. 

The blatant double standard employed in the discourse regarding this conflict demonstrates that anti-Semitism is alive and well. The anti-Israel shield is employed by those who have anti-Semitic views but understand that to be labelled anti-Semitic is taboo and politically incorrect these days. For this reason, they have hid under the anti-Israel shield that is employed by many individuals, organizations, and even institutions like the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights, in order to state their dislike of the Jewish state 'legitimately'. 

To believe that anti-Semitism is no longer relevant in the world is an understatement, and it must be understood that it is alive and well in another form, that of anti-Israel sentiment. 

Furthermore, the fact that some people can not place any blame on Hamas whatsoever for what is currently happening in Gaza boggles my mind. This is an example of blaming only Israel, and it is an example of the way that rationale and reason breaks down when the enemy is the Jewish state. I am proud of the way that many journalists and politicians have looked at this conflict in a rational way and have assigned the correct amount of blame to Hamas and their supporters, but it seriously makes me question my sometimes unquestioning faith in mankind when I see rallies that believe that the true enemy is Israel. This is hateful and incorrect. 

No one should turn on the news at any time during this conflict and take pleasure in the fact that it is happening. Often we forget that there is a second part to the "To save a life is to save the entire world," and that is "to destroy a life is to destroy the world." Death and destruction should never be the answer, and no one should be looking at this conflict with any joy. Certainly the Palestinians in Gaza are not, and most importantly neither are the Israelis. Golda Meir once stated something like, "Israel does not take pleasure in a military victory, we take pleasure when a new kind of tomato is cultivated in the Negev." Israel is not rejoicing because of what is happening in Gaza, nor should it be. Nevertheless, a country that is provoked will respond, and it is unreasonable to expect that when rockets are landing on and around your citizens day after day, that you can sit and do nothing. It is expected that a country will defend its citizens first, and Israel is doing the right thing. 

Like many, I do not apologize for what is being done in Gaza. Hamas continues to launch rockets because no one has stood up to defy them yet. The Palestinian civilians in Gaza still somehow support this regime that is slowly killing them from the inside, and everytime there is an anti-Israel rally in the streets of Toronto, London, New York, or even Cairo that does not condemn Hamas for what it has done to the Palestinian people in Gaza, it is a victory for hatred. Hamas is an organization that must be swiftly destroyed, and there will be no peaceful resolution until that is achieved. 

I strongly believe in peace in the Middle East, and despite what you may think about what I have written, I am a moderate when it comes to this conflict. I believe peace is possible, and I believe that left to their own devices, free of political parties, or the pressure from the game of politics, the people would choose peace. I apportion most of the blame on the Palestinian leaders, who have used their people as merely pieces in a game that is designed to win over the sympathy of the world while demonizing Israel. For too long, the Palestinians have merely been pawns in a political game played not only by the Palestinian leaders, but by many of the Arab leaders as well. People are quick to denounce Israel for what is happening in Gaza, but they should remember that Israel left Gaza, yet still supplies the people there with food, gas, electricity, and medical supplies. Egypt could very easily be doing this, but they wiped their hands of Gaza long ago and have not looked back since. What other country in the world would continue to supply all these vital supplies while still coming under constant bombardment of rocket attacks by an enemy that has declared its unrelenting efforts to destroy the Jewish State once and for all? Only Israel. Many Arab leaders claim to stand up for the Palestinian people, yet very few of them, who we all know have the ability and finances to help the Palestinians immensely, have all but ignored the plight of these people. I do not support every single action of the Israeli government without question, but I can comfortably say that Israel is practically more helpful to the Palestinians than the rest of the Arab world, who, let's face it, is just talk. Its time for a change. 

There is much to be said, but this is getting quite long so I will close here. As I said before, I believe that peace is possible, but it must be seen as such by those in power. Peace can easily be cultivated in the hearts and minds of people, but they must be exposed to the environment in which this is possible. Hamas is a poison to the Palestinian people, and I hope that there will soon be a realization that this is true. When this is so, and when the dust settles, hopefully people can come together and create a long lasting peace that will ensure that people live together, peacefully, for the next 60 years.

In the meantime, I hope that this war ends soon, and I wish for the speedy destruction of Hamas. Outside the region, I condemn the hypocrisy of the left, and for the sake of all those people suffering around the world in countries who have truly turned their backs on human rights, I dream that one day the same amount of attention is given to your plight, and that the same demands are made of your governments for change, reconciliation, and peace.