Letters July 2006 July 25 Both sides must be held to account for their actionsIn response to Sholom Deen's "No hope, no chance, and no future, unless...": Sholom, Thanks for the response. I can't keep this up if each time we have to write so much to each other! Quick clarification, I am not Muslim. No offense taken, as I am sure none was intended, but in the spirit of our exchange, I hope that you will not simply assume that next time you engage with someone from an Iranian background. In any event, I enjoyed reading your letter--and think you make many interesting and valid points. Some points, I disagree with you on, notably the role of organizations such as campuswatch.org in keeping academic conversations honest, the equality of Israeli treatment of its Arab and Jewish citizenry, and your depiction of Arab governments as 'racist' because they deny Jews the right to practice their religion. While this is true, remember that Arab governments, as a general rule, are authoritarian and continue to deny a great deal of human and political freedoms to their own (Muslim) citizens; these same regimes are rewarded and sustained by the US. Arab governments do have a part to play in educating their citizenry, but so long as the current regimes are sustained by the US, which turns a blind eye to the state-sanctioned human rights violations and Israel-hate mongering in exchange for stability and unfettered access to oil, such expectations are unrealistic. What of the US's role? Israel too, must educate its citizens and children not to hate blindly; permitting/encouraging students in writing inscriptions on missiles doesn't achieve this objective. On the issue of anti-Semitism, we agree that Jews have historically been (and currently continue to be) depicted in a negative light, often bordering on outright bigotry (I do not say racism because there is no Jewish 'race' anymore than there is a Muslim race; Jews hail from all corners of the world, in a variety of ethnicities and complexions and are very much cosmopolitan citizens of the world). I also agree that criticisms (on both sides) should deal in truths and facts, not ideology or hate-mongering; that is the only way criticism can be constructive. What I meant by raising the issue of charges of anti-Semitism is that criticisms of Israel are often taken to mean attacks against Jews and Judaism. Criticisms of Israeli policies can be and often are preempted by the 'anti-Semite' tag. As a student of political science and Middle Eastern studies, I see this happen all the time in academia, more so than I see intimidation of pro-Israeli views by faculty or students. I would argue just the opposite in fact, that many legitimate criticisms of Israel are often circumspect because of the overwhelmingly pro-Israel/anti-Muslim/Arab/Iranian climate in US policy, the media, in academia, and in popular representations of Jewish/Israeli history in many mainstream films. Organizations such as campuswatch.org attempt to intimidate all critics of Israel, not just those who deal in distortions. Some of my friends have written fair (if not balanced) pieces critical of Israel for their campus dailies or for websites such as iranian.com; why do some of their articles and names appear on the campuswatch list and webpages, which can then be googled and used against them in future job interviews, background checks, or opportunities? Though not prohibited by law, criticism of Israel is limited by this sort of societal disciplinary coercion, in which a fear of retribution prevents the revelation of one's true thoughts and views. I do not deny the fact that many criticisms of Israel border on dehumanizing and stereotypical; these are wrong and morally reprehensible. Still, as an Iranian-American male, I find that "Middle Easterners", Muslims, and Arabs in particular are discussed and represented in much more debasing and dehumanizing ways than Israel or Jews are in today's media, political discourse, and popular culture in the US; this is allowed to happen for several reasons: 1. The Middle East and (nonexistent "Muslim world" by extension) is currently represented as the bad guy of the West; 'Islam' has become as vague and all-encompassing a term as Communism during the Cold War. Anything Middle Eastern or Muslim is seen as a threat, alien, potentially destabilizing, and backward. This image has been fuelled by movies and television since Not Without My Daughter; in written accounts ever since Europeans began traveling to the Middle East. 2. The underwhelming level of political organization and representation by Arab, Muslim, and Iranian citizens and residents of the US. This is partly due to the relative youth of these communities in the US. You know why racism is so swiftly condemned against other ethnic/racial groups? Because they are politically organized. Blacks, Latinos, and Jews--there are many lawyers, politicians, businessmen, and celebrities among their ranks that can mobilize large swaths of the population politically to defend their interests. The lack of political organization among Middle Eastern communities is partially why so many bigots get away scot-free with the appalling, racist, and hateful depictions of the area's cultures, history, and customs. This is slowly starting to change, with orgs like NIAC, the ADA, etc... 3. The stereotyping of Arabs, Muslims, Iranians, etc. into one collective group with an identity overwhelmingly rooted in Islam; this is due to ignorance, and more importantly, the failure of this country' educational system. If I read anymore articles discussing "the Muslim World" as if that is a singular country or political entity, I will vomit. The level of ignorance regarding the region's many cultures, languages, religious diversity, distinct ways of life and even practice of Islam is shameful, and quite frankly insulting. I have grown especially tired of trying to explain the differences between Iran and Iraq to people who amazingly after 3 years of war, still cannot distinguish between the two. 4. The absolute refusal of American political figures to put any of the blame, responsibility, and demands upon the state of Israel for current and recent impasses in the peace process, if it can be called that at all anymore...this implicitly holds one side responsible for the violence and conflict, and legitimizes scorn and enmity for them. In this regard, I think this administration has done more to destroy prospects for peace in the region than any of its predecessors. Ultimately, my intention is to present a side of the debate that I see lacking in the US media, in the statements of our so-called Œleaders', etc. It is not simply an anti-Israel side, nor does it overlook the actions of the armed terror groups. I am vehemently opposed to fundamentalist, intolerant and armed groups organized under the pretense of Islam. But at this point, condemning Hezbollah or militant Islamic groups is preaching to the choir in the US; yet the mainstream media and political figures are quite tame in their analyses of Israeli actions and policies. My criticisms of militant Islam are not tantamount to support for Israeli actions, nor are my criticisms of Israel a declaration of admiration for terrorists. I criticize because I am appalled that innocent people, overwhelmingly Arab and civilian, are dying due to current Israeli incursions which are part off a wider, ever-expanding cycle of violence in which Arab civilians always pay the highest price in blood spilled. And the fact that no one of consequence in this country seems to give a damn about THEIR lives, their losses, the terror they are facing. Sholom, that is the ultimate dehumanization: silence in the face of suffering. The Jews died senselessly in the Holocaust because no one said or did anything to help them. Wasn't that the point that the founding of Israel tried to drive home, and the crux of its legitimacy? I criticize to provoke reaction, for my own catharsis, above all else, to hopefully educate and inspire others to take notice of this tragedy. We cannot hope for a solution to a problem when we simply dichotomize each side of the equation into right vs. wrong, good vs. evil, Jew vs. Arab, and so on. But no amount of debate changes the fact that Israeli actions are currently killing hundreds of innocent civilians, displacing hundreds of thousands more under a dubious pretext--and the historical trend that militarism begets more conflict and militarism. Though funded by the mullahs in Iran, Hezbollah itself is a response to and creation of Israeli aggression and occupation of Lebanon in the 1980s. All Hezbollah has to do to come out the winner in this latest round is to not be annihilated by the Israeli attack, which it won't be. Likewise, Hamas owes its rise to power in part to Israel's crippling of the PA under Arafat. But my intention is not to go tit for tat. Both sides must be held to account for their actions, and my comments are directed toward those responsible, the political figures and leaders. My interest in writing you is to first thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts carefully, for responding in a respectful and dignified manner, for raising interesting points which hopefully I have answered. We may not agree on a number of points, but like you, I try to think out my criticisms rather than to lash out; to acknowledge if not agree with what the 'other side' says rather than to straw-man a counter position to suit my own argument. Every time I discuss this topic, I remind myself to act as if I was talking to my friends from Haifa and Tel Aviv, but to remember my friends from Ramallah, those currently in Beirut and other affected areas. One chooses words more carefully when one has human connections to an issue.
>>> More July 2006 letters Part 3 -- Part 2 -- Part 1 |