In interviews with Palestinians in Ramallah, Greenberg finds various explanations for why Palestinians  have not taken to the streets to dislodge Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah  party in the West Bank, or Hamas in Gaza -- some show more interest in  promoting Fatah-Hamas unity, Abbas is not seen as an autocratic ruler  (really?), there's a bit of free expression in the West Bank, also a  higher living standard than in neighboring Arab countries.
But the bottom-line response to the riddle of why Abbas appears unchallenged boils down to a single, transcending complaint in Greenbergs's piece -- The problem is not with the Palestinian leadership, but with the Israeli "occupation."
Greenberg starts out by quoting Abed Jabalah, an appliance store  owner in Ramallah, as telling him:  "We are not happy.  No one is  happy.  But the president and prime minister are doing their best.  We  are under occupation.  We are not a state.  The things we demand of our  government we know it can't do because of the Israelis.  Our revolution  should be against Israel first."
And Greenberg  wraps it all up in the final paragraph of his story with a quote from  Abu Helal, who works in youth programs sponsored by a non-profit group:   "We have no regime to topple.  Israel controls it all.  Our basic  problem is the occupation."
Which,  of course, begs the real question.   If Israeli "occupation" is the  real offender, why is there nevertheless quiet on the Palestinian front?  Greenberg, on the basis of his own article, fails to ask the right question -- why aren't West Bank Palestinians  demonstrating en masse against Israel?  Never mind their feelings about  Abbas, since his governance apparently is not what they're really  beefing about.
Had Greenberg delved into that riddle, he might have found that many Palestinians,  while inveighing against Israeli "occupation," actually lead more  satisfactory lives under Israeli rule than under Fatah or Hamas rule.   And they often tend to act accordingly. 
Anti-Israel rhetoric aside, Greenberg  might have found telling evidence that this is so by reporting on what  happened when Israel built its security barrier along the West Bank to  prevent terrorist attacks and, in the process, sliced a bit into remote  sections of eastern Jerusalem, leaving some Arab neighborhoods on the Palestinian side of the fence.  Anticipating that the barrier eventually might become a border between Israel and a Palestinian  state, Arab residents of these Jerusalem neighborhoods began to move  out -- and bought homes in more central Jerusalem neighborhoods on the  Israeli side.
While Palestinian public parlance against "occupation" has become commonplace, more determinative of their real attitudes is where Palestinians prefer to settle down when confronted with the prospect of ending up on the "wrong" side -- the Palestinian side.  
Another bit of significant evidence, also overlooked by Greenberg,  is the latest monthly Peace Index Poll by a Tel Aviv University think  tank in conjunction with the Israeli Democratic Institute.  Taken toward  the end of February, the poll asked Israeli Jews and Israeli  Arabs about the likelihood of anti-government eruptions in Israel.   After all, Arabs comprise 20 percent of Israel's population.  Yet,  they're totally ignored by Greenberg.
Why  aren't they emulating Arab mass protests elsewhere?  The answer:  56  percent of Israeli Arabs see no point in staging street revolts because  they already live in a democracy or view their personal situations as  quite good.  The rest tend to be apathetic or skeptical, seeing no  purpose in mass demonstrations.
Too bad that Greenberg contented himself with reporting Palestinian slogans against Israeli "occupation" instead of reporting on the real lives Palestinians and Israeli Arabs lead and the real choices they make.
No comments:
Post a Comment