Life, Death and the Pursuit of Peace in Israel/Palestine

As an outsider what I see in the "Holy Land" is hate and fear bundled together with ignorance.  No solution will work until much greater trust is somehow generated.  Outsiders feel compelled to take sides, but that isn't really fair as there is plenty of blame to spread. 

The two authors of "Tomorrow is Yesterday" Hussein Agha and Robert Malley were insiders who had been involved with advising leaders on both sides and were involved with negotiations. 

They noted an American bias.  It really goes back to 1948.  President Harry Truman was uncertain if he should support the movement to create Israel.  One of his more trusted friends, a Jewish tailor from his home town in Missouri encouraged him to support.  After knowledge of the Holocaust many Americans felt guilt as they had made it difficult for Jews to immigrate to the U.S.  Some admired the gutsyness of the Jewish pioneers.  The Jewish Christian traditions inclined Americans to think of the Arabic Muslims as uncivilized.

Religious fervor was a big factor.  While suffering in their wanderings after an expulsion, some Jewish thinkers felt they needed to get back to the Holy Land and organized the Zionist movement.  A small, but powerful group of Christians were able to find in the Bible signs of the second coming of Christ that required the Jews ruling in Jerusalem.  They became a significant factor in U.S. elections.  Israeli settlers seemed to feel they were fulfilling a historical religious calling.  A Jewish group, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee also provided political support for Israel.

On the other side, the Muslims felt they were owed the whole of Palestine.  Going back to World War I they had been led to believe if they helped the British defeat the Turks they would have more freedom.  The Arabs felt they had conquered Palestine and beaten off the Crusaders and Turks and had their own religious attachment for the land. 

In 1948 the United Nations had tried to set up two independent nations, but the Arabs felt they were entitled to all the land between the sea and the river and furthermore the Jews were intruders.  The Palestinians have been criticized many times for not accepting Israeli/American attempts at compromise, but they felt cheated.  

The two authors were personally familiar with Yasser Arafat, Mamoud Abbas, Ehud Barak, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Benjamin Netanyahu and many others.  The American presidents felt restricted by their four year terms forcing them to rush. 

The two authors feel the two state solution has been advocated for many years and very likely to be resisted by elements on both sides.

They feel it is time to look for alternatives.  A single state giving equality to both sides with protections for minorities might work, but has a lot of resistance.  Nearby Lebanon has a constitution that is supposed to protect Muslims, Christians and Jews that worked very well until after World War II.  For awhile Jordan controlled the West Bank, but backed away from it over (among other concerns) worry of Palestinians dominating their country.  

To me the big problem was depicted in my first paragraph.  Fear and hatred need to be tamed and trust built up.  This would take more than an American presidential term.  The western world is gradually learning to live with Muslims (many escaping from Mideast turmoil).  Arab nations with oil wealth are now trying to exert international presence.  Many are open to trade with Israel.  A lot of political rhetoric in the U.S. has been about how repulsive Arabs and Muslims are and have been generating hate in American elections.

Trust is built by interconnections.  Two areas that have worked for others, are sports and arts.  Arabs/Muslims and Jews do business with one another in the rest of the world.  Western consumers are becoming fans of Muslim athletes and artists.  Education is critical and should include such things as cultural appreciation, history and logic.

Perhaps we expect too much.  Humans distrust strangers, but we function in big cities.  The world has become much more interconnected and we have mutual concerns.  Climate change affects everyone, even those who think it is a "con job."  Pollution has invaded pretty much everywhere.  All our problems could be obliterated in a nuclear war.  We would all be better off if more people would shift their focus to things that really matter.

How Borders Make and Break Our World

Borders are lines.  The lines represent control.  The author starts off with some concepts we take for granted and gives fascinating examples of how some borders have been set.  Then he steers us to the future and how we will have to adjust our thinking.

Humans have been making territories for thousands of years.  Mainly to protect what they consider their own.  

In Scandinavia we are told about boundary procedures between Norway and Sweden which have the longest European boundary between two nations  One interesting aspect was a recognition of the Sami who herd deer across those two nations plus Finland and Russia.  The Sami were involved in the foundation of the World Council of Indigenous People.  

The Roman Empire was pretty impressive in its extent.  I had been told as a young student that Hadrian's Wall was built to keep out the fierce Scots.  The author points out it really marked the northern most boundary of the Empire.

China is known for the Great Wall.   Modern times have called for new measures.  The concern is to keep out undesirable messages from the outside world.  Incidentally to keep discontent inside.  In 1998 China built its first firewall out of fiber optics.  It required a lot of manpower as monitors.  Other countries, such as Russia, Iran, Egypt and Venezuela found the Chinese strategies could be copied to help keep out western notions.

Israel and Palestine had been subject to a lot of historical factors.  In 1947 the United Nations recommended for the creation of two independent states; one for the Jews and one for the Arabs with the city of Jerusalem being an international city.  Military action went against the Arabs and their found their territory being occupied.  The border became controlled by the Israelis and they started exploiting the Arab lands by destroying such things as olive trees and setting up housing for Jews.  Israel has received more support from the Americans (evangelicals a key element) than Palestine received from Arab nations.

Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon two English surveyors were hired to settle the border between Pennsylvania and Maryland that had earlier been bounded by two different royal grants.  One step in the procedure was to use detailed astronomical measurements. The Mason-Dixon came to be associated with the division between the North and the South.  The fugitive slave law allowed bounty hunters to cross the line to retrieve escaped slaves.  Relating this story to an American visitor this past weekend I was told that Toledo was mis-located in Ohio as it actually when proper surveying should have been in Michigan.  This was so disruptive that it was decided to keep the borders the same.  To compensate Michigan was awarded the Upper Peninsula that had no land connections.

 North America had their divisions before Europeans began to impose their own lines.  The indigenous tribes were concerned also about hunting grounds and food growing areas.  The French, Spanish and English carved up most of North America and the lines changed with wars and treaties.  A Mexican Revolution created an independent nation.  By 1848 Americans attacked Mexicans and the net result was a redrawing of the border with the Americans taking over all of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah and Texas and parts of Kansas, Oklahoma and Wyoming.  Many of the people in those areas considered themselves Mexicans or indigenous.

Donald Trump  announced his candidacy for President with claims that he would build a wall that Mexico would pay for.  Appealing to a large segment he promised he would stop the murderers and rapists.  What is overlooked is that America needs immigrants to keep their economy going.

Pandemic have crossed borders for centuries.  The Black plague cut European populations more than half and was little understood.  One of the first strategies was to isolate victims.  Venice added ten days to a previous standard of 30 days isolation.  To get better protection they extended their watch and were able to divert ships from heading their way.  In effect they extended their borders.

Covid 19 intensified protections.  Immigration and tourism was halted while each nation tried to impose their restrictions.  Trade was greatly impeded and a common excuse for inflation was supply chain problems.  I remember reading years ago that the Japanese developed the concept of Just In Time Inventory which during Covid was upended.  We are still recovering, but have learned a few things including co-operating with other nations behind other borders.

Climate change is affecting everyone, although not evenly.  Your geographic location is key, but so is your wealth.  The author brings efforts in Africa to our attention.  A big concern is the spread of desert regions.  One strategy is to plant trees, but although lots of trees have been planted it has not worked.  Poor natives have found wood to be one of the valuable assets they have access to.  New strategies put a greater emphasis on soil restoration.

Ceuta and Melilla are two Spanish posts at the northern tip of Africa.  They are like magnets for refugees from sub Saharan Africa.  The Spanish Government has fortified both locations, but no matter the barriers the refugees keep coming.  Like the United States border draws refugees from Ecuador, Honduras and Mexico.  For many they really could be classified as climate change refugees.  

Americans and Europeans think the hordes of people are mostly just seeking economic benefits which is true, but tied into loss of opportunities due to climate change.  Those most affected by climate change are also the most poor and had little to do with causing climate change.   Humans have always sought better land when natural circumstances have changed.  Movement hindered by borders.

While mankind has spent tremendous effort to shore up lines other forces such as climate change and pandemics have shown little respect for these lines.  A political force in America and Europe is to fight immigration tooth and nail.  But maybe it is time to declare global citizenship and tackle the problems that really affect us all. 

Some more relevant thoughts:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2022/04/move.html

Is Israel such a bad example for proportional representation?

Those of us who advocate for proportional representation have been criticized that Israel was a bad case for the concept.  To me that is mixing up results with a tool.  Proportional representation is presented as a solution to a problem and although it has many benefits it cannot by itself solve all the perceived problems of the world.  It is an important tool that all reasonable voters should consider if they really want to solve many of the iniquities in society.

 Israel's relationship with the Palestinian people is an abomination that is a problem with a global reach.  Unfortunately the Israeli voters with a proportional system have given support to restrictive laws and practices. The Israeli rulers have set up laws that are very restrictive to Palestinians, almost certainly out of fear mixed in with some ignorance.  How the rest of the world deals with this issue is much like how we deal with the Chinese persecution of Uighers.  The main difference is there is much sympathy for Jews, but not much for the Chinese autocrats.  Although we abhor perceived unfairness most nations respect the sovereignty of other nations for practical reasons.

Each Israeli election draws a fair amount of attention and for many it is the closest they are aware of proportional representation.  We understand there are political rivals who try to establish political alliances in order to get enough power to make decisions.  Netanyahu has been very prominent for over a decade and those who follow the news are aware that by allying himself with some Orthodox elements he has been able to gain power.  For the last several years the alliances have been very fragile.   Giving power to what are considered extremist minorities is one of the charges against proportional representation.

Two developments (I am sure there are many others) have been significant.  Netanyahu has been tainted with corruption charges and many voters have become leery of supporting him.  The other development is among the Arabs who have their own factions.  Some are reluctant to co-operate  with Jewish parties that are openly anti-Palestinian.  Others have looked for opportunities to gain some leverage.  With this last election balancing efforts have opened up one such opportunity.  As has been pointed out the head of the new alliance is actually more extreme than Netanyahu, but there have been slight changes with four Arab electors essential to maintaining the current balance.  If they choose to not support any new legislation the government will fall and a new election will ensue.  They of course need to be careful to maintain the current alliance if and until something better presents itself.

One example brought to my attention by Juan Cole in his Informed Comment occurred recently:  https://www.juancole.com/2021/07/parliament-unification-palestinian.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook   Essentially the Israeli Parliament failed to renew a restrictive law against Palestinians.  Many of those who automatically would have renewed this law abstained realizing otherwise they would face another election.

There may not be too many more examples of the power of the few as it is a delicate balance that allows any leverage and there are many pressures that could disrupt it.  As in any democracy there are always many factions with their own priorities, but under proportional representation they have to consider the priorities of other parties.  Hopefully enough voters will see the results have been positive and the politicians will realize their best interest lies in respecting all the voters.

Under First Past the Post system the hard line parties would not have to pay attention to 20% of the population that Arabs represent in Israel.  We may be fortunate that corruption concerns forced voters and politicians to re-evaluate their priorities.

The bottom line is that proportional representation is a tool that can help solve a lot of problems, but other tools are necessary to solve such problems as climate change, nuclear war risks, refugees, hatred, violence, crime, etc.  Some of those other tools might be balanced education and media support.  It is reasonable that when more people are paid attention through proportional representation that society can move towards solving global problems before it is too late.

Both voters and politicians need to work together instead of maneuvering to gain disproportionate power.  More will get done, but it does require a joint effort which is something lacking today.  Proportional representation is a step in the right direction.

Evangelicals and Trump

On the surface Trump is a very repulsive candidate, but despite that he is loved blindly by millions.  A man that seeks extra marital sex while his wife is carrying his baby.  A man who has cheated literally thousands of people through his various ventures.  A man who cosies up to Vladimir Putin and dismisses his own intelligence services.  A man who insults almost everyone who stands up to him or is adulated in comparison to him.  Very despicable.


My personal baggage.  I dislike the way he talks--demeaning, bragging with little concern for actual facts.   I frown on celebrity worship based on a tough  image, eg.  "You're fired."  Admittedly I might well tolerate his many faults if his policies were more aligned to mine, but they aren't.  They seem for the most part to attract favorable responses from people motivated by bigotry and/or greed.

Americans can be divided into many segments with unique motivations and politicians can only appeal so much to one group without offending another group.  Trump and his team have identified a number of one issue voters that fit into the conservative model.

The 1% feel outraged that they have to share their "hard earned" wealth with the undeserving.  Gun owners feel threatened, some arguing that any restrictions are a slippery slope.  Abortion haters see it as murder to the indefensible and utterly unforgivable.  Bigots based on superficial evidence are afraid and angry at those "others" who are stealing their jobs and their culture.  Then of course there are many who vote the way they do because they and their families and friends always have (or it looks that way).  We all pretend that our voting decisions are rational and it is possible that some actually do try to sort out many different issues.

Evangelism comes in a few variations and to be charitable I view this subject as an outsider.  I feel most comfortable seeing myself as an agnostic--that is one who doesn't really understand the ultimate questions and suspects nobody else does either, although who knows?  I did come across some evangelical thinking from an experience at work.  One day I was jokingly explaining that I had to go home early in order to protect my house against Hallowe'en tricksters.  The secretary replied that as a born again Christian she could not celebrate Hallowe'en.  I liked her and allowed myself to be talked into reading a book.  Sorry, I don't remember the title, but read it and even discussed it a bit.

Essentially from Biblical scripture we are told that Christ will come back.  Many signs will point to it, but some of the key ones were concerned with Israel.  It was critical that the Jews be in control of Israel.  There was something about 10 tribes to the north of Israel.  The secretary thought it might be the European Common Market which at the time had more than 10 members, but not as many as later joined.  There was something about an Anti-Christ that would have all the answers but they would be false.

The logic seemed twisted and to have a self fulfilling dimension, meaning more twisting, but also manipulation when possible.  Trump is very obviously offensive for Christians, except many have come to believe he is an instrument for the Second Coming.  He has done a number of things to encourage this notion.  One of  his early rants was on Muslims which appeals to the fearful and ignorant, but also appeals to those who want to defend Israel.  Iran was targeted as an enemy of Israel and Trump emphatically broke an agreement that had been negotiated by Russia, China, Germany, United Kingdom, France and the Obama Administration.  He has gone on to recognize Jerusalem as the capital, complete with American Embassy.  He has recognized Israel's right to the Golan Heights.  More recently has accepted Israel's efforts to colonize the West Bank. which would more closely resembled the ancient Israel.

Siding with Israel is not the way to broker peace in the Middle East, but that is ignored.  Evangelicals are at bottom a one issue group.  It is true they are against abortions as well as extra-marital affairs.  Studies have indicated there is also a racial element for some of them.  For some the Second Coming is the one deciding issue.

To my mind it is self righteous to think any of us are better than any other of us.  From other sources I recall the number 144,000 are the only ones that will get to heaven.  As world population is pushing 10 billion with many billions already passed on, it is hard to imagine how each of the evangelicals expect to be one of the 144,000.  The suffering of millions of innocents would be ignored.  The influence of the Second Coming believers has been creeping up on the rest of us.  They are not the overwhelming majority, but they are very steadfast in their beliefs.  George W Bush tapped into their feelings and appealed to them.  Trump just has taken some bigger steps.  Just as many Evangelicals see the Jews as tools for their ends, it seems like Trump sees Evangelicals as tools to satisfy his egotism.

To give Trump credit someone on his team helped identify one issue voters and how best to string them together.  Part of the strategy is that most of them realize they need more people to  get their way.  Many of them sympathize with other one issue groups.  The glue perhaps comes from the 1% who have the money and access to expertise to pull the strings.  Changing laws to further advantage their desires (taxes and regulations) includes giving them more political leverage.

If an African or Amazon tribe member had similar beliefs to the Evangelicals (and some of them do) we sophisticated modern people would either laugh or feel pity.  Most of us would acknowledge that Christianity has done good things and others feel that has been offset by the many wars and persecutions.  As a belief system Christianity has competed against many others and has gained a strong role in the modern world.  Its history is worth exploring:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2018/08/the-triumph-of-christianity-history.html

It seems like in many ways the world is falling apart.  These one issue voters are dominating the bigger concerns and if rationality does not rescue us, we will all drown.  It is so hard to decide what the real core issues are, but they include campaign finance, electoral design and education to help bring about more rational decisions.  At the same time we need to deal with the climate crisis, inequality, terrorism, pollution, nuclear risks, hate--all concerns that could be one issue champions joining together.

The BDS Movement

The BDS Movement  (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) might not have been noticed quite as much if there weren't concerted efforts to make it illegal.  The goal is for Israel to withdraw from occupied territories, removal of the barriers at the West Bank, full equality of Arabs in Israel and to promote the right of return by the Palestinian refugees.  Israel claims Arabs enjoy equality in Israel and that the movement is anti-Semitic.  Both Israel and the United States have made efforts to make the BDS illegal and use national resources to reject. 

The cause is known and for most people who consider themselves progressive liberals it is admirable enough.  Like a lot of people when I hear and believe negative things about individuals and companies I try to make a conscious decision not to support.  Other people want to take a strong stand and some of them are organizers and others looking for an organized effort.

Up until past my university years I would tell anyone who asked, that "Exodus" was my favorite movie.  I barely knew any Jews, but somehow came to admire them and how they had overcome the Holocaust.  I still grapple to understand the horror of  their ordeal.  I have watched several movies that focused on the Holocaust from many different angles.  It is horrifying to read about people who deny the Holocaust.  It not only is anti-Semitic, but also indicates rationalization (guilt feelings) for expressing hatred.

A few things happened over my adult years to change my perspective  At work I remember talking to a secretary at work about Hallowe'en.  I was telling her that I had to get home early to protect my home from tricksters.  She surprised me by saying as a born again Christian they could not celebrate Hallowe'en.  I have always considered myself secular, but Lynn was someone I liked working with and accepted her offer to read a book about Armagedden.  There seemed to be a lot of logic, but really twisting the meaning of Biblical words which I just could not accept.  But I came to understand and more frequently heard or read references to the second coming of Christ.  I kept a few details in mind such as there would be the anti-Christ who would seem to have the answers (could that be Donald Trump?), Israel would have to be run by Jews again and there was something about ten tribes that would play a role and that the true believers would ascend to heaven.

I gradually became aware of the role this belief played in American politics and other nations.  They seemed very protectionist of Israel, but at the same time saw Jews only as necessary for the prophesy.  The Palestinians were in the way and needed to be stomped down.  The fact that they resorted to terrorism only proved how undeserving they were.  Arab states and Muslims were suspect as they always seemed to be using the supposed Palestinian injustices to inflict terror on the rest of us.  Many Christians just wanted to protect the holy sites. 

The Arab oil boycott of the west was mostly seen as inconvenient.  One good thing that came out of it was a movement in part led by Jimmy Carter (who is my most admired president) who preached conservation.  Of course Ronald Reagan ridiculed the idea and reversed course.

Another factor emerged when my sister, Rebecca married a Muslim from Morocco.  She was actually married in an inter denomination ceremony.  It was over ten years and two daughters later that she decided to convert.  She is one of the people who I both love and admire.  I had come to admire Ali as well and he gave a different view of Palestinians.  He was careful not to speak against Jews and in fact pointed out to me that he would seek kosher food when halal food was not available.

My reading convinced me that the Palestinians had been taken advantage of.  While I could still admire what the Zionists had accomplished against heavy odds I began to realize they did so at the expense of the Palestinians. And the more I heard and read the more it seemed the Palestinians were being dismissed and discriminated against.  The media in my neck of the woods was almost totally picturing Palestinians as backward, dishonest, violent and undeserving.  The Israelis are pictured as besieged, but very innovative.  Perhaps there is an element of guilt from many Western countries that had allowed anti-semitism to prosper and helped set the events of the Holocaust.

After a television appearance I read a book by Peter Beinart.  It made me realize there is a lot of politics behind the support of Israel.  Check out  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/07/crisis-of-zionism-book-review.html

By now you realize I am sympathetic to the Palestinians, but there is more to it than that.  I am not much of a boycott participant.   I have completed two books by Yuval Noah Harari, an Israeli and have started his most recent book.  He has the best understanding of what it means to be a human of any one I am familiar with.  I am not willing to give up that.  An investment counselor was recommending a mutual fund and thought one of its highlights was that they included Israeli stocks--although like anyone else I wanted to make the most money for the least risk,  passed on it.  I watched and appreciated many movies from Israel http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2015/05/youll-find-arabic-and-hebrew.html  particularly the ones that seemed balanced.

My experiences with boycotts are very limited.  As a Canadian one example was when Heinz decided to stop processing tomatoes from their Simcoe, Ontario plant.  I had driven through Simcoe numerous times as part of my sales job.  I remember consciously actually driving by the plant with a distinct, but not unpleasant smell of the ketchup plant.  French's, better known for mustard, picked up the slack and I have made it a point of buying their ketchup (which happens to taste pretty good).

I was too young or disinterested to think about the anti apartheid boycott.  I am proud that Canada did participate unlike United States and the United Kingdom.  Thinking what would I buy from South Africa?  Never thought of diamonds or gold.  A little later did enjoy eating Granny Smith apples and have since enjoyed South African wines, but think of them as post Mandela (one of my very favorite heroes).

If we don't want people to settle their differences with violence we have to accept alternatives.  Every person who has a dime to spend has some power.  Once they spend that money they have lost some of their power, but the choice should be theirs.  Yes, there should be exceptions--we should not be able to physically harm someone or denigrate them. 

Israel is forgetting its values.  They have suffered at the hands of degenerates, but now they are causing great suffering that to me is counter productive.  I know there are significant elements that want to bridge the gap, but they don't seem to dominate.  Hatred and ignorance are very difficult to deal with, but others have found ways

Critics are welcome to do a counter boycott if they really want, but they have absolutely no right to impose legal restrictions on people who  feel the merits of the cause.  I think what needs to happen is more effort to reconcile the Jews and Palestinians.  Biblical prophesies can be interpreted any way that suits someone else.  The Qu'ran is interpreted very widely.  To me the boycott and such efforts to encourage Israel to take a fairer treatment of the Palestinians is a worthy cause and those that want to delegitimize it are the immoral ones.  Politics and money are a big part of the problem.

Will we waste another opportunity with Iran?

The news is full of commentary on the Iranian nuclear negotiations.  On this side there is serious doubt about how the Iranians can be trusted  Very little direct commentary from the other side.

Trust is perhaps the fulcrum upon which everything else turns.  Americans point out that Iran supports terrorist groups, but Iranians feel they are boosting liberation forces for the Palestinians and fellow Shiite followers.  Americans have meddled in all sorts of countries.  They overlook that back in 1953 the C.I.A. organized and supported a coup d'tat that replaced an elected premier, Mohammed Mosaddeq in Iran in order to protect western economic interests and went on to help set up a brutal secret police force, Savak.  The Americans have also been involved in Haiti, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Chile and others.  Iran has not invaded any country in the past several centuries, but have been invaded by Iraq with support from the United States.  Iran, before being named as part of the Axis of Evil actually provided logistical assistance to the Americans and currently are fighting against a common enemy ISIL.

Militant presidential candidates and other Obama bashers need to realize that additional nations are part of the negotiations and need to be considered in any adjustments of the agreement.  Russia, China, United Kingdom, France and Germany each have a stake in negotiations.  We need to have trust amongst our allies and adversaries.  Bear in mind that each of the parties on our side has a different perspective on the issue and some compromises are part of the deal.  If we don't respect one another how can we expect the other side to respect us.

That is all in the past; what can be done for the future?  We can be sure that military and intelligence resources will be preparing for the inevitable expiration of the agreement.  What will be done to build up mutual trust?  Ten years is half a generation when we probably need a full generation to really make a difference in attitudes (theirs and ours).

The Middle East is a mess.  Invading Iraq has opened up a lot of problems.  Al Qaeda was not welcome there at the start of the American attack, but now it and more extreme elements are threatening the whole area.  Sunni and Shiite distrust and fear each other.  They used to inter marry and carry on business together.  Fundamentalists and extremists are forcefully trying to impose their views on others.  This is an internal dilemma best handled by other Muslims and we need to be careful not to take sides except to defend against violence.

We feel very uncomfortable with dark skinned people, especially if they are Muslim  But we have a responsibility to help with the refuge problem generated by Mideast conflicts.  Refuge camps are potential sources of violence.  One way or another the stresses have to be relieved.   Canada has stated a preference for Christian refugees which might be commendable, but doesn't really deal with the problem.  Americans are not much better while some countries have tried to pick up the slack.

Education is an area where there is a limit to what can be forced upon the resistant masses.  From both the top and grass roots, efforts should be encouraged for cross cultural projects.  They generally take a long time to have a national impact, but are important to start the ball rolling.  Sports and cultural exchanges have been useful with Russia, China and other nations.

I remember years ago having problems with my auto tires.  A persistent slow leak was very inconvenient  and took it to my regular reliable garage, but the problem soon returned.  It took a Syrian immigrant I encountered at a gas station to really fix it.  He made my life better and I am sure he did for others.

Palestine is very often used as an excuse or rationalization, but might there be something to it?  Israel is a haven for Jews that are still discriminated against around the world.  Millions of people (mostly Evangelicals) around the world feel Israel has Apocolyptic meaning that lends very significant support to Israel despite any evidence of unfairness.  The Palestinians feel that it is their land and other Arabs and Muslims feel they have been mistreated by western and Jewish powers.  Settlements are an obvious affront to any honest attempts to reconcile the two races and somehow have to be stopped if not reversed.

During the recent Israeli elections Netanyahu expressed what many consider his true feelings that no two state solution will be instituted while he still has power.  He has backtracked a little, but we should also realize that the Israeli voters have very strong concerns about security.  Emotions such as fear are very difficult to overcome.  Outsiders are painted as not understanding or worse.  We like to think we have their best interests at heart and we truly realize that war is bad for everyone.  Palestine has tired of empty promises and the one sided rhetoric against them and are trying to involve the International Court of Justice.  United States, Russia and China have avoided the court, but in reality the court might be able to accomplish in a more neutral forum what the bigger powers with their vested interests cannot.  Might the Muslim world credit the west with finally rectifying an injustice?

While we look at this from a distance we have more interests and responsibilities.  Climate change, most likely caused by industrial nations has factored into the Mideast by way of droughts.  Ironically some of the same people who believe the Jews have to control the Holy Land before the second coming also believe the climate is controlled by God and we humans should not interfere.  To me they overlook that we have been interfering and not showing respect for God's creation.  Climate change is affecting the entire world in different ways including floods, rising ocean levels, sea water acidification, stifling heat as well as droughts. The Mideast is just one area bearing the burdens of climate change and few see the connection.  There are bound to be more tensions stemming from climate change.

Anti-Muslim forces seem to be strongly influencing America and other nations.  Allied with climate change deniers, conservative right wingers use whatever available tools for their own greedy economic interests.  It is time to take a longer range view or we will all suffer.

An earlier take on some "Persian" experiences: http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/10/my-three-persian-experiences.html

Some of you may know that I have family ties to the Arab Muslim part of the world.  Like anyone else when I hear another perspective I often notice that those giving it are decent people with much in common with what I aspire to, it actually is more understandable.  Close your heart and your mind and there is no shortage of weird violent people out there.

Why blame the Middle East problems on Obama?

Americans or at least some prominent ones are quick to criticize Obama's handling of the various Middle Eastern problems.  He is too soft, too indecisive and just plain wrong.

It is easy to fault any one action, but one should realize the choices are not all that clear.  People tend to forget the background to the decisions and overlook some of the critical details.

Where to start?  Palestine might be one logical place.  The Palestinians are continually pictured as less civilized and controlled by terrorists.  Why do they seem so ungrateful and hateful?  If you realize the fight is for land and for freedom you might understand why.  They too were promised things, but either they weren't forceful or clever enough and they have been effectively stifled.

Israel has an ancient history and we Westerners rightly consider it one of the essential sources of our culture.  Jews gave the world a monotheistic view.  They were forced out of their land and spread mostly across Europe and later around the globe.  By hard work, intelligence and focused behaviour they were successful to the point of stirring resentment some of which was expressed as anti-Semitism.  The Nazis took it to a new level of hate and after World War II the world realized six million were killed under horrifying circumstances.  Jews did not feel safe in Europe and worried about anti-Semitism wherever they located.  Political movements, mainly Zionism sought out a permanent home and the most logical was Palestine.  The only problem was that other people already were living there.

The world felt guilty and ironically anti-Semitism also played in role in agreeing to set aside land for the Jews in Palestine.  The newly formed United Nations had a vote which declared specific land for the Jews, but also land for the Palestinians.  An article by William R Polk reminds me that the British presided over the independence of India including partitioning off Pakistan that resulted in millions dying.  The British also controlled Palestine when it was divided and literally thousands also died and many others relocated.  Through a series of events (some self inflicted by the Palestinians) the Jewish territory expanded and the Palestinians never did get their promised share. Although oil rich Arabs surrounding the area did invest some of their money and lot of their rhetoric to support the Palestinian cause they never got the support that the Jews did from America, Europe and the rest of the world.    There is a mix of resentment and fear also mixed with some Biblical self-rightiousness.  Some of the significant support for the Jews actually comes from American Evangelicals who await the second coming of Christ and believe that for that to happen the Jews have to control the Holy Land.

An obvious source of distrust is that the Israelis persist in making Jewish settlements in occupied territory although they have been told (it is hard to believe they would need to be told) this is very offensive.  They restrict Palestinians in countless ways at the borders not only for crossing, but for business.  Yes Israeli Arabs are better off.

The Palestinians have been ignored and abused for many decades and they are pictured in our media as uneducated with an insane desire to kill Jews.  There very definitely are a lot of fanatics who hate Jews and unfortunately this number is probably increasing. They have their own version of the situation, but it hasn't gotten much credence in the American mainstream media.  But if you think about it there are some grounds for their resentment.  Other Muslims around the world use what they see as very unfair treatment of their co-religionists by Westerners in their fight against us.

Syria and Iraq.  Let's go back a few years.  Both countries had their borders defined after World War I to the convenience of the wheeling and dealing winning powers.  Ethnic and religious concerns were not considered as important as oil and European maneuverings for colonial power.   The western powers felt dealing with relatively secular dictators superior to fairness to the teeming masses.  It seemed likely that any alternative to the dictators might be religious fanatics who would be much more difficult to deal with.

George Bush Sr was confronted by a problem and was able to organize a coalition to force Iraq to give up Kuwait.  He stopped short of conquering Iraq and replacing Saddam Hussein and that upset some right wingers in the United States.  It was a very delicate situation.  The American government had received United Nations authorization and had negotiated a coalition of many nations with differing perspectives.  Saddam Hussein proved himself adept at taking advantage of the situation to restore himself to full dictatorial power.

9-11 caught a lot of people off guard.  Why would anyone want to do such a horrible thing?  There really is no justification for killing so many innocent people.  Ignorance, resentment and hate played a role.  Quickly it was realized that the deed had been organized in Afghanistan (a story in itself) and Americans planned to attack in order to root out the terrorists.  Nobody much quarreled with that decision, but others saw it as an opportunity to get back at Saddam Hussein who they felt had suckered Americans in their last conflict.  Saddam had more reason to fear Al Qaeda than did Americans, but nonetheless some political factions claimed there was a tie-in.

The Iraq invasion proved to be an expensive distraction that has hurt America immeasurably.   They had not captured Osama bin Ladin and although they had greatly diminished the Taliban, they had not replaced it with anything solid.  On one side the Taliban (with help from Pakistan, a supposed ally) rebuilt itself and became a major factor again.  On the other side where Iraq had not harboured Al Qaeda  now became a recruiting base for them.  Religious and ethnic factions became unbottled and in effect a civil war resulted.  The Americans made at least two big mistakes--they had been advised to go in with a much larger number of ground troops, but authorities ridiculed that notion.  They were never able to clamp down enough to control the situation.  The second big mistake was to get rid of the bureaucratic and military infrastructure, men and women with necessary skills and knowledge to get things done.  Underlying these game changing errors was a basic ignorance of the country.

Iran is another country often depicted as uncivilized.  Americans forget they engineered a coup d'etat of a democratically elected Iranian ruler.  If this is brought up, the right wing points out that the Iranians were planning to nationalize their own oil as if the Westerners should have total control over it.  The Western powers favoured the Shah of Iran who with their help set up a harsh secret police force to control the masses.  As the Pope helped bring down Communist dictators so Ayatollah Khomeini helped bring down the Shah.  The Americans were delighted when the Iraquis  decided to invade Iran and supported them with amongst others things poisonous gas.  We, in the West  looked at them as fanatics who stormed and controlled the American Embassy for 444 days.  So each side blames the other, but they had begun to work together for mutual concerns.  Although they had received some Iranian help in the fight against terrorists, the Americans thought to frame Iran as one of the "Axis of Evil."  Now Iran is trying to assert itself to become a nuclear power causing fear in the rest of the world.

The so-called "Arab Spring" opened up another big can of worms.  Many factors were involved such as food prices, youthful unemployment and political agitation.  The results are very mixed and again a lot of factions have seized the opportunity to force their ideas on others.  Americans could probably had been more helpful if their credibility and resources had not been depleted by mistakes before.  From a conservative point of view Egypt, Libya and Syria were all better off before, except even conservatives wouldn't accept dictatorships in their own country.

Obama has a very complicated mess and limited resources.  It is very easy to offend a faction who feels Israel should be the focus of American foreign policy or those who feel fanatics should be killed at every opportunity  or our energy needs ought to be protected.

Conservative Americans think we ought to forget George Bush Jr's mistakes as if they have no impact on today's circumstances, but how could they not?  Obama has to work with the little credibility we have and try to develop more trust.  He has to balance a lot of domestic (unemployment, inequality, immigration, climate change) and other foreign (Ukraine, North Korea) concerns when his party can easily be blocked by the Republicans in the House of Representatives.

The biggest problem is ignorance and it is on most sides.  Most Middle Easterners and Muslims around the world have many higher priorities than killing Jews or Americans.  Most Westerners have many higher priorities than killing Muslims.  Unfortunately most of us let those with an agenda dictate our agenda.  There are some bridges between cultures, but not nearly enough.  Shed enough light on the situation and you will realize we have more in common than we differ on.

"The Crisis of Zionism book review

As an outsider (in the sense of not being Jewish and not having ever visited Israel) I can easily be accused of ignorance.  On the other hand we all benefit from understanding what outsiders think even if they are totally wrong.  I grew up thinking of  "Exodus" as one of my favorite movies, however as I got older I became aware that it represented only one viewpoint.  I am now aware of other viewpoints.

Peter Beinart, who I have found in other contexts to be intelligent and objective has more of an insider perspective on Israel and is very concerned.  Peter might be described as a liberal Jew who sees Israel as not treating Palestinians fairly.  Most Jews in the United States seem to vote Democrat, but because they tend to be liberal they also tend to inter-marry more and are losing their Jewish identity.  Other Jews, especially older ones see themselves as victims and view Israel as a possible refuge or at least as a beacon.

The author is concerned that Israel is losing its democracy.  Many Israelis emphasize that they are victims and don't realize that they now have power and are using it to impose hardship on others.  A significant segment of American Jews support the right wing approach which essentially is to keep the Palestinians from having their own state.  Many of those who feel more liberal are gradually losing their identification with Israel.

Beinart is concerned that the current Israeli government is turning the world against Israel.  Including the occupied lands Palestinians are likely to become more populous in the near future and this will force a difficult choice.  Will Israel remain Jewish and will it also remain a democracy?

Barack Obama has a personal perspective on Jews which surprised me.  One of his early mentors was Arnold Jacob Wolf who believed Israel and American Jewish organizations had to be democratic and felt Jews should de-emphasize victim-hood.   Some liberal Jews were closely tied to Obama's education and to his political rise.  Obama spent part of his upbringing amongst Muslims and is well read on their perspective.  Beinhart thinks Obama was out maneuvered by Netanyahu and sees danger.

Benjamin Netanyahu  has a different vision for Israel and its role in the world. He sees the Palestinians as an obstacle to Israeli and Jewish security.  The settlements in the west bank are seen as a necessary and desirable move although Palestinians and many others see them as a threat to peace. There is a feeling amongst some hard liners that Jordan was taken away from them.

Evangelicals, particularly in the United States have an influence on the dynamics.  They believe Christ will come back, but only while Israel is ruled by Jews.  Several years ago at one  of my jobs I had my eyes opened by a fellow worker who I respected that the second coming was moving forward and would take place in Israel.

It is all very scary, but I believe Peter Beinart has a valid perspective that should be seriously considered.

for a more recent Peter Beinart post after the Hamas attack and Gaza followup  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2025/02/peter-beinarts-being-jewish-after.html