Rabbis For Human Rights

The navy's capture of a fishing boat with a large cache of arms destined for the Palestinian Authority should not have surprised us. We should have been less alarmed by the amount of weapons revealed on the boat than for what such a clandestine act of subterfuge represents regarding the determination on the part of the Palestinians to fight for their independence.

There is something very symbolic in what happened here. And since our army is concerned with facts and not metaphor, we are at a disadvantage. What is the symbolism? The Palestinians are employing some of the same techniques that we did during our struggle to gain our independence from the British. I do not want to make glib comparisons. We were then, and are now, no match for Palestinian brutality. But the shock expressed by our military and political leaders at the size of the arsenal of weapons being brought into the territories reveals a total lack of understanding on our part as to what a people is willing to do secure its freedom.

It almost seems that in Israel military intelligence has become an oxymoron, or at least a contradiction in terms. During our War of Independence, in addition to guns, explosives, and even planes, we managed to bring to our shores people. Smuggling in refugees from the ashes of Europe was a far more daring operation than anything else we did then, and anything the Palestinians are doing now. Knowing how creative we were, one would think that our army would be wise enough to understand the tricks the Palestinians have up their sleeves in pursuing their goal of independence.

But this portrays only one side of the equation. Beyond arms smuggling, there is little that the Palestinian Arabs under our occupation have in common with what those Palestinians Jews underwent during the British Mandate, despite Palestinian and pan-Arab attempts to paint us as the British (or Nazis) and themselves as the "new Jews." Yes, we wanted to cast off the yoke of oppression of the British as do the Palestinians want to rid themselves of our rule. But beyond that, there is no comparison. And the Palestinians would be wise to understand this, especially in the manner that they are trying to force an end to the occupation.

The British were the occupiers from afar. Like the Americans in Vietnam and the French in Algeria, they eventually were driven out, because they were not defending their homes. They were vulnerable, because as absentee landlords, their fighting forces lacked the commitment to maintain their colonial rule. Always in the back of their minds they knew they could return safely to their borders. Psychologically, we Jews knew we could defeat the British.

We also knew the rules of the game. With condemnable exceptions, from the blowing up of the King David Hotel to the massacre at Deir Yassin, we did not chop up English teenagers for play. Had we committed such deeds with the same regularity that the Palestinians carry out their heinous acts, the British might not have retreated so readily.

So, too, do the Palestinians fail to see the error of their rhetorical parallelism. There is no vast ocean that separates us from the Palestinians. The Palestinians should realize that, while they are fighting for their independence, we are fighting to maintain ours. So any facile comparisons to the time of the British Mandate won't work.

Moreover, we accepted the UN call for a two-state solution, which was less than what we had hoped for. We had a practical approach to our independence. If the Palestinians want to truly cast themselves as the "new Jews," they, too, should accept a two-state solution. But as long as they blow themselves up in crowded Jewish markets or on packed Israeli buses, they will have no hope of shedding themselves of an often aggressive and certainly demeaning occupation.

And as long as we underestimate the lengths to which a people are willing to go to win independence, we will remain wedded to an archaic and cumbersome military machine that will continue to be startled by arms smuggling, and will continue to perpetuate an obscene occupation.

Here is the last quasi-comparison between the Palestinians and us: Our fight for independence was forged not only to guarantee an independent homeland for Jews, but also to set up a country that would be based on the social ideals of the prophets. We may have failed in many aspects (the occupation being the most glaring one), but compared to what we can envision for an independent Palestinian state, based on the reality of the behavior of the Palestinian leadership, we are a paragon of democratic virtue.

Perhaps, if Yasser Arafat aspired to be a truly democratic leader, he would have greater success in winning his war of independence, because his desire for the establishment of a state would be not only to gain a homeland for displaced and occupied Palestinians, but also to establish a society that would respect the rule of law. Such an aspiration would ease Israeli concerns of having a Palestinian state as a neighbor.

Both sides can learn from the past. After all, both Palestinian Arabs and Palestinian Jews were occupied by the British. Drawing the correct lessons might just lead to some accommodation between both peoples, which will eventually see two independent states living peacefully side-by-side.

Originally published by The Jerusalem Post, Sunday, May 13 2001; 20 Iyar 5761 Original Online version can be found at: http://www.jpost.com/Editions/2001/05/13/Opinion/Opinion.25998.html
© 1995-2001, The Jerusalem Post - All rights reserved