I think it was professor Hermann who was telling us about the wall in detail. Remember when he told us that they call it a fence? That is not a fence. I guess call it what you want but you can't deny that it is a barrier. Whether it's for the protection of it's people, land, or culture...it's a barrier. The article talks about how this wall and the settlers that have moved in are creating a giant obstacle for future political discussions. These settlements are so intriguing to me. I guess it's because I can't fathom what is going on. It seems so shady. It seems like Israeli forces are pushing people further and further into "Palestinian land". It seems sneaky...manipulative. Am I wrong? Am I misunderstanding what is going on here?
"Israel is trying to contain both the territory and the population and to develop levers of control over them, instead of sharing rule with the Palestinians." This article clearly does not disagree with my thoughts. They are intentionally trying to cut Palestinian Arab's off from social, political, economic, and cultural ties. A quarter of a million people will be trapped? Trapped physically but also in all these other ways. Trapped from their families and jobs?
"The World Bank estimates that in addition to the 220 000 residents of East Jerusalem, about 60 000 Palestinians will be trapped between the border system separating them from the West Bank and the walls separating them from East and West Jerusalem. Israel does not intend to grant them residency or the status and rights possessed by East Jerusalemites. It certainly does not intend to offer them the Israeli citizenship that was rejected by almost all the residents of East Jerusalem."
Who are these people then? What do they do now that they are physically trapped? How do they view themselves? This is more than confining Palestinian's into the West Bank...it's saying "you can't be in Jerusalem, you can't be in the West Bank, and you can't have citizenship to anywhere." They are trapping people...physically, culturally, personally...
The article claims, "It has to do with the Israeli vision of destroying East Jerusalem metropolitan functions in order to assure Israeli domination."
What do you guys think? Is this Israel's vision or is this a massive overstatement?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't know if that's Israel's vision or not . . . I'm SURE that, at the very least, it's not the vision of all Israelis. I agree, however, that it is sneaky and manipulative, and I definitely do think it is a way of claiming more land.
ReplyDeleteIt kind of makes me wonder about the wall that's in process at the U.S.-Mexico border. How are these things the same? How are they different?
Here's a pic of the "border fence."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/04/photogalleries/us-mexico-border-fence-wildlife/images/primary/090417-02-us-mexico-border-fence_big.jpg
I would agree with both of you in the fact that is at least a manipulative move by the conservatives in Israel. And like Say mentioned, it's not what all Israelis prefer.
ReplyDeleteWith the US/Mexican border, I think the primary difference is that we have established borders. There isn't a debate over what land is American or Mexican but rather the idea proposed is to build a "fence" to curb illegal immigration, not to strategically shift Mexicans away from specific areas along the Rio Grande.