What are they afraid of ?

The refreshing news coming from Cairo are regarded by many Israelis commentators, as a “threat”: How can genuine (self proclaimed?) democrats regard the chance of a free future for more than 80 million people as a “threat”? I will try to ignore “geopolitical” analysis and try to scratch the surface in order to see what is really behind that ( false) sense of threat.

Well, for many the “Threat” is a possible breakdown of the “stability” the region “enjoyed” along the last 30 years. These “stable” years include the events such as the 1982 invasion to Lebanon, many Palestinian uprisings, massive attacks on Gaza, etc. So stability in that case is not a synonymous to “No more bloodshed “ but refers to the relative impunity the Israelis hard line government enjoyed thanks to a loyal Southern ally, Mr. Mubarak and his gang.. It is clear that from now on the disposition and/or capability of any Egyptian ruler to ignore the natural popular resentment following any Israeli military actions should not be taken for granted. Any future adventure will carry other consequences than the prevailing along the previous “golden era”. That is one big “threat”.

Second “Threat”: A more deep concern arising from the Tahrir Square is what I would call “ Back to the Middle East”. Many Israelis consider their country location as a geographical casualty: According to that perspective, the country is an isolated Western democracy surrounded by wild neighbours (like a good Old Western) and as such it is deemed to be under a constant threat ( Mr Barak used the image of a “mansion in a jungle”). The “logical” conclusion is that the country must isolate itself from its violent neighbourhood, physically (walls), culturally, emotionally, militarily…etc.

In other words, the dominant motto is “My heart is in West and I am at the end of the East” ( as a paraphrase to the medieval poem of Spaniard Iehuda Halevi) . That is a key element in the Israeli self-image and identity. Anyhow, why are Cairo events regarded as a “threat”?

The autocratic regimes around Israel are a fundamental piece of that twisted image of Israel , as they reinforce the image of the ever threatened Democracy ( for internal and external use as well). For quite a long time that system worked with impressive success: Although Tel Aviv is less than 100 Km from a bombarded Gaza its habitants feel as if Gaza´s misery is something remote as Bangladesh. However the fall of Cairo walls was well heard in the neighbourhood and it heralds the end of an illusion that the Yarkon is closer to the Thames than to the Nile.

Third “Threat”: The image of the “Arabs” turned around in less than 20 of street protests. A population fighting for its freedom cannot be regarded anymore as a faceless, ignorant and even ridiculed mob (an image that reinforces Israel´s prominent status). Cairo street protesters were revealed as normal (some of them quite brave) human beings that wish freedom, a descent job, a normal future for themselves and their kids, like most of us, the normal guys. So, if in the other side of the fence there are normal people, why to isolate from them? Are they really a threat? That question could become a serious blow to the cult of “Bitahon”, (security in Hebrew) based upon the fears and history, a cult that displaces a lot of social and identity deep questions that can threaten the actual social relations in the country.

However, threats can turn into opportunities: New constrain” to the political equations of violence might bring second thoughts when comes the time to pull the trigger and should, hopefully, pave the way to a genuine reconciliation process. The new image of the Arab world arising from Cairo should convince Israelis and others that in the other side of the wall there are human beings, not blood thirst fanatics.

The end of isolation and the fall of the real and imaginary Ghetto walls can do only good to Israel. After all the idea of really living in the Middle East, the traditional bridge between West and East can turn to be a not too bad idea. Israel society can become a more just and equal society as the military threat ceases to be an excuse to a polarized society.

As a final word, let us not forget: Despite decades of conflict between Israel and Arabs, any single European nation spilled much more Jewish blood than all its Middle East Neighbours taken together. Tahrir Square events are a good opportunity to remind that simple fact.

European Lessons ( Part II )

In a previous post http://enriquefleischmann.blogspot.com/2010/09/european-lessons-for-middle-east-part-i.html) I´ve tried to present an historical perspective for Mid East Peace Process, a lesson that the peoples and their leaders could learn from the European history while dealing with the “Peace Process” . Very briefly, the main message was that Mid East peoples should learn how try to avoid the European bloody path to Peace: Europe and its people managed to achieve a relatively calm and prosper era (since 1945) after waisting millions of human lives during hundred of years of wars and conflicts which devoured an infinite amount of economic resources. For us, the younger generations a peaceful Europe sounds a banality but remember that the last 60 years are an exceptional long period with no serious violent confrontations in the Continent . For the record, the last 300 years yielded wars in 1939-45,1914-18, 1919, 1870, 1866, 1805-1815, 1763, 1711, .. just to name a few).Middle East people should understand that the way to prosperity is 180 grades opposed to war , while the alternative is paying the expensive REBBE GUELT ( “Teacher´s Salary” in Yiddish) with their own blood.

Being conscious that the former analysis might sound discouraging ( which is not the case !!) I decided to make use of the same “Raw Material” in order to develop a somewhat more encouraging and hopeful conclusions.

The first step would be to arrange history in a more accurate perspective in three aspects : Casualties, Time and Space.

Casualties : The Mid East conflict has yielded app. 101-115 thousands casualties ( Wikipedia) , WWII 60 Millions, WWI 20 millions ….the death toll table (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War) is a sad reminder of our dubious humanity . Before proceeding , I would like to stress that each and every casualty is a terrible loss, and any statistical “comparison” is misleading from a human point of view. But if the depth of hatred is highly influenced from the level of collective suffering, than a rough comparison can give a ray of hope. As I said before, the comparison is aimed to show that even after terrible bloodsheds human beings are able to understand that an ongoing and endless cycle of vengeance is useless. History teaches us that victims do not necessarily turn into the eternal combustible that feed the flame of hatred .

Time : Our high speed era can hardly cope with an historical perspective, since events are not viewed in a wider context abd so they loose their meaning within a very short period of time. Instead of eternity we became used to think in “short time eternities” . However, if we just maintain a bit longer run perspective, time becomes another dimension that should be considered in our "European" lesson : France and England maintained a 100 years war, the border line between Germany and France was a main focus of hostilities for centuries, the 30 years war was a devastating experience of Europe, let alone the long run Reconquista in Spain.... so the Mid East few dozens years struggle is undoubtedly too long but not extraordinarily long in historical terms. Our generations were condemned to spend their entire lives surrounded by the “Conflict” , an experience which brings some of us to sad conclusions of NO HOPE. History tells us that a different coexistence is possible, and history provides strong evidences that even the longest conflicts eventually end .

Space or Clash of Civilizations : The last last point is less related to Europe and more to “enmity” between Jews and Arabs/ Muslims. The Conflict is sometimes described as part of an unavoidable “Clash of Civilizations” ( Why that “clash” occurs now? Why it did not take place before? ), so as a “byproduct” of that “clash” the conflict can be solved, if at all, only as part of a wider global arrangement ( or after an Armageddon style battle) . That perspective leaves very little place for any solution : the more complicated and confused an issue becomes, its solution becomes further ( in economic parlor : additional imposed constraints just remove further an optimal solution) . However, from historical perspective Jews and Arabs got along much better than European and Jews, so the Conflict can hardly be considered as a mere product of a phenomenon that hardly existed before the foundation of Israel (Note : Zionism never saw itself as a colonization movement in a European sense). Therefore if the KISS principle ( Keep It Simple , Stupid) is applied and the conflict is confined to a strict political , national and territorial arena, expelling external “noises” both sides might be able to find a practical solution , a “second best” solution much faster .

As I said in the beginning, there is still hope that both people are able to advance with the process before it gets too late. History shows that it is possible, but we should not forget that “Time is money” especially in its special local meaning ( in Hebrew the word DAM or DAMIM means “Blood” but also “Money”).