May 22, 2012
Late
last year I received an email from one Khaled Diab, an Egyptian-Belgian
journalist, who asked to visit Hebron. We after several telephone
conversations and a few postponements, we finally met, on Wednesday,
December 14, 2011. We sat and spoke at length; not so much as
discussion, rather as an interview. Later, we took a tour of the
community, including Tel Rumeida, the excavations there, and the museum
at Beit Hadassah.
Mr. Diab is an interesting gentleman, as can be discerned from his blog/website, called The Chroniker @ http://chronikler.com/
. The articles aren't standard Arab propaganda. Not necessarily what I would write, but different.
I'm
posting this because I believe it represents a fairly clear picture of
my views, concerning Hebron, Israel and the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Diab's report was broken down into six segments. I've
run them together, with each of his segments beginning with his title,
subtitle and comment. Needless to say, they aren't how I might have
preceded each section. However, he asked the questions and wrote it all
up. I only provided the answers.
I've
left most of the interview as it was conducted; there are a few minor
changes but almost all of the original document is presented here (minus
Diab's photos). I think it is a fairly accurate representation of ideas
I've conveyed to hundreds and thousands of people over the years, be
they journalists, tourists, and others.
In honor of the 45th anniversary of the liberation of Hebron during the Six-Day War, I've decided to post this for your reading pleasure. It's a little long, but you may find It worth the time.
In honor of the 45th anniversary of the liberation of Hebron during the Six-Day War, I've decided to post this for your reading pleasure. It's a little long, but you may find It worth the time.
Hebron settlers: The art of peace
The
settlers in Hebron are widely regarded as the enemies of peace. That's
why I, as an Egyptian, decided it was essential to get to know them.
Tuesday 4 January 2012
Meeting outside the Cave of the Patriarchs
in Hebron, aka the Sanctuary of Abraham, seemed to
be not just convenient but symbolically fitting. After all, it is this
holy site which is the main reason why a few hundred religious settlers
stubbornly insist on remaining in Hebron, despite being labelled as an
“obstacle to peace”, not only by Palestinians and the international
community, but also by many Israelis, including descendants of the
city’s original Jewish community.
My guide and interlocutor was David Wilder, the veteran American-Israeli spokesman for the settler community in Hebron
. With his long, flowing grey beard, Wilder had
something of the patriarchal look about him, while the gun holstered on
the side of his trousers bore a silent testimony to the Wild West Bank
lifestyle of the settler community here.
Owing
to unforeseen illness and a trip to the United States on Wilder's part,
it had taken several weeks for me finally to get this audience. During
the long wait, I couldn’t quite shake the suspicion that Wilder was not
exactly wildly enthusiastic about a visit from an Egyptian journalist,
who was likely to be, at the very least, unsympathetic, if not outright
hostile, towards his community.
But
persistence ultimately paid off, as undoubtedly did the curiosity
factor, which some Israeli friends suggested would prove irresistible,
although others worried about the prospect of potential hostility.
Personally, I expected civility but didn't rule out other possibilities.
As
we headed to and entered Wilder’s office in his battered old car, he
was curious to learn more about me and what had motivated me to make
this visit.
Part
of my motivation was undoubtedly curiosity. I have visited the
Palestinian side of Hebron on several occasions, both with a Palestinian
human rights group and on my own or with friends. I have seen for
myself the massive humanitarian impact, including the complete closure
of all businesses on al-Shuhada street and in parts of the old city’s
souq in the Qasbah, not to mention the severe restrictions on movement
this draconian security entails. I have also spoken to Palestinians
affected by the settler presence.
And
now I wanted to see how the other side lived and what made them tick.
In the Art of War, Sun Tzu says that if you know your enemy and you know
yourself, then you can win a hundred battles without suffering a single
loss. I don't know if this is entirely the case or not, but in the Art
of Peace to which I subscribe, knowing the enemies of peace, not just
its friends, is essential if we are to find a way to end the battle and
cut our losses.
Besides,
I'm not one who likes to make easy and lazy judgements and I am a
passionate believer in the idea that everyone has the right to have
their case heard. With this in mind, I decided that it was important for
me to cross the line, and it was a little surreal to see the inside of
the settlements that stood behind the thick gate outside which I had
stood.
On
a couple of occasions, I have stood outside the gate of the Beit Romano
settlement to protest the weekly Shabbat “Qasbah tour” which leaves
from there, because of the heavy Israeli military guard it requires and
the barring of Palestinian entry to the old city during the tour.
It
is called a tour but it is more like a tour of duty. First, an advance
party of heavily armed and nervous IDF soldiers, some looking little
older than child soldiers, leaves the settlement, pointing their rifles
in all directions in an absurdist mime. Their mission: to check the
route. Some time later, out come the “tourists” and their “guide”,
surrounded on all sides by even more IDF soldiers – all provided
courtesy of compulsory national service and the Israeli (as well as
American) taxpayer.
The
last time I did it, I even draped a Palestinian keffiyah – one that was
actually made in Hebron and not in China – which I had just purchased
from a shopkeeper who had seen his business reach near collapse due to
the closure of most of the shops on his street. This acted as a
provocative red rag to the younger settlers on the tour and the
beleaguered Israeli soldiers guarding them had a hard time keeping them
away from me, which led them to implore me to move away, which I refused
to do arguing that I had as much right to be on this street as they
did. Reflecting on this incident, I wondered what Wilder would make of
it.
As
I toured Jewish Hebron with Wilder, I figured that I must have been the
only Arab there and wondered what the settlers would make of me if they
found out that I was an Egyptian, especially given the regular reports
of settler violence and attacks against Palestinians and their property
. I saw a couple of yeshivas, an archaeological
site which seemed to confirm the Biblical narrative in Wilder’s view,
and a historically de-contextualised museum dedicated to the tragic 1929 Hebron massacre
.
In
visiting the Jewish settlements of Hebron, I wanted to develop a deeper
understanding of what motivates a small group of people to live amid
such hostility and exist in self-imposed isolation, not only from their
physical neighbours but also from their co-religionists and compatriots.
The
long, in-depth conversation I had with Wilder, who is an eloquent and
passionate speaker, was enlightening, and that is why I have decided to
serialise it in full. To me, it not only revealed a group of people with
a worldview that is so completely different to my own that I felt I had
indeed landed there “from the moon”, as Wilder invited me to do at one
point.
One
major impression I got from our conversation was not only the sense of
divine entitlement and righteousness the settlers possessed, but also
their rather paranoid narrative of victimhood and historical grievance,
some of which is justified, despite the substantial power they yield.
They feel not only hated by the Arabs, but misunderstood by Israelis and
unfairly labelled as extremists. They criticise and lament Arab
rejection of their presence in Hebron and their identity, yet they
reject Palestinian identity and, judging by Wilder’s discourse, are
opposed to granting them equal rights.
Although
I do not believe in God-given rights, given the religious importance of
Hebron to Jews and given my unwavering belief in multiculturalism, I
believe that a Jewish presence in Hebron is necessary. However, that
presence must be one built on equality and justice, not on segregation,
oppression and occupation.
Informative
as my encounter with Wilder was, it did not increase my optimism for
the future. Following our encounter, I was left with the impression that
the situation in Hebron, and the West Bank at large, is as intractable
as ever, with the ideological settlers holding the Palestinian and
Israeli public to ransom.
Nevertheless,
I am still convinced that it was a useful exercise, that it helped
humanise the situation and that it is through continued dialogue that
the walls of prejudice and distrust can be gradually broken down to lay
the groundwork for peace. In addition, the first step to resolving a
problem, no matter how insoluble it seems, is through building a deeper
understanding of the situation and the key players.
Now
this preamble has gone on long enough. I’ll let the interview with
Wilder speak for itself and you can make your own mind up about the
thorny issues it raises. The interview will be serialised over the next
couple of weeks, so do check back for the latest instalments.
Hebron settlers: From secular America to religious Hebron
What motivates an American Jew from a secular background to move to Israel and become a religious settler in Hebron?
Tuesday 4 January 2012
Khaled Diab: Can you introduce yourself?
David
Wilder: My name is David Wilder. I work as a spokesperson for the Jewish
community here in Hebron. I grew up in the States. I’ve been in Israel
for over 35 years. I’ve been in this part of Israel for over 30 years. I
lived for a number of years in Kiryat Arba
. I moved down here 13 years ago. I’ve been working here for 17-plus years.
What motivated you to move from the States, first, and then to move here?
When
I was in university, I had the opportunity to participate in a one-year
programme. I had an idea about going to Israel from almost as a child.
But I never came over here. I didn’t grow up in a religious background.
So your parents were secular?
They were what we call in the States Reform Judaism
– what would be called here secular Judaism. But
the idea to come to Israel had been floating around. The idea of being
able to come for a year in university, get credit for it, be far away
from home, have a good time, learn something, and be in Israel at the
same time, you know, it was appealing. I came over in 1974, so we’re
talking a year after the Yom Kippur war
. Israel was, you know, something in the news, it wasn’t something, you know, hidden away.
So that awoke your Jewish identity or something?
I
don’t think that that did, but it wasn’t… it was tangible, it was
something. It wasn’t some concept. It was real. And the idea of coming
over was, you know, appealing. And I was accepted to a programme, so I
came over to Jerusalem. I was at Hebrew University, primarily with
Americans, that’s the kind of programme it was. I didn’t know any
Hebrew.
And
over that period of a year, I don’t know, something shifted. Because my
expectation was to come for a year, go back, finish, graduate and go to
law school. You know, I sort of had it all set out. But something
clicked and pushed me in a different direction. To tell you exactly what
that was is very difficult. But that’s what happened. I went back and
graduated, went back and finished my last year.
When
I graduated, I came back, and stayed. I became involved in different
things. Very slowly, over a period of time, I became more religious,
having become introduced to religious Judaism, which I didn’t know
anything about before. I was introduced to a woman, an Israeli, we got
married.
Was that an arranged marriage or was it a love marriage?
Both.
Arranged marriages have a connotation of you meet on the day and you
get married. We didn’t do that. But many times, you’re introduced. The
fact that you’re introduced to someone doesn’t mean you have to marry
them. You can be introduced to 50 people before you find someone you
want to marry. But I was introduced to somebody and we somehow hit it
off. I still don’t understand why she liked me but that was 32 years ago
and we got married, and the rest is history, as they say.
And you’re still together?
Oh, yeah.
And she’s a naturalised Israeli like you?
She
was born here. Her father was born in Turkey and moved to Cuba and came
to Israel in the 1930s. Her mother was born in Jerusalem and her family
was originally from Greece. She’s Sephardi and I’m Ashkenazi. So we’re a
mixed marriage, you could say.
And she also shares your religious convictions?
Yeah.
We have seven children. Four of them are married and another one is
getting married soon. Two are still at home. And a lot of grandchildren.
How many exactly? Do you know?
At the
moment, we have 17 grandchildren. I have one daughter who goes in twos;
she has two sets of twins. That pushes the numbers up.
So you’ve created your own veritable mini-tribe.
It’s a
“hamoula” [clan]. Yeah, you could say that. But look, we’re a small
family in Hebron. There are families with 11 kids. I think there’s a
family here with 13 – 13, I think, is the largest in Hebron.
What motivated you to move to Hebron rather than stay in Jerusalem?
We
were looking to contribute where we felt we could contribute. You know,
do something, the idea that, if you believe in something, don’t just
talk about it, do it. So we were looking for a place to live on
something of a permanent basis and, actually, we sort of fell into
Kiryat Arba. We knew somebody who lived there and they told me about an
apartment. We didn’t have any money, and it was very cheap.
We
wanted to try to do something. You know, we were both young. I was
studying. I was learning Torah at that time, and I continued for a
number of years. And we moved there and we’ve been here ever since.
And do all your kids and grandkids also live around here or have they moved away?
My grandchildren live with their parents.
Yeah, I know…
I’m old. I’m not that old.
No,
no, I understand. My kids are like this: one of my daughters lives here
in Hebron. My eldest daughter lived here for 10 years after she got
married. Her husband is a rabbi. He teaches in a yeshiva. They wanted to
live where he teaches, so they moved down about 20, 25 minutes from
here, in the southern Hebron hills, still in what’s called Judea, about
20 minutes outside of Be’er Sheva
. I have son that lives 10 minutes outside of Hebron, in Beit Hagai
. And another daughter who lives in Samaria.
Tell me a little bit about your community here. How big is it?
We
have here, today, in Hebron… Ok, let’s define terms. There are
different ways of defining Hebron. And that’s also in terms of numbers
and things like that. You know numbers, anyone can do anything they want
with numbers. I’m sure you’re aware of that. So to try to keep things
as straight as possible.
In
Hebron itself , today, there are four Jewish neighbourhoods; there are
about 90 families; there are about 300 children; there are about 350
guys in the shiva – 850 Jews in Hebron. In Kiryat Arba, there are about
7,500 people. Now if you drive around Kiryat Arba, on the perimeter of
Kiryat Arba, there’s a fence, on the eastern side. One side of the fence
is Kiryat Arba, the other side of the fence is Hebron. So there is a
question which I’ve asked numerous people and never gotten a good
answer: if you count that side of the fence as Hebron, then count this
side of the fence as Hebron. Ok, you can say that Kiryat Arba is a
neighbourhood of Hebron, but it is a separate municipal entity, ok?
The
two communities are very interdependent. I mean, we don’t have room
here for anything. We don’t have here a post office or a supermarket or
schools, because we don’t have any space to put them, or the room we
might have, we can’t use. So all that is in Kiryat Arba. Hebron is the
basis, you know, it’s where it started.
If
you’re talking about the greater Hebron region, we have close to 10,000
Jews. If you’re talking about Hebron proper, where we are today, then
you’re talking about 850 people, plus-minus.
You
were talking about how you’re very interdependent with Kiryat Arba, but
are there differences in the make-up and attitudes between the people
in Kiryat Arab and the people here in Hebron?
Look,
Hebron, Kiryat Arba, separately or together, they are not a kibbutz,
ok? I think that the basic general attitudes; there’s a very strong
common denominator, for the most part. But this isn’t necessarily
ideological. You have, I don’t know, it’s very difficult for me to try
to guess percentages or statistics. You may have people who live in
Kiryat Arba because it’s cheaper than living in Jerusalem. If someone
wants to buy an apartment and an apartment in Jerusalem costs a million
shekels and here it costs 100,000 shekels, then your mortgage is a lot
lower here than it is there.
But
I think, for the most part, there is a strong ideological common
denominator. But just like anything and everything else, there are
differing, you know, different issues, there are different opinions. And
your opinions can scale that way, that way, in any given direction. You
know, it depends on what you’re talking about. There are things that
people agree about. There are things that people disagree about.
And
between Hebron and Kiryat Arba, they’re not, you know… Both communities
have a stigma, a stereotype, or a brand, or whatever word you want to
use to describe it which may, many years ago, have been accurate, but
today... It’s good for the media, you know, when they want to smear us.
But, in truth, it’s very difficult to characterise any real, major, you know, characteristic.
Look,
in Kiryat Arba, you have Russians, you’ve still got Ethiopians, though
there are less Ethiopians today. You’ve got people they call “bnei
menashe”, you know, that have been brought over from India and Pakistan.
You’ve got Ashkenazi, Sephardim, you name it, you’ve got it. And you’ve
got people from France, and you’ve got people from the States, and
you’ve got Israelis. And, on a smaller degree, you’ve got the same here
in Hebron.
I
don’t have the stats for voting. You know, here you vote for parties.
But I don’t have stats from the last elections, but most people vote
here for religious parties.
Hebron settlers: “We are not extremists”
The
Hebron settlers feel demonised by the mainstream media, and say reports
of settler violence are exaggerated and some are even "black flag" ops.
Tuesday 4 January 2012
Khaled
Diab: You just mentioned the media. How do you regard the mainstream
Israeli view, especially the liberal view, of your community?
David
Wilder: How do I view their view of me? You need a double mirror for
that. Look, the media is very left wing, as a rule. There are always
exceptions to the rule. You have journalists, you know, and politicians
who take a different path. But as a rule the media is extremely
leftwing. And, as such, they look at us as rightwing extremists who are,
you know, a bone in the throat of peace. To put it very generally.
And
they express that. You know, we work with them. We work with the media
and try to influence however we can. Sometimes successfully, sometimes
less successfully. But it’s very obvious that the media is generally,
not just here, but the world media also is. In the United States, the
big media, whether it be theNew York Times or the Washington Post or
CNN. Perhaps one of the exceptions is Fox, which is a little bit more
moderate. But they’re usually, generally, very liberal, very leftwing.
So would you say you get a more sympathetic hearing within Israel or in the United States?
The
difference between the United States and Israel in terms of media is
that in the United States you have much larger media. First of all, in
Israel, if you look at television, you’re talking about
government-licensed media. There’s very little private media, and the
private media that was on our side, you know, shut down. Ariel Sharon
shut it down.
In
the United States, you have much larger, much freer media. Anybody who
is able to - I don’t know what the criteria are - can get a license.
Anyone who has the money can open a radio station, or a newspaper, or a
television station, or go on cable, or whatever. And so, in terms of
sympathy, as such, among the more rightwing media in the United States
there’s much more sympathy. If you go down to the Bible Belt and here
some of the talk shows, they’re very conservative.
Do
you feel things have shifted in the past few years, with, like,
Netanyahu and his government? Do you feel they’ve become more
sympathetic in the media to you?
No,
the media hasn’t become more sympathetic to us. There are people every
once in a while who, you know, stop and do a little bit of
introspection; they sort of look and try to examine where they are and
where they are coming from. And every once in a while you can get
somebody in the media or even a politician.
The
head of the Labour party today, Shelly Yachimovich, who used to be on
the radio. She wasn’t a very good friend of ours when she was on the
radio. Today, she states that she opposes… she disagrees with our
ideology, but she also comes out and says that people that are settlers
are good Israelis just like everyone else. She doesn’t try to demonise
us just because we live here. She can say I disagree with them; I want
to throw them out, but they’re not bad people.
But have things change in the media as a result of Netanyahu’s government?
No,
because he’s also considered to be rightwing, despite the fact that he
also has Barak in his government. He’s considered to have a rightwing
coalition, so the media, they don’t like him anymore than they like us.
He’s not going to be a cause of them moving in our direction - to the
contrary.
Newspapers like Ma’ariv and so on, you don’t find they’re sympathetic?
No.
Ok, you say that the Israeli media often labels you as “extremists”, what do you think of that label?
It’s
not just the Israeli media. Years ago, I don’t know if you remember,
there was a… When I started working here, almost 18 years ago, the New York Timescorrespondent, the head of the New York Times,
he was a guy called Serge Schmemann. I don’t know where he is today; I
see his name every once in a while, but he’s not here, thank God. But he
didn’t like us. He was very leftwing and he was very anti people like
me in Hebron. And when he used to write in theTimes about Hebron, he always prefaced the word Hebron with extremists. It was almost like one word.
He
was here once with one of his editors and I asked him, in front of his
editor, why he always wrote that. He didn’t like that. He said, well,
you’re zealots and you’re doing this and that. I said but you never
write that. You always write we’re extremists. He said, yeah, well,
everybody knows what I mean.
I
mean, you know, we don’t think about it. You know different words have
different connotations. And in the media, when you say something enough…
When you write something enough times, then people start to believe it.
Because, you know, he writes it again and again and again, so it must
be true.
When
I think about extremism, I think about the Red Brigade, you know,
Hizbullah, organisations that go out and kill people. You know
extremism, that’s how I read extremism.
So how would you describe your community? What words would you use?
I
think… What I’ve used in the past is to say that we are ideological,
that is, we live an ideal, ok? You can agree with my ideal or you can
disagree with my ideal. That’s legitimate. I don’t have any problems
with that. People can think different things, and whatever.
It’s
also like when the Israeli media talks about religion, religious
people, so you have… they can talk about Orthodox religious, then they
talk about Ultra-Orthodox. So what’s an Ultra-Orthodox? What makes
somebody more Orthodox than somebody else? We all do the same thing: we
keep kosher; we keep the Sabbath; we do this and we don’t do that. So
why is that Ultra and this not? Usually, it’s the way people dress. If
he’s got a hat and a long black coat, then he’s Ultra. If he just has a
knitted kippa like mine, then… But there’s no real difference between
them.
The
same thing is true with extremism. The fact that I believe that people
should live in Hebron. We have over half a million people that visit
here every year, so they’re all extremists. The people that come to
visit Hebron from the United States, whether they be Jewish or
Christian, or whoever they are, Israelis or whatever they are, are they
extremists because they come to visit or because they support us, ok,
give us money? So what makes me extreme? Because I live a particular
ideal that somebody else disagrees with?
How about if your ideal, the majority of people disagree with it, would that make you extreme or not, do you think?
No,
why, I mean the ideal of democracy is that you can have a majority and a
minority. The fact that you’re… Take the… I mean, I don’t know how it
works in England, but take the American Supreme Court, and its nine
justices. You have a case which is decided eight-to-one, is the justice
whose one vote is against that of the majority extremist because he
disagrees with them, even though there are eight against one? No.
Look, it’s semantics which is used as a tool to create an impression on others. That’s what media does.
All right, you mentioned, connecting violence to extremism. That’s, in your mind, the defining factor. How about the violence that’s perpetrated by settlers
, like, the “price tag” campaign, and so on. Do you think of that as extremism?
Errr,
yes. Yes, it certainly is. I think that extremism can be also measured
in different ways … and you can have ideological extremism also. But I
think that that is considered by your normative Israeli, on whatever
side of the fence he is, as very extremist.
And do you think that it’s a manageable, containable problem, or do you think it’s spinning out of control
?
I
think the “spinning out of control” is a media spin. I think, again,
what we’re seeing today is use of what a few people are doing as a tool
to try to blow it up. In Israel, as in most other places, I suppose, but
I see it here, you have all sorts of different types of violence.
There’s leftwing anarchist violence, which has been going on for a few
years, down, every Friday, in Bilin. You have all sorts of different
places where you have violence against Israeli soldiers which is
perpetrated by Israelis and foreigners and all sorts of people, and
every once in a while it makes the news when somebody gets hit by a
rock. But, as a rule, they ignore it because it’s leftwing violence
against Israel.
What’s
the difference between leftwing violence against Israeli soldiers and
rightwing violence against Israeli soldiers? They’re both violent;
they’re both against the same body. This one is taken and turned into
major headlines for a few days and the other one is ignored. You know,
they’re both wrong, ok. But one is used for the purpose of
delegitimising us and the other one is ignored because part of the media
agree with what they’re doing, so, you know, let’s just leave it
alone.
And also, the number of Jews partaking in such actions is very very small.
And also, the number of Jews partaking in such actions is very very small.
It
is violent. What I’m saying is that the same kind of violence. You can
have two different groups that are perpetrating the same kind of
violence, and one of them is turned into a major media event, and the
other one is ignored.
You have a small group of people today, which is very frustrated.
Are they young or old?
They’re young. People, once they get to my age, they don’t have the energy to suffer like that anymore.
And what frustrates them, would you say?
Policies
which they believe, not only are they wrong but destructive, and they
see people being thrown out of their homes. They saw what happened in Gush Katif
. They see the results of what happened since then.
They see it happening again, starting on a small scale and moving up,
possibly, to a very large scale. And they see all the warnings that are
used to try to prevent that from happening, I don’t know if it’s falling
on deaf ears or just not being listened to. They don’t know how better
to express themselves to try to get something done.
It
doesn’t necessarily justify the violence, but I don’t think… I think
what we’re seeing today is still… Let’s put it this way, you don’t need a
large group of people… you don’t need a whole lot of people to break
into a mosque and write something on the wall. You need one or two
people. And there are people who are doing it. Eventually, they’ll stop.
I don’t know how or when.
It’s
reaching a stage, though, where it’s turning off a lot of people that
might sympathise with their belief and the ideal, or the opinion behind
it, but once you start to express it, as what happened yesterday in the
Israeli army base, people start to say, you’re starting to cross red
lines. But, again, I don’t think it’s the… you’re not reaching a stage
today where it is out of hand.
Israel’s
security forces, whether they be police or army or intelligence, is
very large, it wouldn’t surprise me, for example, I don’t know that it
is, I don’t have any factual evidence on our table here, but we have
seen in the past, provocations, when Israeli intelligence has used
people as provocateurs to do things like that, in order to be able to
reach a particular goal.
So you think some of this violence is self-inflicted by the…
I think. I don’t know that it is, but it could be. We’ve seen it before.
How
about the contrary allegations, that the security forces have been
increasingly infiltrated by religious elements and they’ve risen up the
ranks, and so on?
I
sort of don’t really agree with the word of “infiltration”. You
understand the intrinsic contradiction in that, you know, not yourself,
coming from where you’re coming from, but you hear this obviously on
Israeli radio from Israelis. So I understand where you’re getting it
from. But the built-in contradiction is that when religious Israelis
didn’t go to the army, they were put down as not caring about the state
of Israel and not willing to defend the state of Israel and they’re not
willing to put their lives on the line just like everybody else.
So
when religious Israelis do go into the army and they are willing to
work very hard, and they’re willing to go to officer school, and they
are willing to do what everybody else does, it’s said that they’re
infiltrating the army and rising in the ranks. If you go into the army,
if you send intelligent people into the army, and they’re motivated,
then, you know, they can rise in the ranks just like everybody else.
So,
on the one hand, they’re saying that the religious people are taking
over the army. On the other hand, if we don’t go into the army, they
say, ahh, they’re not going into the army, they’re not really part of
the state of Israel.
I
think that people who receive proper education and they understand,
ideologically, the importance of the state of Israel, and they also
understand the issues that we have to deal with today, you know, the
security issues that we have to deal with, I understand that we need an
army and people should understand that, if there’s equal service, or
something equivalent to equal service, then you go to the army.
Everybody does it – you go in for a year and a half, three years, you
can go for five years. And it’s very widely accepted and it’s done.
So,
you know, when religious people don’t do it, they’re accused of not
caring and not taking on community service the way they should, and when
they do go into the army, they say, ooh, they’re infiltrating.
So you feel that your community is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t?
Well, we’re not talking about Hebron specifically, but on that particularly issue, yeah, that’s an apt description.
Hebron settlers: “I don’t like Tel Aviv, does that mean we should tear Tel Aviv down”
Hebron
settlement is as important as Tel Aviv, Israel is obliged to protect it
and what Arabs lost in war should not be returned, says spokesman.
Monday 9 January 2012
Khaled
Diab: What I’m gathering from what you’ve been saying is that you feel
there’s a lack of understanding, comprehension and empathy and, even
sympathy, towards your community and its aspirations. But how about if
we turn the tables, do you feel your community understands and
comprehends and empathises with mainstream concerns, such as, for
example, you said that you were about 800 people here, yet you need
several hundred, or a couple of thousand, soldiers to protect your
presence here? Quite a lot of mainstream Israelis are relatively bitter
about that. And how about the wider concerns, that your presence here
has a humanitarian impact on the Palestinian population of Hebron.
David
Wilder: That’s a big question, so let’s chop it up. Let’s start with
the first part of the question. In terms of the military. First of all,
it’s important to understand that the community here is here with the…
the community here was re-established with the express consent and
approval of the Israeli government. In other words, it’s not a pirate
community. So, it’s real, it’s official, it’s not, you know, where
somebody came in and they put up a tent, and then we grew and reached…
But the early settlers after the 1967 war, weren’t they like that?
We
first came back… we came in 1968. People rented a hotel and then the
Israeli government moved them to a military compound, and they lived
there for two and a half years. After that, Kiryat Arba was established
by the Israeli government, by Moshe Dayan, and they moved up there.
In
1979, a group of women and children moved into Hebron, to Beit Haddasa,
which was a Jewish building, it was built by Jews in 1893 as a medical
clinic which was used by both Jews and Arabs in Hebron. At that time, it
was empty. The prime minister then, Menachem Begim, wasn’t overjoyed
that they were there but he didn’t throw them out. He made their living
conditions extremely difficult, but he didn’t expel them.
In
1980, following a terrorist attack here, when six men were killed, the
Israeli government voted and re-established officially a Jewish
community in Hebron. And a lot of, not all of, the buildings… but some
of the buildings here, the rebuilding or the renovations, were done with
funding from the Israeli government. So it’s something that’s real and
official, ok.
The
fact that there are people who don’t like it, you know. I don’t like
Tel Aviv, does that mean we should tear Tel Aviv down and throw
everybody out? No. I like this; they like that.
In
terms of the military presence here, the Israeli military, or the
Israeli government, has policies whereby they protect Jews wherever they
are. And there are Jews here, so they also have to be protected. When I
came to Israel in 1974, you didn’t have in Jerusalem security guards at
bus stops, checking people getting on buses to make sure they’re not
carrying bombs to blow up people on the bus. It’s a tremendous outlay to
have security people at bus stops, you know, but Israel did it because
it was a necessity. And the same thing is true in Hebron.
First
of all, I’m not responsible for the fact that there are only 850 people
here. The property that we have is full. If we’re allowed to build in
Hebron on the property that we own, then we could have more people here.
If we could buy from Arabs that want to sell us property, we could have
more people. But as you’re very much aware, PA law says that Arabs who sell property to Jews will be summarily executed
– it’s a capital crime [Ed: the PA has not
actually executed anyone for this offence]. And they do it, so most
Arabs, they’re not looking, you know, for all those virgins up there in
the sky, so they don’t do it, because they’re not really interested in
getting killed. It’s a very difficult procedure.
The
military that is here have several different functions. They’re here to
protect me, for sure. They’re also here to protect you, and all the
other people that come here to visit, because we have a lot of people
that come in to visit. Today, there’s a group of 400 people here.
But,
as far as I’m concerned, the most important role of the military here
has absolutely nothing to do with us. When Hebron was divided in 1997,
the Hebron Accords, Israel pulled out of most of the city. It was given
entirely to Arafat, and we pulled everything out. When we did that, the
other side of Hebron turned into a terrorist nest, and you had people
running around Israel from Hebron blowing themselves up, in Tel Aviv and
Be’er Sheva and Haifa. There was a soccer team, a football team, in Hebron that they all turned into suicide bombers
. There was an article about them in Newsweek.
In
other words, when there was no Israeli intelligence, no Israeli
security, on the other side of the city, it just, you know, it turned
into a breeding ground for terrorism. And the same thing happened in
Jenin. It happened in other places. And it cost us. It cost us a lot of
lives. The Israeli military, as far as I’m concerned is here at least as
much for, if not more, to protect the people in Tel Aviv than they are
to protect me. Because if they can prevent someone from building a bomb
and getting out to Tel Aviv or wherever they want to go to blow
themselves up, then that’s certainly no less important than making sure
that I’m safe and you’re safe. And that takes soldiers, you know.
Well,
you can say that, if we pulled out of all of Hebron. Great! Well, then
let’s just look at… if we want to learn a little bit from our recent
past, we did that inGush Katif
. We pulled out of Gush Katif and we got 10,000 rockets back into Israel from what we gave them.
And you regard that as a pullout? I mean, the military is still in there.
They pulled out. They pulled out entirely.
Yes, but the military presence of Israel is still there
. There’s the whole no-man’s-land. There’s the
perimeter. There’re regular raids. The borders and economy are
controlled by Israel.
No,
no, of course not. The only reason you have raid is stop them throwing
rockets at us. When we pulled out, the idea was… the Europeans invested a
lot of money there. The Israelis who were down there, they had
initiated and developed tremendous flower industries and the Europeans
bought a lot of the hothouses that they used, which were… I don’t
understand the field at all, but they were very sophisticated… So that
the Arabs who then inherited what we left would be able to use them, and
they destroyed them. They took them apart; they destroyed them.
When
Israel pulls out of areas, they’ve turned into terrorist bases which
have wreaked havoc in Israel proper, ok. I’m not talking about what they
try to do in Hebron. I’m talking about what they try to do to people in
Tel Aviv – and that, I think, is a major reason why the military is
here and why the numbers have to be where they’re at.
So
that’s the first part of the question. The other part of the question
is dealing with… you asked me about, you know, well, there are people
that don’t like us here… So, there are people that don’t like us, so
what?
The
concept of Hebron – i.e. Jews with horns and tails who breathe fire and
eat one Arab for breakfast and two for lunch and three for dinner with
the blood dripping off from your moustache from the one you’ve just
finished – that’s the vision that people have. And they come in and it’s
not like that. When I used to give tours… I still give tours but a
different kind of tour… We would start in Kiryat Arba and the bus would
come in and I’d just go around Kiryat Arba in the bus before coming down
here into Hebron. And I used to watch people’s faces, and they didn’t
believe it. They didn’t believe they were in Kiryat Arba, because Kiryat
Arba is a settlement, and you know what a settlement is, a settlement
is some tents, right? But that’s what people thought, that was the
vision they had.
And
a lot of Israelis who come in, not for a political tour, they can ask
questions if they like, but forget the politics, just the historical
element, the religious element, what Hebron means to the Jewish people,
whether you’re religious or you’re not religious, it doesn’t make any
difference. Everybody has a heritage, and they see it and they hear a
little bit, and all of a sudden (clicks fingers): this isn’t what they
taught me about Hebron. And it’s a totally different image. And that’s
when mainstream Israelis who say may be we shouldn’t be here start
saying, may be we should be. And we’ve had that happen.
It
happened not so long ago. A major Israeli television entertainment
personality was here and, after he was here, he said, yeah, there are
problems with the community here and there, but we can’t leave Hebron,
you know, and that happens when people see it, when they’re here, when
they start to feel it a little bit. And we see that happen time and time
and time again. It’s not an isolated kind of a thing.
To
touch on something you said in passing about the taboo amongst
Palestinians towards selling property to Israeli Jews. How does the
community here and other groups among the Jewish community feel about
selling land to Arabs, Palestinians? Look, if a Palestinian came and
asked to buy your land…
Ok,
look, there’s a major difference between what I like and what I don’t
like and what is legally acceptable. I can say that I don’t like it, I
can even oppose it, but the Supreme Court just ruled, up north in one of
the moshavim
,
that when they had a tender to buy property, there was an Arab couple
that wanted to buy and the community wouldn’t let them, the Supreme
Court said you have to let them, you have to sell it to them, cuz
they’re no different than anybody else.
Legally,
according to PA law, which is based on Jordanian law, an Arab that
sells property to a Jew is to be killed. Israeli law doesn’t say that.
There can be reasons why yes and why know; there can be security
elements; there can be all sorts of elements.
We
used to have here, many years ago… They were building outside here, and
there were Arab workers. One day, an Arab came inside here, with a gun,
and he pulled them all together and told them if you come back here
tomorrow, I’ll kill you. That was an Arab telling the Arabs. The next
day nobody showed up.
In
other words, there can be differences of opinion – pro, for, against,
whatever – and that’s all legitimate. But when you take that and
legalise it, and you say the law is…
But isn’t there a law, a form of legalisation, that says Israel officially owns all the land of Israel
, like the Israeli government…
I
wish that was true, but it’s not. I mean, you can ask me religiously
what I believe, but in terms of what’s on the books, the president of
the Supreme Court ruled, much to my own personal differing of opinion or
opposition, but she’s the president of the Supreme Court, not me – at
least, for a little while longer, she is. She ruled that any land that’s
not registered as being owned by the Israeli government or the state of
Israel belongs to the Arabs. Now I don’t know where she gets that from.
But it’s just the opposite of what you just said.
There
is land that’s owned by Arabs, I know that, and there’s land that
isn’t. There’s land that’s owned by Jews, that’s owned by Arabs, there’s
state-owned land. In any country in the world, there’s state-owned
land.
And you think land captured by conquest is legitimate property?
You’re asking about…
Like what, for example, the international community regards as occupied territory?
Like the Jordanian conquest of 1948. The land that they took in 1948 by conquest. Is that legally theirs or not?
Or the land that Israel took in 1967. I mean, in all cases.
First
of all, you see one of the anomalies of the conflict today is that
there’s almost a given that violence, or different levels of violence,
committed by one side is legitimate and accepted and understood and
justifiable, and from the other side it’s not. There are consequences.
If somebody declares war, or forget the war, if somebody walks into my
office, and I start beating them up. You walked into my office just now
and you said, my name is Khaled, and I jump on you and start hitting
you, and you sue me, ok. You sue me for a million shekels. You take me
to court. Then I’m going to have to pay the consequences for beating you
up. May be you beat me up too. But I have to pay for what I did. It’s
my problem. It might have hurt you, but I have to pay the consequences
for what I did.
If
somebody starts a war with you, then there are consequences for that.
People can’t declare war and figure that even if they lose, they’re not
going to have to pay a price. You know, when you say, as Nasser said,
we’re going to throw them into the sea and, you know, he made a pact
with the Syrians and the Jordanians, and he said, you know, let’s finish
them off.
In 1967, the prime minister was Levi Eshkol…
But didn’t Israel start the 1967 war or don’t you regard that Israel started it?
I
don’t know. The history books that I have say that Nasser closed the
Straits of Tiran. That’s an act of war. The United Nations left. You
know, that’s an act of war. The fact that he closed the Straits of
Tiran, that he put a blockade on Israel, and said we’re going to throw
you into the sea, formed a military pact with the Syrians and the
Jordanians, I think that’s pretty much an act of war.
When
Levi Eshkol was prime minister and he sent representatives from the
state of Israel, including Golda Meir, to Hussein in Jordan saying to
him, we don’t want anything, just leave us alone – we have enough to
worry about up north and down south, just leave us alone. We’ll leave
you alone, you leave us alone. And his response was to start shelling
Jerusalem. He started shooting missiles from Jordan into Israel.
So,
what, he thought he was going to do that and we were going to just
ignore him? May be he thought that we would be finished, that they would
defeat us and he would get everything. He wouldn’t just have East
Jerusalem, he would get West Jerusalem too and a little bit more. But it
didn’t work like that. You can’t start a war and expect that, if by
chance you lose the war, it’s not going to cost you anything.
We
came into Judea and Samaria and Gaza as a result of that war. And we
stayed. Today, when people talk about the Geneva Convention and
civilians and all of that, there are many different responses to all of
those questions. The first one is, of course, if you want to say that
we’re not allowed to be here, or that we’re occupying this, then who’s
the legal owner, so to speak?
In
other words, back in 1974 or 1975, Hussein relinquished all claims to
Judea and Samaria. He said, I don’t want anything to do with it. It’s
not mine any more.
But he relinquished them to the Palestinians, not to Israel.
No, he said, it’s not mine.
And he voted for the Palestinians, the PLO, as the representatives of the interests of the Palestinian people.
But
that doesn’t mean just because he said so that it belongs to them. I
mean, like, you know. The questions involved… I mean, legally, I don’t
have any problems with international law. I mean, there are no problems.
But if we take a place like Hebron, ok, and we take… I mean, right now,
there was a… You know, for 700 years, Jews and Christians had no access
to Machpelah, the Tomb of the Patriarchs.
Is that true?
Oh,
yeah, unfortunately it’s true. In the year 1267… In 1260, the Mamluks
pushed out the Crusaders. The Crusaders came in about 1100. And,
ironically, the Crusaders in Hebron threw out the Jews. It was the first
time I know of in a long, long time that there hadn’t been Jews in
Hebron.
In
1260, the Mamluks threw out the Crusaders and let the Jews back in. The
Mamluk emperor was a guy called Baybars and he closed off Temple Mount
and, as an aside, he closed of Machpelah. He said, it’s a mosque. And
for 700 years, we couldn’t go inside. There used to be stairs on the
eastern wall. Jews could go up to the seventh step. That’s as far as we
could go. They started to let Christians back in in the early to middle
1900s. Jews couldn’t go in. And for hundreds and hundreds of years,
there were stairs on the eastern wall and Jews could go up to the
seventh step.
And
it’s only since we came back, is that side accessible to anybody.
Anybody who wants to can go in. There are different sides, and this for
this, and that for that, but anybody that wants to can go inside, with
very, very few exceptions. Today, and you can read it, I’m writing about
it now, the Arab mayor of Hebron… I say it to people all the time, but
nobody really believes it, but now he’s said it… He said it, you know,
and it was printed by, in Time magazine,
by Karl Vick who’s not a big friend of ours, so if he writes that’s
what they said, then I think he’s accurate. The Arab mayor of Hebron
today says that if he ever controls it, he won’t let Jews back in. He
says it’s a mosque, always has been, always will be. He said, you know,
we’ve been there as a mosque since, you know, 1260 or 1400 or whatever
date.
If we’re not here, then there’s no access. It’s gone.
So, you feel yourselves to be guardians of the Jewish heritage of Hebron?
We…
Let’s put it this way, if there wasn’t a Jewish community in Hebron
today, it doesn’t matter whether I’m here or somebody else is here, if
there wasn’t a Jewish community in Hebron today, Machpelah would’ve been
lost a long time ago. We would’ve lost Machpelah in 1997. Arafat
demanded it then, and they wouldn’t give it to him. And the people who
wouldn’t give it to him weren’t rightwing extremists like me, they were
leftwing extremists. Bu they were the ones running the show, and they
took to Arafat the numbers, and they said this is how many Jews are
visiting and how many Arabs are visiting. We can’t give it away, we
can’t give it to you, there are too many Jews that go visit, and those
numbers keep growing.
Hebron settlers: Palestinian people do not exist, are “PR bluff”
Hebron
settlers criticise Arabs who deny Israeli identity, yet reject the
existence of a Palestinian people and say historic Palestine was mostly
empty.
Tuesday 10 January 2012
Khaled
Diab: I notice you have a map of Palestine behind you. I wondered, is
that an ironic gesture? Because I haven’t heard you mention Palestinians
once. You only refer to “Arabs”.
David
Wilder: You’re very perceptive. You’re very, very up on it. That’s very
good, because I always tell people. I always know the people, you know
the journalists who come in, when they’re awake, when they look at my
wall and see that and they ask me that question. And you’ve added to the
question because you’ve said I don’t mention Palestinians, because most
people don’t even see it. So, you’re alert. That’s very good.
You know who printed it? Who printed the map?
Well,
Israelis don’t usually put that sign on maps. It was printed in
Bethlehem by the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities, Palestinian
Authority. What’s it a map of? It’s a map of the state of Israel. But
it’s Palestine. Tel Aviv is Tal al-Arabi, and Ramla is al-Ramla, and Lod
is al-Ludd. In other words, this is Palestine according to the
Palestinian Authority. But it just happens to be a map of the state of
Israel. That’s why I have it there.
Well, how about we look at it from the reverse, Israeli maps of Israel also deny the existence of any Palestinian entity.
Well,
first of all, I think that the official line is that what they… Look
there are different official lines, ok. But the one that’s used for
world consumption is Palestine is Judea and Samaria, Gaza, right? It’s
not Tal el-Arabi.
So,
first of all, the official line is supposed to be that Palestine is
Judea and Samaria. This is something else. I mean this is what they say
to other people, ok, but it’s usually not publicised as such. Number
two, I think that there are probably a lot of Israeli maps today, not
the ones that I would print, but… that show Judea and Samaria as a very
separate entity.
In terms of Palestinian entities as such, so far there isn’t a state of Palestine.
Yes, but do you think there’s a Palestinian people.
That’s a whole other issue. I have no problems talking to you about that too.
So you want to talk about the Palestinian people.
Yes, especially since you have another poster behind you which says, “Don’t the Arab states have enough land of their own?”
Yes, I did.
It probably didn’t go over really, really well, but he could’ve been quoting me. I mean, look…
Because
for me, as an Arab, I see a distinct Palestinian identity, culture,
history, and so on. So, I want to see how you view it.
I’ll
put it very simply. When was the last time there was a king of
Palestine or a Palestinian parliament or a Palestinian who won the Nobel
prize or a Palestinian anything? Look, historically, just historically,
ok… I can’t say forget the politics because it’s all politics.
But
if we just take historical facts, ok. You may have even studied more
history. I used to study history, but you may know more history than me.
But where does the word “Palestine” come from?
Well, it comes from the Romans and the Philistines.
So,
like I said, you’re up on your history. Ok, because most of the people
when I ask them that question, they don’t know anything about the
Romans. But the word “[Syria]Palestina
” of course came from the Romans 2,000 years ago.
It was a 2,000-year-old term that was used when they threw the Jews out,
after thedestruction of the Second Temple
.
But they didn’t throw all the Jews out
. A lot of the Palestinians around now were probably Jews once.
Hang
on a second. Hang on a second. So let me evolve what I’m trying to say.
Again, I don’t expect you to agree with me. I’ll explain to you where
I’m coming from. Palestine came from [Syria]Palestina
[see history of the term “Palestine
”]. The Romans destroyed the Second Temple, and
they wanted to create an entity which didn’t have any Jewish identity to
it. They took Jerusalem and they changed the name of Yerushalayim to
Aelia Capitolina. They threw the Jews out of Jerusalem, all of them out
of Yerushalayim, and they changed the name to Aelia Capitolina.
Why
did they do that? It’s very simple. I mean, simplistically, you want to
create a new identity, you change the name. I mean, it doesn’t have the
same association any more. It has a different association to it. Rather
than have Israel, Yisrael, which has a Jewish identity to it, they
changed the name to Palestina. They took the Palestina from the Philistines
who died out a thousand years before.
Or they were integrated into the other peoples of the region.
Whatever,
but there were no Philistines anymore. The Philistines died out during
the days of King David. You didn’t have them during the days of the
Roman conquest. So, all of a sudden, you have Palestina, the same way
you, Aelia Capitalina. And it stayed. Over the next 2,000 years, I don’t
even remember, but I can pull it out for you… there were about 14 or 16
different peoples that ruled in this little piece of land, which you
can call Palestina or Palestine or Israel or whatever you want.
But ruled as part of an empire.
But there was never a… during that period…
But the local people largely stayed the same, more or less. There was some immigration, obviously…
You
had different local peoples, depending on who was here at any given
time. In the time of the Greeks, it was Greek. In the time of the
Romans, you had Romans. You had local people but you didn’t have a whole
lot of them. We’re talking about 2,000 years ago. We’re talking about
1,500 years ago. The populations around here were much smaller and very
different.
The last empire to rule here was the Ottoman Empire.
Well, there were the British, don’t forget them.
That’s post... I’m talking about before them. Before then, you had the Ottoman Empire that ruled here.
In
terms of different kinds of populations, you know what, I’ve seen
different historical documents that say different things. One of the
best, one of the more popular items, is, which I’m sure you’re probably
familiar with, was… which I have actually here on the iPad, which I
pulled off… is Mark Twain’s book. You know Mark Twain.
Yeah, of course, I know Mark Twain.
So, he wrote about his visit to the Holy Land [Innocents Abroad
- Zionist perspective
, Palestinian perspective
]. There was nothing here, it was desolate. There were people. There were Bedouin. There were people here and there.
But there were plenty of urban populations too.
But he writes about it being desolate. You’re talking about the late 1800s. And he says… he came here expecting one thing.
But then the early Zionists came here and said, “The bride is beautiful but she is married to another man
”.
Hear me out. Hear me out. First of all, when the early Zionists came here, there was nothing here either [See "A land without a people for a people without a land
"].
But they said, the bride is beautiful but she’s already married.
Look,
I don’t see too much of it today but… I saw commercials, things they
used to put on television, in Gaza, about what the Jews had done. They
showed pictures up north of beautiful houses, lawns, and everything, and
then the Jews came, and then it’s all black, the screen is black and
everything is destroyed.
Up
north, for example, if we’re going to take the area of the Galilee.
When Jews started to come over in the late 1800s, early 1900s, it was
all swamps. There was nothing there. People died in droves trying to dry
out the swamps. There was nothing there. It wasn’t green and beautiful
and lush. There was nothing, literally, nothing. There was no industry,
there was no fruit, there were no vegetables, the land didn’t grow
anything, the trees didn’t grown anything. It was very, very sparse.
But
going back to the Palestinian people. There were people here. There was
no, never any such Palestinian entity whatsoever. When the British received the mandate
from the League of Nations after World War I, that
mandate called for them to develop a national home for the Jewish
people, which included southern Lebanon, parts of Syria, all of what’s
today called Jordan, of course, Judea and Samaria, coming all the way
down. Of course, they changed their minds and they went in a different
direction. But that’s what the original mandate called for.
The
Palestinian people, as such, never existed. It’s probably the biggest,
most successful PR bluff that the world has ever swallowed. What is
today called the West Bank. What is the West Bank? The West Bank is the
western side of the Jordan River. The Jordanian people never existed.
There was never a Jordan. It was a creation of the British. The British
created it. Ok, they had to have a place for a king, and they didn’t
have any place to put him, so they created a monarchy, they called it
Jordan and they put him there, so that he’d be happy and he’d have
something that he could do with himself, until they killed him, until he
died.
But
there was never a state of Jordan. The people that lived on the eastern
side of the Jordan River and the people that lived on the western side
of the Jordan River were identical. They were the same thing. They were
Arabs.
On
the eastern side, there were mostly Bedouins. On the western side, they
were mostly urban populations. They were very different.
No,
they were not. Today, not things that I’ve written, things that have
been written by many other people. 75%, and again, the numbers aren’t
necessarily from today. The numbers that I remember, in any case, that
75% of the population of what’s today called the Kingdom of Jordan is
identical to the Arab population we have today in Judea and Samaria.
The
fact that Arafat was able to create a… I mean, let’s put it this way,
ok. If there really is this thing called Palestine, and there really is
this Palestinian people, then where was the demand for it, let’s just
say from 1948 to 1967, when Israel wasn’t here. Israel wasn’t in Hebron,
Israel wasn’t in Bethlehem, we weren’t anywhere in Judea and Samaria.
We weren’t in Gaza. So where was the demand then, by the same people,
for Palestine.
There was a demand but it was put down by the king of Jordan.
No, there never was a demand because it didn’t exist.
Ok, let’s take a different tack. Ok, now, you clearly don’t believe that a Palestinian people exists.
As such, yes.
So,
what you’re saying is, you’re denying… you’re in denial of their
identity. And yet you’re also irked by the fact that there are certain
Palestinians who deny an Israeli… that there is an Israeli identity.
Should it surprise you that if you deny them their identity… Should you
expect them to accept your identity?
Look,
there are very different goals. We have very different goals. My goal
is to live. And I don’t have any problems with other people. Ok, you can
be my next-door neighbour. I don’t care, as long as you don’t try to
kill me. It doesn’t make any difference whether it’s you or Muhammad or
Ahmed or Youssef or Dawoud or whoever. I don’t care, ok. But there has
to be an acceptance of some kind of legitimacy. And that doesn’t exist
amongst the other side. They refuse to accept the fact that I have a
legitimate right to be here whatsoever.
Whether
or not they accept… I mean, look, again, we can talk on two different
planes. We can talk on the theoretical/ideological plane. We can talk on
an actual plane, ok. The fact is the Jews and Arabs lived in Hebron for
hundreds of years together. The relationships weren’t always great, and
the people that ruled, there was no IDF and there was no state, ok. And
the relationships weren’t always great. And there were Jews who were
killed and they were heavily taxed. And they were treated as dhimmis.
When the relationship started to improve in the early 1900s, in Hebron, that improvement led to…
Look,
today, look, I’ll give you a few examples. When I lived in Kiryat Arba,
there were Arab workers. They used to, in the afternoon, lie down on
the grass in different parks and go to sleep. And lo and behold, if they
went to sleep, they would wake up. If I did that somewhere else, I
don’t know if I would wake up. I might wake up without my head. Today,
in Hebron, you have a situation, and I’ll show you in a little while,
the city is divided. They can come over here. They do go through a
security check, to make sure they’re not bringing over a gun or a knife
to try to kill me. But they can come on this side. I can’t go on that
side. It’s true I can’t go on that side because, number one, Israeli law
outlaws it. But if I did go over there, they’d kill me.
You believe that?
Oh,
yeah, no doubt about it. It depends who caught me, who got to me first.
There are those that wouldn’t. It doesn’t happen frequently, but there
have been kids who have wandered over, one way or another, and somebody
found them and brought them back.
Arabs
are not inherently evil because they are Arabs. But today there is a
political conflict going on and, if they wrong person finds you, then
they chop off your head. That’s number two.
Today, in Israel, you have Arabs in the Knesset. You have people like Ahmad Tibi
, who is not a real strong supporter of Israel. But
he sits in the Israeli parliamentary body. He’s a legislator. He can
try to put laws through. He has legislative immunity, parliamentary
immunity, which I don’t. But he works with the PA and he works with
people that are against the existence of the state of Israel. But he
sits in the Israeli Knesset.
Abu
Mazen has said more than once that, in the state of Palestine, there
won’t be any Jews. Because there are some people that say, just like
there are Arabs that live in Israel, there are people who have
citizenship, they have good jobs, they have Israeli ID cards, and they
can vote in Israeli elections, they can go to school, they get the same
healthcare as everybody else gets…
I
don’t know what Arafat said. Arafat is dead. Unless, you know, they
want to bring him back. Abu Mazen has said that… well, you know people
say it, people here in Hebron say, well, I’ll just stay here under it.
And he says time and time again, the Palestinian state will be Judenfrei
. There will be no Jews here. Jews cannot live in Palestine. We have to establish our identity. A Jew in an Arab state is a dhimmi, and they treat him that way.
Arab states have secularised.
Well,
it’s going back the other way. And an Arab in a Jewish state today has a
lot of rights that, first of all, he doesn’t have in any Arab state,
ok. Arab women are allowed to drive in Israel. They don’t get lashed.
If
you have Arabs sitting on the Knesset. Look, you even had a guy who had
to flee Israel because they were about to arrest him for treason, but
they kept paying his pension, ok. It’s absurd that my taxes that I pay,
part of my taxes go to pay people that are enemies of the state of
Israel, ok.
Of course, yes.
He was considered by the world as the Palestinian
statesman. He was a spokesman and he was a statesman and he was a
diplomat and he was very highly respected, right. That’s what I recall,
before the peace process got into full swing.
He
died post-Oslo. The last interview that he gave before he died. I think
he gave the interview in Egypt, then he went to Kuwait and he died
there. If I recall correctly, he had a heart attack. The last interview
that he gave, he said thatOslo was a Trojan horse
designed for us to get our foot in the door. And
he said clearly in that interview, and I have copies of it, he said, of
course all of Palestine belongs to us. Palestine? Israel belongs to us.
Of course, it’s all ours. But this is our way in.
Ok,
this was the statesman, this was Arafat’s righthand man. He was, you
know, one of the people that Oslo was based on. You know, peace. But
it’s a Trojan horse. So, when I try today to look, and you say… Well, if
I deny their existence, why shouldn’t I expect them to deny my
existence? It doesn’t begin. It doesn’t begin because it’s not just only
a Palestinian identity, it’s a whole ideology.
Hebron settlers: Living with Palestinian “dhimmis”
Palestinians
must accept Israeli rule but granting them equality would create the
"tools for Israel's destruction", says Hebron settler spokesman.
Wednesday 11 January 2012
Khaled
Diab: Ok, let’s move on, we’ve been covering a lot of ground in the
past. Now let’s look to the future. So, what in your view is the
ultimate solution, what… Can there ever be peace between Arabs and
Israelis and how can we achieve that?
David Wilder: [Laughs loudly] Look, I’ve learnt never to day never. Can there be peace? Yeah, sure, there can be peace. But there has to be a legitimate… There has to be an authentic acceptance of the legitimacy of the right of Jews to be here. And that doesn’t exist.
David Wilder: [Laughs loudly] Look, I’ve learnt never to day never. Can there be peace? Yeah, sure, there can be peace. But there has to be a legitimate… There has to be an authentic acceptance of the legitimacy of the right of Jews to be here. And that doesn’t exist.
By
the same token, shouldn’t there be an acceptance on the part of Jews
like yourself of the right of Palestinians to be here too?
I don’t… I have never… I have been in this position for 17 or 18 years. I’ve never said that, for us to live here, the Arabs have to leave. They don’t say that about us. They say that, for there to be peace in Hebron, there can’t be a Jewish community here. I’ve never said that.
I don’t… I have never… I have been in this position for 17 or 18 years. I’ve never said that, for us to live here, the Arabs have to leave. They don’t say that about us. They say that, for there to be peace in Hebron, there can’t be a Jewish community here. I’ve never said that.
But
I clarify that by saying, as much as I’ve never said that I believe in
transfer, let’s just throw them all out. I think we’re not living in a
one-way street. It’s a two-way street. In other words, if it’s
considered legitimate to say that, in the name of peace, I have to
leave, then it’s also legitimate to say that, in the name of peace, they
have to leave. Ok, but I don’t see that happening. Not this way and not
that way.
Like
I said, I don’t have any problems living with anybody. If anybody
wants, they can live here. I believe that they have to… The conditions
are very simple. They have to, number one, accept legitimacy. They have
to be willing to live within the framework of the state of Israel.
So you think here should remain part of the state of Israel?
Let me finish. And they cannot keep trying to kill me. In other words, today, that’s where the other one comes in [pointing to poster behind him]. You’re perceptive. You are, because most people miss it all. But today, I think, there are 22 Arab states that surround Israel. I’m not telling anybody… I’m not going to put a gun to anybody’s head and say they have to leave. But if they want to leave, they have somewhere to go.
If
they decide that they don’t want to live within the framework of the
state of Israel, then they have two choices, three choices. They can
either continue to do it and not like it. They can try to physically
rebel, i.e. continue the terror, continue to try to kill Jews. Or they
can leave. If they want to leave, I’m not going to stop them. If they
want to continue to try to kill us, then they have to know that we’re
not going to turn the other cheek. Not me, it’s not my job as a
civilian. It’s the job of the Israeli security forces to see to it, just
as any security force anywhere in the world, is supposed to make sure
that the state is safe for its civilians, that its citizens are safe,
that’s why we pay taxes, and that’s why we go to the army, and that’s
why we do what other citizens in any state have to do.
Do I think that they should remain within the framework of the state of Israel? Of course, I do.
So, you’re opposed to the two-state solution? Or would you be willing to live under Palestinian… in a Palestinian state?
I have a very cynical answer to that question because people ask me that question all the time. I say, of course I believe in a two-state solution, we get Israel and they can have Palestine, Texas. Of course, I reject the two-state solution. And I’ll tell you why I reject the two-state solution.
I have a very cynical answer to that question because people ask me that question all the time. I say, of course I believe in a two-state solution, we get Israel and they can have Palestine, Texas. Of course, I reject the two-state solution. And I’ll tell you why I reject the two-state solution.
Would I personally… The idea of would we stay in Palestine, as such, is theoretical, I don’t expect it to ever happen.
But if you were given that choice.
Look, I speak as a representative for the Jewish community. That’s a question which has never been discussed publicly or communally, and I have… Somebody asked me that question last week, on camera. And a friend of mine was sitting there, and I said we disagree. We both represent Hebron and we disagree… we have differing opinions.
I
want to live in Israel. I came to live in Israel, under Jewish
leadership. I didn’t come to live under the rule of anybody else,
certainly not an Arab. What would happen, I have no idea.
Why
do I reject the idea of a Palestinian state? There are all sorts of
different reasons. Let’s leave for a minute the religious reasons and
the nationalistic reasons, both of which are for me real and legitimate.
But let’s leave them for a minute. Let me ask you, ok, let’s just.
You’ve just landed from the moon, ok. You don’t know anything, except
that the way to peace in the Middle East is a two-state solution. So you
take a look at a map. A map of Israel, a very simple map. And you see
that up north, you’ve got these wonderful people called Hizbullah. And
they’re sitting right on top of you and you know that they have chemical weapons
.
Do they?
Oh yeah, unfortunately they do.
Israel has nuclear weapons, of course.
They have chemical weapons and they have missiles that can hit the middle of the country, and they love us. You come down a little bit and you’ve got the Syrians, and they’ve got the same thing plus. You come down a little bit further and you come to the state of Jordan. Today, Jordan is fairly stable. I hope it stays that way. With what’s going on in the Middle East today, it’s impossible to know what’s going to happen tomorrow. After Egypt has fallen and Syria is about to fall, and who knows what’ll happen there and what’s in store for Jordan.
And
you come down a little bit further and you’ve got the Egyptians. And
everything that I’ve been talking about as theory for the last 10 or 12
years is starting to turn into real life, ok, cuz who knows what will
happen when the [Muslim] Brotherhood takes over, and things start to
change there too. And it might not all change over night but, over a
period of a few years, let’s see where it goes there.
And,
of course, you come down to Gaza and you’ve got Hamas, with everything
that they’ve got. And the only side that really looks like it’s secure
is to the west, and there the only thing you’ve got is the
Mediterranean. So, that’s Israel, we’re surrounded by lots of really
good friends. And then, of course, we ignore the Iranians, who are still
trying to put together a nuclear bomb to kill us.
Let’s
say that that’s Israel. And then somebody comes and says, you know
what, we’re going to take the state of Israel and we’re going to make
another Arab state there. Ohh, good. Another people that love us are
going to have another state. They’re going to make what we have a little
bit smaller because what we have today is very small in any case. But
we’re going to make it a little bit smaller. We’re going to create a
situation whereby the border from the east to the west is about 10km [alternative view on defensibility of 1967 borders
], ok, and we’re going to have an… And then they
say but they’re going to be friends. They’re going to be Fatah. They’re
going to be good friends. They’re the peace partner.
So, he
goes on to the internet and he sees today, because you landed today
from the moon, that… what he pulls out of it today, which I saw this
morning, that it’s very much expected that, in the next elections, Hamas
is going to take over everything, ok.
So,
then he says, ahh, Hamas, they’re the ones shooting all the rockets
into Israel. Ohh, good. So, then we have another enemy state. So, we
have another state, they call it Palestine. It’s right there. And peace
has arrived. For six months. And then some joker wakes up one morning.
And he says, I don’t like it, it’s too quiet. We have to, you know, add a
little excitement to life. And he takes out his little stinger, and he
puts it on his shoulder and he goes outside, cuz he’s living up in
Samaria in the hills, up there and he looks west and he has a beautiful
view, every morning when he gets up, and he sees… He can see the
Mediterranean, he see Netanya and he sees all the way down to Ashkelon,
and in Ashkelon, he’s got a beautiful view, and every day, he really
gets a kick out of watching the planes take off and land in Ben Gurion.
One
day, he decides to cause a little excitement, and he takes out his new
little missile, which he bought yesterday, and he shoots down an
aeroplane. Or, I once wrote a sort of satirical article, in which the
people have changed but the attitudes remain the same, then it was with
Saddam Hussein, today, it could be one of the Ayatollahs who decide to
go and visit their cousin Muhammad in Jordan. You know when kings come,
they go with a big group, so he brings 50,000 soldiers with him, and
when they come to visit the king, he takes them on a tour of Palestine,
and he lines up the 50,000 soldiers on the border with Israel. And he
says, why don’t you go and take a look in Israel too. And what do we do
then?
You’re dealing with an existential threat to the only Jewish state which exists.
Well,
let’s assume that you’re reading of the situation is correct. But let’s
look at it from another perspective. How about those Israelis who fear
the“existential threat” to Israel from demographics
? For example, if Israel remains…
I understand, but it’s not true. Look, like we talked about earlier, you can play all sorts of games with numbers. And if you talk… I fully agree, if you talk to different people who deal with demography, you get totally different results.
I understand, but it’s not true. Look, like we talked about earlier, you can play all sorts of games with numbers. And if you talk… I fully agree, if you talk to different people who deal with demography, you get totally different results.
If you want to know what my answers are. You can accept or reject. Write down the name Yoram Ettinger and go to his website
and pull up his stuff. He does demographic work.
He’s a very bright man. He’s done a lot of examination of the
demographics here. And it’s all what we call… The idea of losing the
demographic battle is all nonsense.
Even
a few days ago, the Israeli bureau of statistics came out with a study,
which I don’t have on the Web, I’m sure it exists, I’m sure it’s up
there, but they just came out with a new study. They were asked to look
50 years into the future. And they came out with results according to
the numbers that they have today. And Israel doesn’t come close to
losing the demographic Israel that you have today.
There’s
one other factor which I don’t know if they took into account there.
The other factor is that, I think, in the next 10 to 20 years, you’re
going to find a tremendous influx of Jews from North America and Europe
into Israel.
Why do you think that? Do you think there’ll be rising anti-Semitism, or they’ll be drawn to Israel, or pushed out?
I think the primary reason they’re going to leave is that they’re going to be afraid, yeah.
I think the primary reason they’re going to leave is that they’re going to be afraid, yeah.
So you see anti-Semitism rising again?
It already has. I think they’re going to leave and they’re going to come over here.
It already has. I think they’re going to leave and they’re going to come over here.
You
mentioned earlier that you’re happy for your Arab neighbours, the
Palestinians, to live here as long as they accept Israeli rule. But are
you happy for them to live as fully equal citizens, in a secular state,
rather than…?
That’s a very good question. And I’ll tell you very honestly. I had an opinion and, today, I’m not a hundred percent sure what I really, today, think has to happen. I really don’t know. There are several sides to the coin. And there are also very different opinions within what you would call the whole nationalistic, you know, camp, as such.
That’s a very good question. And I’ll tell you very honestly. I had an opinion and, today, I’m not a hundred percent sure what I really, today, think has to happen. I really don’t know. There are several sides to the coin. And there are also very different opinions within what you would call the whole nationalistic, you know, camp, as such.
There
are people who have said, no problem, make them all Israeli citizens,
give them Israeli ID cards, let them vote, make them just like everybody
else. Personally, I’m not a hundred percent sure. I really don’t know
and my… The reason for my wavering is because I believe that democracy
is wonderful. I grew up in a democracy, in the United States. Israel is
not the democracy of the United States but it’s certainly more of a
democracy than you’ll find in other places.
But
I see democracy as a means to an end, not as an end in itself. And if
it’s a tool, and when it’s used correctly, it’s a wonderful tool. When
it’s misused, it’s extremely dangerous. And the best examples of that
are Germany and Gaza. There were many people that were against the
elections, and they took place and Hamas came into power. And there are
people that are very concerned about… The only reason that Hamas hasn’t
taken over Judea and Samaria is because the Israeli army is here. They
work together with the PA to prevent that from happening. Otherwise,
Judea and Samaria would’ve fallen a long time ago to Hamas, and people
are very concerned about the upcoming elections, because they’re not
interested in having Hamas take over here whatsoever.
If
that’s the result of democracy and the same thing is true with giving
all of the Arabs in Judea and Samaria and possibly Gaza Israeli
citizenship, what happens then? If you’re creating the tools for your
own destruction, I don’t believe in suicide. If I say go ahead and do it
and the end result of that is the demise of the state of Israel, then
why do it.
But
the ironic by-product of what you’re saying is that you’re advocating,
paradoxically and ironically, given the history of Jews, that Arabs,
whether Christian or Muslim, have to live as “dhimmis”?
You see, that’s why I said, I don’t know. I’m not saying today that I advocate this or that. There are major problems in all directions. And I don’t have the answers for everything. Look, you’re dealing with issues that are very, very complex. You’re dealing with religious issues, and nobody wants to compromise on religion. There’s never a people that want to compromise on religion. You’re dealing with political issues. You’re dealing with international issues. You’re dealing with things that touch on about every facet of life.
And,
so, for anybody to say, well, I have the answer. We’ll just have to do
this and everything will be okay. I wouldn’t take him seriously. There
is no such animal. You’re dealing with very, very complicated issues.
And I certainly don’t have the answers to everything.
I
think that there are certain things that can happen and develop that
can ease the situation. There are things that can cause it to erupt.
There are things that can happen that can cause it to settle. To have
all of the answers? I don’t have all the answers. I don’t pretend to
have all the answers. I can only do what I believe within the small
framework that I have. Whatever influence that has, it has. And, you
know, I do what I can do. I write. I take pictures. I talk to anybody
who wants to talk to me. I talk to you. I talk to other people. And I
don’t hide anything.
comments
No comments:
Post a Comment