Rabbi Daniel Jackson of Israel writes on One Hand Clapping of his view - nearly universally shared by other Israelis - of the controversial security fence the country built between Israeli territory and the West Bank and some of Syria.
Read the whole post here.
Susan and I have been looking at land in the community of Yonatan. ... Looking around the lots, taking in the beauty of the evening, I commented to Efrat, the young woman showing us around, “It’s a pity about that fence.” “I agree,” she said, “but, our neighbors, the Syrians, have other ideas about us. What you call ‘crime’ in the States, our neighbors call ‘acts of resistance’.”
In Yonatan, it is the Syrians. In Ephrat in the Gush and Jerusalem, it is the Palestinians. In the Galil, it is Arab Israelis. Only the very largest cities and areas go without some sort of fence. Arab Israeli towns are built on the sides of very steep hills; utilizing the architectural style of feudal peasant towns clearly defensible from a frontal assault by marauding warlords and other terrorists. Jewish Israeli towns, however, are platted like suburbia throughout the US and Europe but with a controlled access gate across all entrances and a substantial fence (sometimes with a moat).
I posted last month of my own experiences traversing the barrier in Jerusalem. Of the West Bank's total barrier length of approx. 700 km, about five percent is a wall rather than a fence; some Israelis call it the Yasser Arafat Memorial Wall, since it was built in response to the Second Intifada after Arafat walked away from the Camp David peace conference in 2000.
That fence has been a no-brainer for years. Those that claim they don't work are nuts, historically good fences make good neighbors. Why else would fences exist? This idea that they for some unknown reason dont work is equivalent to someone suddenly claiming the bucket doesnt work after 100,000 years. Oh really?
The only argument i've ever really heard made against fences is that they arent perfect. Maybe not, but perfection is a ridiculous standard. Good fences would mitigate a lot of problems in this world. Our Mexican border for starters, and Iraqs borders for another. Its quite a lot cheaper than all the resources being spent trying to put the genies back in the bottles. Fences are in fact unrivaled in cost effectiveness. Heavy upfront investment, but huge savings down the line.
his view - nearly universally shared by other Israelis - of the controversial security fence
So there's no controversy about it in israel, right? They almost all agree?
I support the fence.
Having said that, I can't think of a Jewish Israeli town inside the Green Line with the gated fence and moat, and I can think of a lot of Israeli towns I've driven through. Just to pick the Galil: Shlomi, Rosh Haniqra, Metullah, Rosh Pina, Kiryat Shmona… Has the security situation changed that much or did the good rabbi misplace his map?
I dont think there is really any doubt that Israel is of two minds about the fence. Without question there is an Israeli political component not willing to give up the settlements or ceed any further land, green line or no. Probably more importantly is the economic argument- Israel relies on Palestinian labor and I suspect there is a quiet underlying feeling that cutting off Palestine from Israel would have heavy economic consequences.
None of these arguments should hold up the inevitable. Losing Sharon was a terrible blow to the future of Israel on many levels. If only Nixon could go to China, perhaps only Sharon could force the ambandonment of the settlements. Is there any appetite for bold actions with the current Israeli leadership?
Strange isn't it that the Jewish vote in the USA was 87% Democratic in 2006.
[NM: Bare link corrected.]
American Jews are one of the strongest bases of the Democratic Party.
Hate Democrats ???
Huh????
Andrew J Lazarus -- Are Jews to be denied the unity of their own people? Are they somehow inferior to say, Mexicans? Who wish to maintain the ethnic and cultural makeup of their nation? I.E. La Raza?
If Mexicans can celebrate their uniqueness and prevent say masses of Guatemalans from moving over their border (and they do) why can't Israelis?
Moreover, Israelis being wealthy and middle class are averse to bold action like all others in that class (Swedes, Japanese, Americans, the Swiss). They want to be left alone. Unfortunately like all middle class people living next to poor and dangerous ones they won't be left alone.
If Mexicans can celebrate their uniqueness and prevent say masses of Guatemalans from moving over their border (and they do) why can't Israelis?
Good thought. Similarly, lots of white southern americans wanted to live their lives without having to deal with blacks. They were fine with having separate schools and country clubs and libraries and so on for blacks, but they wanted to celebrate their uniqueness without having to have blacks celebrate it with them. I guess the big difference was they lost the war.
I talked to an old man who sold subdivisions and such that were chartered to not allow jews. He made his fortune selling land that he wouldn't have been allowed to live in if he wanted to. But I guess he didn't want to. He was fine with having lots of racists living off by themselves where they didn't bother him.
Officially we don't do that kind of thing in this country any more, but that's no reason why other countries shouldn't if they want to.
The fence has made it that much harder for Iraelis to be killed, massacred, maimed, intimidated, destroyed. Not impossible mind you (thank God---and of course, to that end, new technologies are being developed), but harder. Quite a bit harder.
Therefore, the fence is, de facto, an evil thing.
But how can we turn this evil thing to advantage?
Well, we can use it to further deligitimize the Jewish State (already hanging by a thread, wobbling, waiting to topple, to collapse, to disappear---it's just a matter or time). We can stress the apartheid aspect of the wall (Jimmy Carter is a true brother); we can stress the suffering of those blocked by checkposts (and the suffering of our people, generally); we can make comparisons between this Israeli wall---this apartheid wall---and the Berlin Wall, whose destruction was welcomed by all men of good faith; we can stress that the wall is merely another attempt by the Zionists to grab Arab land; we can stress the relative quiet that has occurred since the wall was built---that Israelis have not been attacked like they used to be (thereby mocking the whole point of having a wall and undermining its rationale); we can stress the historical inhumanity of Israel's policies towards Palestinians; we can stress that the entire Zionist project is colonialist and racist, a crime against the Palestinians, against all Arabs, against Islam and against humanity; we can stress that America's reputation is suffering a thousand-fold by supporting such an apartheid, racist, Zionist regime (Walt & Mearsheimer are also true brothers).
For starters, at least, this is what we can do. One must turn disadvantage to opportunity.
Justice! Peace! Resistance! Freedom!
J Thomas --
Two points. One is that Blacks are citizens of the US. Guatemalans are not citizens of Mexico (which btw will not let them in and hunt down and sometimes shoot those who cross it's southern border). MEXICO has a whopping big southern border fence. But then some animals are more equal than others.
Secondly, the end of Jim Crow coincides with the suburbanization of the South. Vastly reducing the risk that the end of Segregation entailed (political punishment by Black majorities allowing unchecked crime/violence against whites). As much as Martin Luther King Jr, the end of Jim Crow may be to suburbanization vastly eliminating that risk. Pre-desegregation Southern Cities and elsewhere had not separation but close physical contact of Whites with Blacks. Hence Jim Crow and the KKK to eliminate political risk. The old saw, that in the South you could get as close as you wanted, but never big, and in the North as big as you wanted, but never close, comes to mind. After all, Rosa Parks was asked to give up her seat to a WHITE MAN. Which would be unthinkable today -- a white man riding a bus filled with mostly Black people.
This revealing comment, i.e. non-citizens of a state somehow have a magical "right" to move to another and have the rights of all citizens is a non-starter for those who don't want a ready supply of subservient labor. Among other things working men and women see their wages destroyed by cheap labor, housing prices skyrocketing through expensive land, their children facing either ethnic violence or an ethnic favoritism in most walks of life: government, business, schools, etc. [Witness the struggle in LA Unified by Black parents who want school business in English and Mexican parents who believe it's "racist" to conduct business in English.]
This is the Liberal flaw: creating winners (rich people with cheap labor and no middle class upward mobility threat, immigrant groups) and losers (everyone else). In Israel the fence has been accompanied by temporary immigrants ironically from Easter Europe, many who had grandparents and great-grandparents possibly persecuted Jews [Bulgaria an honorable exception] and now seek economic salvation as guest workers. Japan of course allows no mass immigration -- they are using mechanization whenever possible.
Frost was right: good fences make good neighbors.