Thread: Hope springs eternal

Originally Posted by Dwarven Pirate

Might be not the usual fare here, but it is good to see such a thing happening there these days.

The Arabist » Hamas and Fatah in the dock in Gaza drama

The most interesting part of the articel I thought was this:

"“The Nation” is the work of Palestinian dramatist Said Suirki and the “trial” is tagged with the number 48.67.2007 — referring to what the author sees as three seminal dates in the Palestinian tragedy."

The reason is the choice of dates. They are all instances where the Palestinians believe that they were victimized. 1948 is the year of the "Nakhba" during the Israeli War of Independence; 1967 is the year of the Six Day War, and 2007 the year of the victory of Hamas in Gaza. What's wrong with the focus on these dates? The problem is that the Palestinians and their supporters obsess about them to the exclusion of these dates: 47, 64, 2002. It's not simply a difference of dates. The choice of focus speaks volumes about the root of the conflict and the Arab attitude towards ending it.

1947 is the year that the Palestinians chose to go to war to destroy Jewish nationalism in the Levant which led directly to the Nakhba. 1964 is the year that the Palestinians chose to begin guerilla attacks against Israel in the hope of inciting a general Middle East war to destroy Israel that became the 1967 Six Day War. 2002 is the year that the Palestinians chose to iniate the Intifada that led directly to radicalizing Gaza and the Hamas victory in 2007.

The difference is the choice between taking responsiblity for the Palestinian situation or playing the victim.

If even "moderate" Japanese writers, historians, commentators and politicians continually harped on and decried the tragedy that befell Japan on August 6, 1945, without ever even mentioning December 7, 1941, I think everyone would know that there was a problem in their thinking. That disconnect from reality that fortunately has not afflicted Japanese culture and politics is alive and well in the Palestinians.

Originally Posted by Dwarven Pirate

Good point, surely, if we wish to use this event to criticize.

Do you agree though that it is refreshing to see that people are still culturally active, given what they have gone through? And that some dissent, at least, is alive and 'allowed'?

EDIT: Actually, what I got from the article was that it was critical of palestinian leadership, and that this is what was 'on trial'. Therefore, these dates would actually be in the author's view, BAD. I could be wrong, but I think the title is satirical.

It was not my intent to criticize you or the author of the play. Certainly, as you point out, it is a good thing that there is at least some dissent permitted. The issue that I raised goes to how much dissent is even contemplated, rather than what is allowed. I don't think that the author was intending to challenge the fundamental assumptions and myths of Palestinian existence, which is what the difference in dates is all about. He may have been attempting to do that, but it is impossible to know without reading the play. Instead, I suspect he was calling on Fatah and Hamas to stop fighting each other and start making Palestinian lives better, but in the context of the Palestinian mythos. If he was, for example, trying to say that Palestinians are responsible for their own statelessness, I doubt he would still be alive.