BSG-Palestinian parallel

I am a fan of the sci-fi TV series "Battlestar Galactica" (BSG). I'm not sure why I like this show. I discovered the show only at the beginning of season three. It's a drama ... in space. It is a Peabody Award winner and has excellent writing. Here is a synopsis from wiki to give you a little background:

Battlestar Galactica continues from the 2003 mini-series to chronicle the journey of the last surviving humans from the Twelve Colonies of Kobol after their nuclear annihilation by the Cylons. The survivors are led by President Laura Roslin and Commander William Adama in a ragtag fleet of ships with the Battlestar Galactica, an old but powerful warship, as its command ship. Pursued by Cylons intent on wiping out the remnants of the human race, the survivors travel across the galaxy looking for the fabled and long-lost thirteenth colony: Earth.

At the end of season 2 the fleet decides to settle on an in habitable planet called New Caprica. The Cylons eventually find them and take over the planet occupying the humans already living there. The humans' standard of living wasn't that great before the occupation but it got even worse during the military and brutal occupation by the Cylons. The humans' had a corrupt and ineffective leadership before and during the occupation. During the begining of season 3, those who were in the human military start leading a resistance. One time, they sent a suicide bomber to the human police graduation ceremony in order to kill the puppet governor for colaborating with the Cylons. Many humans (collaborators) died but the corrupt governor didn't. This led to a tighter crack down on the human population. The Cylons were contemplating whether to kill all the humans, try to come to a peaceful understanding, or just leave. After a succesful and daring rescue by the rest of the human fleet, the humans flee the occupation and the planet looking for a new future. The Cylons decided to stop pursuing them. During and after the escape some that led the resistance killed some humans believed to have collaborated with the Cylons. They held secret informal (illegal) tribunals to persecute and kill those who they believe to have collaborated. The new leader and President of the fleet Roslin decides to pardon all people except the puppet governor of the Cylons (though he is later acquitted of all charges).

One of the character's on the show is a former terrorist and prisoner who was released and then became Vice President (but as a political rival to the main characters) of the fleet's make-shift government. In the latest show (412 Disquiet Follows My Soul) he has this monologue about the latest crisis in the story arc which I think gives an insight on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

In prison, you start to confuse your hopes and dreams with reality. You start to believe that because you want something to happen ... for all the peel and red ... you start to believe that it will happen. You start to live on wishes ... the way things should be rather than the way they are ... all because you can't face reality. The leaders of this fleet are succumbing to wishful thinking because they can't face reality and the reality is that the Roslin/Adama Administration has led us nowhere. Earth was a mirage ... a fantasy they tangled in front of us for four long years in order to maintain power ... a fantasy the dreamed up as a way hold on and control the government over the democratic wishes of the population. So now ... what is the effectless and dispirited leadership is doing to solidify their position after failing us so miserably? ... Turning to the Cylons ... the Cylons, for help. Aren't the Cylons the reason we are out here in the first place? Aren't they the enemy? Or are they suddenly our friends if that keeps Roslin/Adama in power?

Later in the episode he says:

Every citizen has the right to protect themselves from oppression. Take whatever measure you think is necessary.

The parallel between the BSG and Palestinian story is remarkable. I don't know if the producers and writers of the show did this on purpose but I think they have great insight on human behavior like all great literature.

Eyal Press

I have previously spoken about the blog Ta-Nehisi Coates recently but now I want to introduce it as a recurring feature on this blog. On January 5th, 2009 the main writer of the blog (which I am aware of - just found this blog) introduces a new writer named Eyal Press to write about the war in Gaza.

Here's Eyal in his own words:

Growing up, I visited Israel every summer, often traveling through the country with my cousin and his friends in Hashomer Hatzair, a progressive Zionist youth group. My attachment to the country runs deep. But I'm also among the many progressive Jews who went to the college when the first Palestinian Intifada erupted and who have come to view the occupation as a calamity. I'm not a pacifist but I've seen enough wars go awry (Lebanon in '82 and 2006, Iraq...) to be deeply skeptical.

My grandfather was a socialist-Zionist who fled Bialystok for Palestine in the 1920s. Had he not done so, he almost certainly would have shared the fate of relatives who stayed behind and didn't survive World War II, which is one reason I don't run with the crowd on the left that views Zionism simply and solely as a colonialist movement, forgetting the part about Jews being murdered and persecuted relentlessly for centuries on end. (It had a colonial element, to be sure, but it was also a liberation struggle.)

Anyway, I find this guy interesting and I'll be talking/analyzing what he and other commentators on that blog have to say. They seem to have a healthy discussion over there, unlike Mondoweiss.com, RichardSilverstein.com and even Digg.

Jewish and Palestinian Americans speak on the situation in Gaza

Ali Damah (Jordanian) from the organization, MidEastYouth, posted these videos of Jewish-, Palestinian-, and other Americans speaking about the situation in Gaza, on a local Fox affiliate in Florida. Considering that this is a "low-status TV station," the quality of the discussion was excellent; more content, less propaganda. The Palestinian woman on this show is intelligent and very open in the discussion. She doesn't place all the blame for the situation on Israel, but blames Hamas as well, while still expressing the Arab anger over the Israeli incursion into Gaza. She has a clear and thorough understanding of the situation in Gaza, in particular, as well as the general Middle East.

Another person who spoke on the show (via telephone) was a Christian missionary working in Gaza. She said that Hamas is hiding in their basements and civilian buildings. She said, "they are hiding in the people ... if they loved the people they would get away from the people." She also said that Hamas is supplying aid/food with families in exchange for young recruits. Don't forget Hamas raided UN aid trucks intended for the Gaza families. This is what Israel has been saying all along and now you have an on-the-scene, independent observer saying the same. It's tragic.

Was Hamas democratically elected?

AlJazeera English has recently broadcast a discussion Sir David between a Hamas spokesperson and a former Israeli ambassador to the United States, about the current situation in Gaza. The ambassador makes a good rebuttal to the claim that Hamas was democratically elected. In Iraq and Kosovo, parties had to disarm before running in elections. Hamas (and Hezbollah as well) did not disarm before running in elections and still maintain their armed forces. Can you imagine the Democrats and Republicans each with an armed militia? Instead of filibusters they would have skirmishes. It's chaotic and a democratic society can't operate this way.

When I watch these AlJazeera videos there are many times that I want the moderator or an Israeli spokespersons to ask the Arabs certain question or tell the audience to think about something. For once, my thoughts were answered. The Israeli ambassador told the audience to look at Hamas' charter online.

In, the second part of the program (Frost Over the World), Sir David has a Palestinian and a Jew familiar with Israeli politics in the studio, on the same sofa. I think Israelis and Palestinians need more discussion around coffee tables. Here are a few notes:

1. The Palestinian said that a Hamas official told him that Hamas' infrastructure hadn't been dented. I was thinking, "Is he crazy? This is the kind of delusional thinking that brought the Palestinians nowhere."

2. The Palestinian said that Arafat accepted the two state solution. "Oh really?"

3. The Palestinian is correct that Israel's settlement policy harms the peace process. But I think that Israel is having an internal discussion on what kind of state it wants to be. The Palestinians have to start thinking about what sort of state they want to have in the future. I don't think that this internal discussion is premature because it will help Israel, mediators, and the international community garner support for their respective peace camps if the Palestinians express that they want a secular and peaceful state. Unfortunately, the Palestinians overwhelmingly "voted" for a radical Islamist and antisemitic organization. This told all Jewish Israelis that Hamas and this new "face" of the Palestinian cause isn't about peace and improving the lives of Palestinians (just as Hitler did by involving Germany in a war), but is about the destruction of the Jews.

4. The British Jew is being very polite. I think that being face-to-face with one's counterpart softens us up, helps communication and the peace process. Maybe it's because he's British and not Israeli. Israelis aren't afraid to say what they think even if it harms someone's feelings.

I wish the Brit told the Palestinian, "What did you expect when your people elected an antisemitic terrorist group right next to a Jewish state?"

5. The Palestinian says that he can't accept Israel because they stole his land (i.e., 1948). He says he can accept a 15-year "hudna" (which means "cease-fire" but can also mean "calm"). Most observers see a hudna as just a time-out, in which for Hamas will rearm; such a cease fire would never last.

6. The Palestinian says that he can drop the gun but can't "abandon the dream". The problem is that the Palestinians still haven't found a way to follow the dream without arms. I wanted to ask him, "Okay, you dropped the gun. Now what? Tell me how you and the rest of the Palestinian peace camp will move forward so the Israeli peace camp can talk to you and support you."

7. The Palestinian also says that the first step must be Israel recognizing Palestinian "victimhood" caused by the creation of the State of Israel. I think Israeli historians such as Benny Morris and also Israelis in the media have recognized this tragedy, but Israel as a nation is unwilling to just pull back and compensate Palestinians, because it doesn't believe they will really drop the gun and pick up the hammer to build up their new state. Israel's withdrawl from Gaza and Hamas' rise is an example of that.

8. "When you shout at someone and say that there is no dispute, there is obviously a dispute" is the response the British Jew makes to the Palestinians' statement on the Palestinian narrative of 1948.

My return to the blog

It is time for me to return. I have been following Ha'Aretz, Jerusalem Post, and AlJazeera (English language) report on the current war in Gaza, "Operation Cast Lead." I have somewhat withdrawn from the internet lately. I needed some peace of mind. Many people in Israel and Gaza are praying for some peace of mind as well, not to mention actual peace also.

I'm sure all people who don't live in caves know something about what is happening in Gaza right, now so I won't repeat the details. There is one item in particular that I want to point out: , a debate on AlJazeera from December 25 a couple days before the war in Gaza began. Here are some things I want to point out:

1. The Israeli pundit in the video expresses the general feelings of Jewish Israelis. The Israeli public approves of the air-strikes but far fewer approve a ground operation. The Israeli expresses that feeling.

2. I saw this war coming from a mile away.

3. Is the Palestinian pundit a member of Fatah or Hamas? He isn't so much defending the Hamas regime as he is the Palestinian cause of "Resistance," which I believe has harmed the Palestinians more than it has the Israelis. It's interesting that Palestinians seem to be afraid to condemn other Palestinians in the media. It reminds me of a passage in "From Beirut to Jerusalem" by Thomas Friedman, where a Palestinian faction broke away from the PLO because they thought that Arafat and his cronies were ineffective but were quickly crushed because of two reasons. The first is that they received support from Syria, which delegitimized this faction. The second is that they criticized the current official "face" of the Palestinians, which was Arafat. Fatah is going to disappear unless they vehemently blame Israel instead of Hamas. This is largely because, for the moment, Hamas and the bleeding and dying people of Gaza are the faces of the Palestinian cause. In my opinion, Palestinian self-criticism is non-existent and would continue to derail the Palestinian cause, which has been hijacked by radical Islamists. Arafat the Corrupt was the first face of Palestine. Hamas the Terrorist is new face.

4. Egyptian support, at least at the official level, is unprecedented and somewhat embarrassing. Israel is finding allies in the Middle East because of a common enemy - radical Islamist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah. Jordan remains silent, as it always has been but Egypt has been vocal in placing the blame on Hamas. It's worth pointing out that the main opposition to the government in Egypt is the Muslim Brotherhood. And guess who is a wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. That's right - Hamas.

Riz Khan talks to Thomas Friedman

Today Thomas Friedman talked to Riz Khan on Aljazeera English about his new book Hot, Flat, and Crowded. (Note: the link sends you to part two which is actually the beginning of the interview, then go here, and then here to follow it in order.) Thomas Friedman is my favorite columnist. His columns appear regularly on Wednesdays and Sundays in the New York Times. I don't know many columnists but I was impressed by him from the very start when his columns used to appear in the Baltimore Sun like 5 years ago.

I have many criticsms of Al Jazeera but I like Riz Khan. He's a terrific journalist and I would probably not watch Al Jazeera English (youtube channel) if he wasn't there.

Now lets talk about Friedman's book(s) and how it is related to middle east peace. I believe that engagement of debate and conversation between Israelis and Arabs is one of the keys to Middle East peace. And Friedman's book is about how the world is "Flat", how the obstacles for people to communicate and work with each other have greatly diminished. What he means (he makes the following point in the interview) is that he, an American Jew, can talk to Khan, who works for an Arab news network, and get a call from Avraham Burg, who is a former speaker of the Knessest and former head of the Jewish Agency, all on Al Jazeera, thanks to the innovation of information technology.

Al Jazeera interviews Shimon Peres

Wow, talking about awkward. Ghida Fakhry of Al Jazeera English interviewed Israeli President Shimon President and they talked about several issues. Fakhry asked Peres several questions, mainly about Iran's nuclear ambitions and the status of peace talks with the Palestinians, Syrians, and the Lebanese. She also asked about Israel's alleged nukes.

This interview seemed poorly managed by the interviewer. She asked the same question several times and it seemed to annoy Peres. It looked like the interviewer was using the same Arab rhetoric. Riz Khan would have done a better interview.

I've been talking a lot lately about the Arab media. I usually like Al Jazeera English, a Qatar owned news agency, because I like Riz Khan and how they have regular debates with Israeli and Arab pundits, but that maybe because I have such low standards for them.

I do have several issues with Al Jazeera other than the obvious bias in their reporting. First, when ever they have a news report on Israel and they show a clip of Israelis, they usually show datiim or haredim which are minorities in Israel and don't truly represent the Israeli populace.

Second, they held a birthday party for Samir Kuntar. I think Riz Khan and some others protested this.

Third, in May they ran this special about Yaffo/Jaffa, Palestine Street - The Lost Bride, they characterize the 1948 totally out of context. Reporting through omission. I have one thing to say about journalists in the interview and the one in the Jaffa piece. Eze chaticot.

Durban II - Anti-Racism or Jew bashing?

Al Jazeera English recently had a debate on Durban II, a controversial anti-racism conference, between Hillel Neuer, the executive director of UN Watch, and Massoud Shadjareh, the Chair of the Islamic Human Rights Commission.

I'm all for an anti-racism conference but the problem is who is leading it. This conference is just a platform organized by some of the most intolerant and oppressive regimes to criticize some of the most democratic and free countries in the world in the name of Human Rights while ignoring the suffering of their own people.

I wrote earlier about the control and censorship Arab governments have over the Arab media. What is worse that even organizations such as the Islamic Human Rights Commission fail to criticize Arab governments on human rights. I went to their website and the only country they criticize on the front page is Israel, multiple times. This is alarming. The only way Arab societies will adopt a tradition of self criticism is if Arab media become independent.

The key to promote Arab liberalism, freedom, and equality

Robert F. Worth of the NY Times wrote this great this piece on how Arab television has shocked many in Arab and Muslim world.

Here are a few interesting parts from the article:

Two shows about Bedouin history were dropped because they apparently offended the sensitivities of tribal leaders in Saudi Arabia, and two Syrian shows were canceled after they treaded too close to criticizing members of the Syrian government.

....

Perhaps the best example is “Noor,” the popular Turkish series that ran over the summer. The show violated Arab cultural taboos in a number of ways: besides having Muslim characters who drank wine with dinner and had premarital sex, one of the male protagonist’s cousins had an abortion.

Perhaps more important, the male protagonist, called Muhannad in the Arabic version, treats his wife as an equal and supports her career as a fashion designer.

....

But the show appears to have been the single most popular television drama ever shown in the Arab world. The finale, broadcast on Aug. 30, drew 85 million viewers, according to surveys by the Middle East Broadcasting Corporation, the network that showed it. Of those, more than 51 million were women over 15, more than half the total number of adult women in the entire Arab world.

You can read the entire article in the link I provided above.

I was shocked about how many Arab women watched "Noor". Even in Gaza, which is controlled by the Islamic fundamentalist Hamas, they watch "Noor" as is reported in another NY Times article, Watching 'Friends' in Gaza.

Could TV be the medium for the West to sway the minds and hearts of Arab world? Unfortunately, this 60 Minutes report about the US funded Arab language TV network "Al Hurra" shows the difficulty for America to appeal to the Arab world. The US governement spent $100 million a year since 2004 on this project and reached very little success with perhaps less than 1% of the viewers tuning in to Al Hurra.

So how can the West use TV as a medium to promote freedom and equality in the Middle East? By pressuring Arab governments to give independence to Arab TV networks to cover social and politcial issues. On June 8th of this year, Al Jazeera English reported on the Egyptian governmental crackdown on independent satelite TV networks and TV shows that are critical of the Egyptian governemnt. I have been watching the Al Jazeera English channel on Youtube for months and they rarely criticize Arab governments. If they are going to criticize any country, it is mostly about Israel.