Categorised | Columns

Getting emotional about Palestine

ON whichever side we may be on, it seems almost impossible not to be emotional about the Palestinian issue. The sources of these emotions may vary, from identification either with the Palestinian or Israeli side, or simply from the sheer frustration at the unjustness of the situation.

What’s clear is that amidst the emotion, there is a lot of fuzziness about the real issues, and much inconsistency on principles. In particular, would all Malaysians who advocate Palestinian human rights apply this principle within Malaysia? Would those who decry the treatment of Palestinian refugees, for example, also be as indignant at the treatment of refugees in Malaysia?

Palestinians and Orang Asli

On 26 May 2010, the Federal Court recorded a settlement that effectively recognised the native title rights of Orang Asli. The Temuans of Kampung Bukit Tampoi fought in court for 14 years to gain compensation for the land that was taken from them for the construction of a highway to KL International Airport. They argued that the compensation they received, which was only for the crops and orchards they lost, was insufficient because they had also lost the land that they had lived on for centuries. The Federal Court agreed with them, and thus set a precedent for Orang Asli to claim their native title rights over their customary or adat land.

Sagong Tasi of the Temuan, with Orang Asli village in background

Sagong Tasi of the Temuan (Pic courtesy of Suaram); background image: Orang Asli in Kampung Rembai, Selangor (Pic by Adzla @ Flickr)

Those who believe in justice, including myself, welcomed this landmark decision. We cannot dispute that Orang Asli have been here since long before any of our ancestors even thought of packing their bags to move to Malaya. Neither can we dispute that Orang Asli are now a marginalised minority in their own land, beset with many social and health problems, perhaps only slightly better off than Australian Aboriginals.

But here is where the compartmentalisation begins. There are many Malaysians who would argue in support of the rights of Palestinians to their own land. But would they ever apply the same principles to Orang Asli or to any other indigenous peoples within our own country, whose lands are being encroached on, if not occupied by others? I suspect not.

On the other hand, there are probably also those who, while defending native rights to land, have no sympathy for the Palestinians’ own rights to their land. They’d cite historical “facts” that the Israelis (and there seems to be no differentiation between Israelis and Jews) had been there for some 2,000 years as the basis for their claim to the land. Even if this “fact” were true, and regardless that Israel as a state only came into being in 1948, does this justify more recent confiscation of land from people who have also been there for centuries?

Myth of the “native”

Artwork of Australians aboriginals

Christopher Pease, Law of Refraction, 2008/2009 (Artwork © Christopher Pease, courtesy of Goddard de Fiddes Gallery; photographed by Robert Frith)

Today, many countries are made up of “natives” and migrants. And in many of these, native peoples are often violently displaced by migrants (the New World particularly comes to mind). But after some time, this mixture of peoples becomes irrefutable fact.

This is why calling fellow citizens “pendatang” is so reprehensible. If long-term claims to land are the only moral criteria for citizenship rights, then everyone except Orang Asli and indigenous peoples of Sabah and Sarawak must vacate our country. In fact, every non-Aboriginal must vacate Australia, every non-Native American the US and Canada, and every non-Maori, New Zealand.

On the other hand, as the Australian political scientist Prof Dennis Altman points out, “The majority of Israeli Jews [today] are born in Israel. To deny that Israel is their homeland is equivalent to arguing that all non-indigenous Australians should leave, not a position I have ever heard from even the most passionate local opponent of Zionism.”

The idea that a homeland should be reserved for a people by virtue of their race and religion should be repugnant to all who believe in democracy and human rights, especially here in Malaysia. Yet that is exactly what Israel is – every person of the Jewish faith anywhere in the world is entitled to Israeli citizenship.

The Passover Seder, the ritual that marks the beginning of the Jewish holiday of Passover, always includes the refrain “Next year in Jerusalem”, a phrase which disturbs Altman. “We could, after all, settle in Jerusalem next year,” he notes, “but many Palestinians who desperately want to return to their ancestral homes cannot.”

And while many sympathise with the plight of Palestinians forced to live in refugee camps for generations, in Malaysia there seems to be no recognition that we even have refugees within our borders. On the other hand, one also wonders if those who work on the refugee problem in Malaysia feel any resonance with Palestinian refugees. At least our refugees have some chance of resettlement in a third country; Palestinians do not.

Problem of democracy?

Then there is the problem of Hamas, which many claim to be the main obstacle to peace and therefore the justification for the continued blockade of Gaza. But this is the problem with democratic elections: sometimes people vote for those we personally don’t like because they like the alternative even less. Just as many Malaysians voted for the untested Pakatan Rakyat in March 2008 because they cannot stand the Barisan Nasional; this is what happens in democracy.

Lieberman (Wiki commons)

Or, as Altman again points out, “If we are to praise Israel for its democratic system, which gives a racist party – Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu – veto power over a potential government, how do we dismiss elections that give power to Hamas, despite its undoubted support of terror?”  A further irony is that Datuk Ibrahim Ali is probably the ideological twin brother of Lieberman, now Israel’s Foreign Minister.

The point is that, when it comes to Palestine, so many parties are inconsistent, selectively choosing to apply human rights principles where it suits their specific agendas. But if there is to be a universal standard of human rights, then all sides must adhere to it, regardless of race and religion. And when analysed calmly and rationally, the struggle for Palestine is about land, not religion. The greatest injustice is for all sides to fall for that red herring.

Marina Mahathir is an activist, writer, and blogger who constantly needs more outlets to vent because there is never a shortage of issues to vent about.

The Nut Graph needs your support

Read previous Ventings columns

Post to Twitter Post to Google Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

8 Responses to “Getting emotional about Palestine”

  1. Farouq Omaro says:

    Tun Dr Mahathir speaks out strongly against Israeli “occupation”. But at the same it was during his rule that hundreds of thousands of Indonesian and Filipino illegal immigrants got citizenship from the backdoor. Now these foreigners open up land anywhere they want, their children compete for bumiputera scholarships with the natives, they peddle goods illegally, they rob, steal and rape locals, they trespass on the land of locals, they are relocated to local villages.

    I have no sympathy for the political cause of the Palestinians, though I sympathise with them on humanitarian grounds. I find it amusing that Israel is a demon to Muslims but China and Russia are not! Are Palestinians more human than Uighurs and Chechens?

    • rr says:

      It’s just a ruse to direct tension and anger away from them. It amazes me they should go completely nuts over this. They should watch more of their own material for example the poor people living in Malaysia on TV3 already bursting at the seams and receiving insufficient funding. Because welfare ain’t sexy like ill-needed subs fighters, subside the foreign students! What? Hard to rip the people off through welfare, there’s no chance of profit.

      Look after our own backyard first what! The reports of the Palestinians firing rockets into Isreal is not sexy for the mainstream propaganda TV stations. Also remember it is both their faults. See how the politicians have twisted this.

  2. Mellissa says:

    Just to add, during the time of the Balfour Declaration, Palestine was home to approximately 690,000 Arabs and only 85,000 Jews as well.

  3. M.O.T.U says:

    Am surprised we can feel so much for people whom we’ve never really met but yet feel nothing for our fellow Malaysians.

  4. Philips says:

    I wonder…all the fuss, all the noise, all these cries for Palestinians.

    Is it truly and honestly on humanitarian grounds??

    OR is it simply because the victims are mostly Muslims?

    Or is it simply because its pure hatred towards Jews and Israel?

    I wonder…emm.

  5. Ida Bakar says:

    Well said that the Red Herring here is religion. It is about land (if it were about religion why did the Israelis bombed a synagogue in Southern Lebanon that Hezbollah paid to repair?)

    The polar opposite of Malaysians’ opinion regarding Israel-Palestine can be explained as thus:

    1. Israel-Palestine is a middle-east concern and by default a Malay-muslim concern, so why should the rest of us who are not buying into the Malay-Muslim agenda care a jot. Better see what so-call the mouth-piece of the free-world actually think; turn on the FoxNews and CNN. [I also put the blame on those politicians who sought to make political capital out of this but have been silent on the plight of the Orang Asli, the Penans,the dispossessed Tamils, the Rohingya refugees, etc.]

    2. Palestinians are part of the wider Muslim ummah and the Jews are Jews, ergo we support their cause. This sort of opinion detracts from the argument that the Israelis are acting against international law, not to mention moral norms in their dealings with the Palestinians; and hence perpetuate the opposite view above.

    When it comes to Israel-Palestine, Malaysians do need a bit of education. Even in Viva-Palestina Malaysia site there is no link on the historical facts (I’m talking about modern era not Biblical one), no links on Israel human rights groups [http://www.btselem.org/English/index.asp] or anything to describe the dire health situations in Gaza and West Bank [http://www.phr.org.il/default.asp?PageID=4].

    So, (many) Malaysians are in ignorance and make up their minds based on their worldviews which are formed along ethno-religious lines.

  6. Farouq Omaro says:

    Dear Philip,

    I have the same feeling as you do. Would Malaysians be as emotional if Israel was not Jewish, and Palestine was not Arab Muslim? Chechens and Uighurs are Muslims but not Arab. Tibetans and southern Sudanese are not even Muslims. See the reactions?

  7. Shane says:

    “If long-term claims to land are the only moral criteria for citizenship rights, then everyone except Orang Asli and indigenous peoples of Sabah and Sarawak must vacate our country. In fact, every non-Aboriginal must vacate Australia, every non-Native American the US and Canada, and every non-Maori, New Zealand.”

    Wow – well put. Good article, this is something I’ve been thinking about for ages. Most people live in countries which were conquered off earlier peoples at some time.


Most Read (Past 3 Months)

Most Comments (Past 3 Months)

  • None found

Advertisement


<

Advertisement


<
  • The Nut Graph

 

Switch to our mobile site