Choosing words carefully
by Ray Hanania
There is one important fundamental about truth: Genuine truth gives one the power to tolerate even
the most heinous criticism. Tolerance of criticism is a sign of confidence. Intolerance is a symptom that
what you believe may not really be true. So throw the toughest, harshest argument against what I
believe, because I have faith in my own truth. Do you?
The Middle East is ripe with intolerant views that reflect the insecurity of people who refuse to see the
truth. And the first truth assaulted is existence. By denying one's existence, it becomes easy to respond
to provocations with violence. It's easy to kill something that doesn't exist. Easy to deny something that
doesn't exist. And easy to explain to your own people when things don't go your way that it's their
nonexistence that is the problem, rather than your own failure.
Palestinians and Israelis have been denying each others' existence for years.
The late Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir declared: "There was no such thing as Palestinians." Israelis
still argue that Palestinians don't exist. Arabs do the same, insisting Israel does not exist. They refer to it
as "the Zionist entity". Well, if Israel doesn't exist, how can it be an entity? Why are so many people
afraid of something that doesn't exist? When denying existence doesn't work, people turn to denying
the celebrations of existence. Every year, Palestinians and Israelis mark 14 May in different ways. For
Israelis, who mark Israel's creation using the Jewish calendar, it's a celebration. For Palestinians, the
date is one of mourning.
Both sides take the reaction of the other as an offence rather than with understanding. Arabs see
Israelis celebrating their victory in anger. Israelis watch as Palestinians commemorate their failure as a
tragedy. So Jews are prohibited from celebrating Israel's existence in Arab countries, and Israel is moving
to adopt laws prohibiting Palestinians from celebrating the nakba [the Arabic term for the events of
1948, meaning "catastrophe"]. When banning the words that address existence doesn't work, people
turn to using words that hurt.
One word that hurts Jews is apartheid. Many Jews refuse to even speak the word itself, referring to it as
the A-word in much the same way that Americans revile the pejorative racist description of black
people, as the N-word. The word apartheid has more power to hurt than its actual meaning, which is
why Palestinians seem to have glommed on to it. What is the word apartheid and why are we fighting
over it?
The word apartheid surfaced in, of all years, 1948 as the name of a political party in South Africa that
symbolised the official policy of segregating blacks from whites. In the 1950s, '60s and '70s, apartheid
evoked a sinister meaning and became a bludgeon the world used to strike down South Africa's
separation of the races. South Africa's racist white regime fell and the man it had imprisoned for 25
years, Nelson Mandela, became the new South Africa's first black president. I can understand how
Israelis fear the word. It invokes the issue of separation-a word Israelis have used to describe the wall. It
plays to Arab claims that Israel is a racist country that discriminates against non-Jews.
Its first victim was Jimmy Carter, who while president ushered in the first peace accord between Israel
and Egypt. He wrote a book that used the A-word in the title. I think Carter is one of the most reputable
people in the world: the most caring, genuine human being who ever became a leader. But like many
Arabs, Carter exaggerated the problem by using the word. Carter tried to explain he wasn't talking about
Israel, but about how Israel's occupation of the West Bank evoked images of apartheid. Israelis and Jews
around the world recoiled in anger and responded with punitive attacks against his character. Although
Carter has backed down, the rejectionist Arabs have not. Rejectionist and extremist Palestinians and
their Arab allies have launched "apartheid week" to attack Israel. Although they are a minority they have
built up a mirage of public support by exploiting the unanswered anger of the majority in the Arab
world.
The word apartheid does not really apply accurately to the Palestinian-Israel conflict. The word
occupation does. But the rejectionists no longer like the word occupation. Apartheid symbolises the
creation of one state, while occupation fuels the movement to create two.
In misusing the word apartheid, the rejectionists and their angry, blind followers are pushing toward reenacting the transformation of South Africa in Israel and Palestine. Palestinians who support "apartheid
week" do so either out of sinister hatred of Jews, or out of blind, unreasoning anger that simmers
because they can't properly vent. The inability to release pent up anger empowers the rejectionist
minority but stems from the failures of Palestinians and Arab leadership. When Arabs couldn't defeat
Israel, they turned toward demonization. And when demonization didn't work enough, they simply
exaggerated the truth. Exaggeration is a common trait among Arabs and Israelis both.
It's not easy for Israelis to deal with. Israelis also come in two categories, those who hate Arabs and
those who are angry with Arabs but don't know how to deal with the issue of justice and compromise.
Most Israelis simply denounce anyone who uses the word apartheid as anti-Semitic - another abused
word used as a bludgeon for those who criticise Israel. The word anti-Semitic is to Palestinians what
apartheid is to Israelis.
I could ask Palestinians, "Won't it make the creation of a Palestinian state that much harder to achieve if
they put all their bets on the word apartheid?" I could ask Israelis, "Doesn't it show a weakness in your
beliefs if you are so afraid of one simple word?"
Maybe the answer is that both Palestinians and Israelis live in the dark shadows of one real truth-that
they have done terrible things to each other over the years. What frightens me more than the violence
that has wracked the region over the past century is when people start attacking the use of words. Is it
anti-Semitic to criticise Israel? No. Tolerance of criticism of Israel or Palestine is a sign of strength and
hope.
Is it "apartheid week?" Or is it really "apartheid weak"? Rather than hold celebrations that fuel a hatred
of Israel around an exaggerated word like apartheid, Palestinians should instead organise rallies and
conferences that call for compromise based on peace and the creation of two states.
But Palestinians have to ask themselves the same question that Israelis must face: Do we release our
anger against each other, or do we control it, and focus it on peace?
Peace and compromise are words I feel very comfortable living with, even in a backdrop of anger.
* Ray Hanania is the 2006 winner of the New America Media's "Best Ethnic American Columnist". He is a
political analyst, satirist and former national president of the Palestinian American Congress. This article
is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) with permission from The Jerusalem Post.
Source: The Jerusalem Post, 10 March 2010, Copyright permission is granted for publication.