Ramla or Ramallah: Crossing Borders and Boundaries
- Details
- Written by Britain Eakin Britain Eakin
- Published: 04 December 2009 04 December 2009
- Hits: 3477 3477
Ramla or Ramallah: Crossing Borders and Boundaries
By Britain Eakin for MIFTAH
December 03, 2009
On the Muslim holiday of Eid Al Adha, I traveled to Tel-Aviv for a belated Thanksgiving celebration with a dear friend, who I will call Yael. Yael is a Jewish Israeli with dual American citizenship whom I met in the US years ago, long before I knew anything about Israel or Palestine. However, as I’ve become more politically aware concerning Palestine, our friendship has developed an uncomfortable tension. This tension was particularly agitated when I started posting articles on Facebook that were critical of Israeli policies in Palestine, the height of which occurred during Operation Cast Lead, along with my outspoken criticism of it.
My political expressions via Facebook deeply offended Yael, who saw my posts as one-sided and interpreted them as a direct personal attack on her. The hurt ran so deep that even until very recently it was uncertain if our friendship would survive our political differences. This meeting was our first since the tension erupted and since I’ve been in Palestine this time, and was a sincere attempt to repair our damaged friendship.
Last year when I was here, I spent a significant amount of time in Israel, much of it with Yael. This time I’ve mostly stayed in the West Bank and have ventured into Israel on very few occasions. The hassle of crossing Qalandiya checkpoint often deters me, yet when I do go I try to engage with Jewish Israelis, making a point not to shy away from telling them I live in Ramallah. I do this for two reasons: one because I enjoy the looks of shock on their faces when I tell them I live here, and two because I enjoy hearing their responses, which are quite telling.
On this trip the initial responses were the same without fail; with complete looks of surprise on their faces they all asked me if I said “Ramla (an Arab city inside Israel) or Ramallah,” as if I could not possibly have said the latter. Once it becomes clear that I did indeed say “Ramallah” a series of questions inevitably ensues; in my experience, Jewish Israelis become very curious when they encounter someone who actually lives on “the other side.” I am a strange and interesting creature to them.
Yael and I spent Eid preparing a Thanksgiving feast and discussing the tension between us. As we cooked we took turns sharing our feelings with each other and tried to reach an understanding of where the other person was coming from. In the end, we decided to let bygones be bygones but did not come to a decision about how to walk the delicate political line of our friendship. In the past, we mulled over the idea of never discussing politics again. Yet even if we had made that decision I don’t believe it would stick. My life in Ramallah is much too interesting to ignore for a Jewish Israeli who has never been to the West Bank, and my conscience won’t let me shy away from what I have born witness to here.
After we finished cooking, Yael and I took the food over to her friend’s house where five of her friends, all British Jews, joined us for the feast. Halfway into the meal, the daughter of one of Yael’s friends asked me where I live. I told her I live in Ramallah, at which point her eyes grew wide and she asked me “Ramla, or Ramallah?” Once I clarified that I live in Ramallah, the questioning commenced.
The first question asked was whether or not I have to cover my hair here. I told them it’s not necessary, and pointed out the considerable Christian minority in Palestine, to which one of them responded that she thought all Palestinians were Muslims. They were also surprised to learn that you can buy alcohol here, and that some restaurants actually serve it. They asked about my social life, wanting to know if I socialize with Palestinians or other foreigners. I told them my contact with other foreigners is very limited and that I mostly interact with Palestinians. They inquired about what kind of television is available here and if we get any Israeli stations. They also asked if I feel safe here, to which I responded that I feel so safe I have no problem walking home alone late at night.
Additionally, they wanted to know if I was questioned while crossing Qalandiya checkpoint – I told them I only have to show my passport photo and my most recent entry visa. I could tell as they questioned me about the checkpoint that it represents a clear boundary in their minds; one between safety and danger. The idea of a checkpoint seems to put their minds at ease concerning who has access to Israel.
As they questioned me it became very clear that my choice to live in Ramallah politicizes me whether I like it or not, making me a conduit for information. Although many Jewish Israelis I’ve met have expressed a deep-seated fear of Palestine and Palestinians, they are also eager to know what it’s like here, and I represent a portal into what is perceived as a forbidden world of danger. Yet as the girls questioned me, I began to realize just how serious the gap between the two places has grown, and I also realized the lack of accurate information they have about Israeli policies, leading them to be largely unaware of what the reality of life is like for Palestinians.
For example, the Goldstone Report came up briefly and one of the girls stated that the report was a farce because it only criticized Israel. I asked if she had read the report and she said no; this means her beliefs about the report are shaped entirely by the media and hearsay, which clearly omitted the fact that the report condemned the firing rockets into Israeli civilian territory as war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity. More accurate information about Palestine and Israeli policies in the territories is readily available – it seems to me a matter of seeking to know or choosing to block it out. Yet even if most of the time the choice is made to block it out, the choice I’ve made to live in Ramallah invariably forces the issue of Palestine to the surface, making it impossible to ignore in my presence.
As someone who has the privilege of being able to travel freely between the two places, I realize that I am at times a bridge between the two worlds, particularly as contact between the two people becomes more severely limited. I am not entirely comfortable in this role and have not yet figured out the best way to navigate the crossing of these boundaries. It is important for me to hear Yael’s perspectives, but it is also important for me to find a way of expressing my own personal truths, whether it be telling my Palestinian friends that I have Israeli friends in Tel-Aviv, or telling my Israeli friends what their government and army is doing in the Palestinian territories. For now I will continue to live in Ramallah and hope that some good, no matter how small it might be, will come from my presence here and my ability to cross boundaries.
Britain Eakin is a Writer for the Media and Information Program at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
http://www.miftah.org
Columbia Sportswear's Response: Israeli ad has been discontinued!
- Details
- Written by Ron Parham, Sr. Directory Investor Relations & Corporate Communications, Columbia Sportswear Ron Parham, Sr. Directory Investor Relations & Corporate Communications, Columbia Sportswear
- Published: 04 December 2009 04 December 2009
- Hits: 2998 2998
[Note: We received this email via our web site. Columbia Sportswear should be applauded for taking this issue seriously and acting in a responsible way! - AUPHR]
Thank you and your readers for bringing this advertisement to our attention and for voicing your concerns to us via this site and numerous e-mails.
We investigated and determined that neither the original Hebrew text of the ad created by our independent Israeli distributor, nor the erroneous English translation supplied by the newspaper, was submitted to or approved by Columbia Sportswear as called for by our standard practices.
Columbia Sportswear and our Israeli distributor have agreed to immediately and permanently discontinue the ad, as well as to reinforce our standard pre-approval practices pertaining to all marketing materials in order to avoid such unfortunate errors in the future.
We take all customer feedback seriously and sincerely regret the offense inadvertently created by this ad.
Ron Parham
Sr. Director Investor Relations & Corporate Communications
Columbia Sportswear Company
Goldstone receives human rights award
- Details
- Written by JTA JTA
- Published: 04 December 2009 04 December 2009
- Hits: 2889 2889
The South African judge, who led the commission that accused Israel and Hamas of committing war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity in last winter's Gaza war, on Thursday won the Stockholm Human Rights Award, the French news agency AFP reported.
The prize is awarded by the International Legal Assistance Consortium, the Swedish Bar Association and the International Bar Association for "an outstanding contribution to promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms," according to AFP.
Columbia Sportswear agrees to ‘immediately and permanently discontinue "settler" ad campaign
- Details
- Written by Adam Horowitz Adam Horowitz
- Published: 04 December 2009 04 December 2009
- Hits: 2871 2871
Columbia Sportswear agrees to ‘immediately and permanently discontinue’ ad campaign marketing to settlers
Last week we posted a Columbia Sportwear marketing campaign directed at Israeli settlers. Peter Miller, a member of the Portland-based organization Americans United for Palestinian Human Rights, took it upon himself to contact Columbia to voice his displeasure. To his surprise, Columbia responded the next day and announced they have decided to immediately discontinue the ad campaign.
Here are the emails:
Customer (Peter Miller) 12/02/2009 07:36 AM
December 2, 2009Dear Columbia Sportswear -
I have purchased your products for many years. I was dismayed to learn recently that your clothing was advertised in Israel as "Suitable for active work in various regions, including outposts." The word "outpost" is rather unique to Israel and it means a specific thing: an illegal settlement colony planted, against international law and in violation of Palestinian human rights, right in the middle of Palestinian land. Outposts are created by radical, right-wing Jewish Israeli settlers. Unfortunately, these settlers have the tacit and often explicit support of the Israeli government. The outposts are a direct violation of the fourth Geneva conventions as well as the so-called "road map to peace" and numerous other documents and declarations. The UN Security council calls the Israel’s settlements "a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention." And the outposts represent the vanguard of these settlements. The "active work" these settlers are engaged in is increasing Israel’s hold on Palestinian land, making future peace and a just resolution impossible. The "active work" is part of Israel’s setting up of an Apartheid system, ruling over the Palestinians who are crowded into smaller and smaller areas, who are separated from each other by Settler roads, separation walls, settlements, military checkpoints, and forbidden zones.
I sincerely hope that Columbia Sportswear is not in the business of supporting these outposts and I ask that you investigate how your products are being promoted in Israel. I ask that you not promote your products in this manner and that you not attempt to promote your products in support of illegal activities and human rights violations. I, for one, don’t want to be associated with "outposts." I do not wish to wear clothing if it is being promoted as being "suitable for active work" in "outposts".
I would be happy to discuss with you the issues involved with these outposts. I give you some background information below including a links to an article depicting the offensive ad.
Sincerely,
Peter Miller
"Israel’s settlements are on shaky ground"
International law mandates that they must be removed and that the Palestinians should be compensated for their losses.
By Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, from The LA Times
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/06/28/israels-settlements-are-shaky-ground"Columbia Markets to the Active Settler on the Go"
The Hebrew translation of outposts there is "gvaot" (hills) a euphemism for the illegal outposts populated by the "hilltop youth", notorious for their violence against Palestinian civilians.
By Adam Horowitz
http://mondoweiss.net/2009/11/columbia-sportswear-markets-to-the-active-settler-on-the-go.html
And Columbia Sportswear’s response:
Response 12/03/2009 04:20 PM
Thank you for bringing this advertisement to our attention and for sharing your concerns with us.We investigated and determined that neither the original Hebrew text of the ad created by our independent Israeli distributor, nor the erroneous English translation supplied by the newspaper, was submitted to or approved by Columbia Sportswear as called for by our standard practices.
Columbia Sportswear and our Israeli distributor have agreed to immediately and permanently discontinue the ad, as well as to reinforce our standard pre-approval practices pertaining to all marketing materials in order to avoid such unfortunate errors in the future.
We value your input and we take all customer feedback seriously. While we cannot always promise specific changes, we do consider and incorporate comments from customers like you when planning our marketing communications for the future.
Thank you for caring. We hope we can count on your ongoing support.
Report finds new Israeli war doctrine targets civilians
- Details
- Written by The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel
- Published: 03 December 2009 03 December 2009
- Hits: 3039 3039
Press release, The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, 3 December 2009
The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) released today [2 December 2009] a new report which exposes the shifts in Israel's combat doctrine as evidenced in the prosecution of operation "Cast Lead" and from numerous public oral and written statements made by high ranking military officers and senior Israeli government officials.
The report, "No Second Thoughts: Changes in the IDF's Combat Doctrine In Light Of Operation 'Cast Lead'," demonstrates Israel's application of a new combat doctrine during the hostilities in Gaza, which is based on two principles:
"Zero Casualties": The complete prioritization of avoiding IDF [Israeli army] casualties while disregarding the increased risk to Palestinian civilians. The implementation of this policy is evident in the massive use of fire power, the use of white phosphorous weapons in densely populated areas, and in firing at Palestinians in the streets, with no discrimination between combatants and civilians, this even after the IDF would order the evacuation of residents from civilian homes.
"Dahiyah Doctrine": named after the residential Dahiyah district in Beirut, where Hizballah enjoyed support and also had its headquarters. The district was massively bombed by the IDF during the Second Lebanon War. The doctrine promotes targeting civilian infrastructure in order to cause widespread destruction and suffering among the civilian population so as to foment popular opposition to Israel's opponents (namely Hamas and Hizballah).
As a result of the implementation of these principles, the fighting in the Gaza Strip caused intentional and large-scale damage to civilian infrastructure as well as the killing of hundreds of non-combatant civilians (despite the absence of an official policy to intentionally kill civilians). Israel's actions directly contradict official statements claiming that the IDF acted in accordance with international humanitarian law and took every possible measure to avoid harming non-militant civilians.
This combat doctrine morally stains the citizens of Israel. It may lead to increased international isolation of Israel and to a situation where Israeli soldiers, officers and leaders will face arrest outside of Israel and be charged with war crimes. The writers of the report summarize: "So fundamental a shift in the IDF's combat doctrine, which has such a far-reaching impact, shouldn't be considered only in the closed forums of the General Headquarters and the Security Cabinet, but demands substantial public discussion."
Download the full report