Israelis, mainly peaceniks, Pt. 3: Moshe Ma’oz

Moshe Ma’oz is a veteran Israeli
peacenik and a retired prof of Middle East Studies at
Hebrew University who has done a lot of great research and writing on
Syria.  Jewish Israelis are often
very wary of agreeing to come to meetings in East Jerusalem.  As Benny Morris once told me: “It’s
simply because we don’t know our way around here; we come here so rarely.” Ma’oz, to his credit, was happy to come over to the little
hotel I was staying in there—I think I’d told him about the attractions
of its restaurant; plus, crucially, he seemed to know where it was.

But on March 3, as the time for our meeting approached even
he was defeated by the horrible parking situation, so he called and asked if we
could meet at the American
Colony
instead.

For
those who don’t know it, the AC is named after a group of quixotic Presbyterian
utopians from Chicago who made their way to Jerusalem in 1881 with the aim of
setting up a utopian colony dedicated to various good works.  They attracted many participants from
both the US and Sweden, and eventually ended up in a beautiful, courtyarded old home outside the Old City’s walls to the north,
in the neighborhood known as Sheikh Jarrah after a
famous local mosque.  At some
point, the colony had declined to the point that the remaining members of it
decided to turn the beautiful old house and a couple of others the colony owned beside it into a hotel. One of the colony’s last surviving members/descendants, Val Vester, lived in a cool basement apartment there till her
death a couple of years ago.

Back
in the 1980s 
before
the hotel’s Swiss management company jacked up the prices
quite inordinately, they used to always keep a few rooms at low rates for
visiting journalists and researchers, and my husband and I often stayed
there.  Sometimes we would go and
visit with Mrs. Vester and hear all her great stories
about the old days.

Also
in the 1980s, the AC was one of the places where George Shultz or other
visiting American dignitaries would visit Palestinian leaders like Faisal Husseini or Hanan Ashrawi. Those were “the good old days”—before the
Israelis started to completely prohibit any Palestinian political activity in
Jerusalem at all. (That came with Oslo.)

Anyway,
if you can spring for the price of two cups of coffee, it’s still a pleasant
place to sit and do an interview with someone. The internal courtyard is truly
lovely—planted with orange trees, vines, and flowers.  But it was ways too cold for us to sit
there, so I would plant myself and my interviewee in
one of the lounges, instead.

When Ma’oz walked in, he was
pretty depressed, but he expressed it in his usual friendly and half-joking
(maybe?) way:

Helena, I am so depressed! Do you
think Denmark has room for six million Jews? There is no future for us here! …
Honestly, I am ashamed to be an Israeli.

The main message he wanted to convey was this:

Obama has
to act! He has to work fast to build consensus around the two-state solution.
He has to work strongly with those in Israel who still want the two-state
solution who are still, on paper, a majority… He has to
combat the gang around Bibi Netanyahu.

He grew very serious, saying he thought it was
true—and very problematic– that most of the Israelis who want what they
call a two-state solution,

still
don’t want to give up East Jerusalem or the Jordan Valley—and without
having East Jerusalem as the capital of an independent Palestinian state there
will be no peace with the Arab and Muslim worlds.

“Jerusalem is the key!” he said, a number of times.

He said that one of the main things preventing Jewish
Israelis from accepting the idea of a Palestinian state was the fear that Hamas
might take over this state,

and then
Hamas would threaten the whole country, including Lod
[Ben Gurion] airport.

I can understand that fear. But the
Palestinian state could be demilitarized: they are ready for this.

I asked if he thought it would be possible for any Israeli
government to even consider trying to evacuate the nearly 500,000 settlers who
are now in the West Bank (including east Jerusalem).

He said,

Some people say it could lead to
civil war. And it’s true that in the IDF’s combat
units you now have a growing number of religious officers.

We need good leadership in Israel!  In the context of a peace agreement, we
can do a one-for-one land swap with the Palestinian state, and that would bring
the areas holding 80% of the settlers into  Israel. You’d have to give the
rest the opportunity to stay where they are under Palestinian sovereignty.

But don’t even dream of dismantling
the settlements of East Jerusalem, the ones that they call neighborhoods.

… You know, the majority of
Israelis who favor a two-state solution do so because they hate Palestinians,
not because they love them.

He was completely clear that the ongoing building of new
settlements has to stop:

Those settlements at Ariel and in
and around Hebron—what on earth are they doing so deep in to the
Palestinian areas?

He recalled that after the 1994 massacre in the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron, when the Kahanist
settler activist Baruch Goldstein used his automatic weapon to slaughter 29 Muslim
Hebronites who were praying there, he had been one of
those specialists who had urged prime minister Rabin to take that opportunity
to pull all the Jewish settlers out of downtown Hebron. “But he listened to
Ehud Sprinzak instead,” he said dolefully. “Imagine
how much easier the Hebron situation would be if we didn’t have all those
settlers there now.”

5 thoughts on “Israelis, mainly peaceniks, Pt. 3: Moshe Ma’oz”

  1. Evacuating Hebron will have to happen, and although I wont say it would be “easy” it can be done.
    Gaza was completely evacuated. And Israel recently evacuated one of the more contentious spots in Hebron without incident. The settlers darkly spoke of the “price tag” doctrine, but they’ve done nothing since.
    The problem is that recent history has shown that when Israel removes residents from territories, that does NOT lead to peace.
    Your colleague’s description of Israeli fear is well taken. I saw a panel a few months ago where Martin Kramer and Shibley Telhami were speaking about various issues, including of course Israel/Palestine. It was Telhami, mind you, who said that Israeli, Palestinian, American, and Jordanian intelligence all have come to the same conclusion. That the ONLY thing preventing a Hamas takeover of the West Bank is the presence of the IDF. So obviously “end the occupation” isn’t the answer, at least not by itself.
    Finally, there will be no need to remove all settlers. There is no mandating that the armistice lines of 1948 become the final borders, and they can be negotiated and adjusted. Large settlements close to the former armistice line can easily be incorporated into Israel. “Inadmissibility of territory acquired by force,” which some people cite as some sort of ritualistic incantation does not mean that former armistice lines become boundaries, and does not mean that parties cannot reach negotiated agreements in good faith.

  2. “Jerusalem is the key!” he said, a number of times.
    Let’s call on Tom Clancy. In “The Sum of All Fears” Israel partially cedes sovereignty over Jerusalem to the Vatican and Saudi Arabia, and the city becomes a UN protectorate policed by Swiss Guards. Residents of Jerusalem can choose between either Vatican, Israeli or Islamic judicial law.

  3. The fact that the IDF is the only force preventing Hamas from running the West Bank suggests that, despite Israel and its allies spending millions of US dollars on puppet forces, and despite ruthless campaigns of detention, assassination and other forms of terrorism, to ensure otherwise, Hamas would still be the choice of the Palestinian people.
    This, it should not be necessary to point out, is not a justification for the IDF operations in the West Bank. It is an indication that they should, in accordance with the Oslo agreements, leave.
    As to the settlements in the West Bank-all illegal, all defying the only authority which legitimates Israel existence, the UN- they are designed specifically to prevent Palestinians from controlling the territory. They must be removed, unless their inhabitants can come to an agreement with the Palestinians to live, with full rights of citizenship including religious toleration, in a Palestinian state.
    The notion that people carry extra territoriality with them into other lands- that I could, by settling in Virginia, legitimately place myself under the protection of the Canadian government and defy the USA- is nonsensical. And racist.
    Finally, Joshua, there is the question, which cannot be dismissed or evaded, of the repatriation of those driven out of their villages and homes since 1948. They and their descendants living under the feeble protection of the UN and international law, must not be denied justice.
    In many ways the Israeli fascist parties are more realistic about peace than the political swamp to their left-they understand that there can be no peace without justice. So they don’t pretend that the sanctification, by a weakened and barely authentic representative of the victims, of a surrender will ever pass muster in the real world (I say nothing of the fora inhabited by logic choppers and casuists)as a binding treaty of peace.
    The questions would appear to be: when and how will the position of the Palestinians be elevated to one of military parity with Israel? Will this happen by Israel’s allies falling away? By opinion moving decisively in the Palestinians’ favour? Or by both.

  4. The saga of the American Colony sounds like the saga of the American missionaries in Hawaai. Ended up owning the place “by mistake”.
    Obama has to act! He has to work fast to build consensus around the two-state solution. He has to work strongly with those in Israel who still want the two-state solution who are sill, on paper, a majority… He has to combat the gang around Bibi Netanyahu.
    I think there is zero chance of that happening. The gang around Netanyahu is the same gang around Barack Obama. Maybe your prayers will be answered Helena. I just don’t see how.
    Your man Moshe Ma’oz seems to have read the the proposal of the ten wise people you linked the other day. Or to have written it.

Comments are closed.