Considering Palestine

By now, nearly all of us must be aware that Israel is celebrating its 50th year as a state. Palestinians, at the same time, have made efforts to present their side of the story. Israelis and Palestinians put forth competing interpretations of the last half-century, and at times even argue over the history itself. We observers who are neither Israeli nor Palestinian are left to tease through the differing histories if we are to gather a sense of the lingering crisis at hand.

Even in Boston and here at Harvard, we have seen both the celebration of Israel and the outcry over Palestine. The news coverage reporting on a celebration of Israel on the Boston Common also covered a protest for Palestine taking place just yards away. Students last week celebrated 50 years of Israel in front of the Science Center, while posters entitled "Palestine 50" were put up around the Yard to reflect the Palestinian perspective. The enthusiasm of celebration and the zeal of protest make the issue more real in our minds and call to our attention the questions being raised.

At the same time, however, this manner of exposure can give us a superficial sense of the issues. It becomes all too easy to frame the question as one of "competing nationalisms"--a framework that neglects key issues and invites us to take a hands-off perspective devoid of any moral or ethical responsibility. To see the matter in a purely nationalist framework--Israelis and Palestinians engaged in territorial struggle solely for the sake of their nations--is to overlook normative judgments and a sense of right and wrong. Looking at the controversy from international legal and human rights perspectives sheds a fuller light on the real questions of Palestine.

Israel's territorial expansion beyond its original borders has been repeatedly rebuked by international bodies. The United Nations' 1947 Partition Resolution envisioned separate Israeli and Palestinian states, with Jerusalem subject to international oversight. Following the 1967 war and Israel's seizure of East Jerusalem and greater territory, a number of U.N. resolutions criticized Israel's actions. A 1969 Security Council Resolution (No. 271) repeated the international community's condemnation and pointed out Israeli failure to comply with previous U.N. resolutions. Another Security Council Resolution in 1980 (No. 465) condemned Israel's settlement policies in Jerusalem.

From the perspective of international sanction, the Israeli expansion into Palestinian land is a violation of U.N. resolutions. In light of the international community's repeated protests, Palestinian grievances take on a new shade. Their loss of territory is not simply a national gripe, but a transgression against prior agreements and the sanction of the world at large.

Israel's commitment to maintaining control of Jerusalem and its entrenched settlements therein are violations of the international community, and not merely against the Palestinian people. Whatever Israel's justification for its actions, it must nonetheless recognize that it has expanded in violation of numerous United Nations resolutions.

Israeli policy has likewise come under criticism from human rights organizations for the treatment of Palestinians under its control. Arabs living in the Israeli state are subjected to harassment and are not truly regarded as equal citizens. Those living under the Palestinian Authority have repeatedly been barred from going to their jobs in Israel, and have suffered from the loss of income. The U.N. Commission on Human Rights censured Israel in 1974 for its policies in the lands it had taken since its independence. Human rights concerns thus similarly show "the Palestinians' problem" to be an issue of international concern rather than merely one nation's gripe toward another.

We who observe the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the outside must move beyond the framework of competing nationalisms. A consideration of Palestine on the basis of international law, United Nations resolutions and universal human rights reveals that the question is not one merely of legitimate warfare and national interest. Viewing Palestine outside the prism of nationalism unveils deep normative concerns and fundamental questions of justice.

Aamir Abdul Rehman '99 is a social studies concentrator in Cabot House. This is his final column of the semester.