I wonder how complete that history lesson was.
Susiya, for instance was Jewish for about 1,200 years, maybe more, but the 1,200 we can prove.
The southern Mt. Hebron region was Jewish with the occasional Christian or pagan site during the course of time.
How did they get un-Jewish?
Muslims came and pushed them out, or killed them.
But the history lesson skips all of that.
When the Arabs and Muslims took with the sword and settled "settlement" issues with the sword, that is ignored.
History of the region is far more complex than what is portrayed.
I know-I do it for a living.
52
If J Street thinks it's accomplishing something positive by having a Jewish American kid questioning whether Zionism is "worth pursuing anymore", how about a reverse tour that sends volunteers, any religion, to the Gaza border area which has been bombarded with rockets, some stealth terrorists coming thru the former terror tunnels, and now the horrific fires set on thousands of acres of land, the smoke alone creating a dangerous health situation. And, they still get hit by mortars and missiles.
Is the Palestinian "liberation" movement worth pursuing anymore?
31
Once again, the NYT engages in biased anti Israel reporting.
Not a single mention of multiple wars waged against Israel (starting in 1948 when the Arabs tried to annihilate the Jews), the scores of suicide bombings, street stabbings, kidnappings or home invasions & the murders of families - which have resulted in Israel using sanctions and security measures to contain Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians.
No mention of the Palestinian Authority’s financial reward system for terrorists - Pay for Slay.
Not a single mention of the multiple offers of peace turned down over decades by Palestinian leadership. It seems the Palestinians don’t want peace, they want Israel.
David Halbfinger seems to be promoting the J Street tour while attempting to discredit and undermine Birthright. 28 kids on a J Street tour vs thousands who participate in Birth Right.
How nice for J Street to get this valuable free advertising.
57
2/3 of the original Board of Directors of J Street were either active or retired employees of the US State Dept and Gentiles. Obama's purpose in creating it was to break AIPAC's influence. The poison never stops.
12
To ignore the realities of what is happening in Palestine today is worst than victors writing their history. The brutal occupation is a fact that cannot be white-wash. Only by accommodation, grudgingly or otherwise by the powerful (Israel) to the disempowered (Palestinians) will Justice be served.
18
I'm curious if they explained the reason why there weas no Jewish presence in Hebron was because the Arabs massacred the Jewish population minutes years ago this summer? I doubt it.
21
If you are interested in an authoritative review of the problems J Street is trying to show these students, go to Juan Cole’s Informed Comment site. Cole is a professor of history at University of Michigan and frequent guest on PBS Newshour, etc. You can search the site by issue or try the 7/20/2018 entry.
7
I support Israel and its right to exist, but not tatoally at the expense of other people's lives. I am encouraged to see young Jews given an opportunity like this one. Unfortunately, they and the people responsible for making a trip like theirs possible are a minority. Until they no longer are and can do something to help swing the opinions of so many Americans to see what's really happened there, Israel will continue along the same political lines and the bitterness against both Israel and America will get worse.
14
When the participants of the J-Street program went to Hebron, did they discuss the repeated Arab attacks on the Jewish community there? Or were they left with the impression that it had been peaceful since 1929? Did they discuss how Jews had lived there for thousands of years, until the Arab riots of 1929? Did they discuss how the Jewish community had tried to return a few years later only to be attacked and driven out again? Did they go to the 97% of Hebron where Jews are forbidden to be?
Because it's very easy to look at a checkpoint and demonize the people manning it when you leave out a history of subjugation and periodic violence against them.
Even after 50 years of what is called "landgrabbing" by Israel, the "growing settlements" use less than 2% of the landmass. Was that made clear to the participants? Israel has repeatedly agreed to dismantle some of the settlements in the event of a peace treaty being signed. Was that discussed at all?
At any point in their trip, were these young people encouraged to wonder why Arabs and Jews can live together in Haifa, Tel Aviv, Asqelon and other Israeli cities, but not in Ramallah, Shu'jaiyya (where Jews were once the majority) or anywhere else under Palestinian Arab sovereignty?
Because that's a question they need to be asking.
48
As one who has visited some of the same, and similar, places visited by those in this article, I hope that someone asked the Palestinians whom they met with what they want and are willing to settle for. If the question is asked, it will give insight into one of the major reasons this conflict still goes on. Neither side is all victim or villain.
23
@Want2know
watch the Tinderbox when it comes out - we spoke to about 25 Israelis and Palestinians - most of them people we stopped in the street - about what they want. The responses are illuminating.
6
On a visit to Israel in 1981, we toured a town in Galilee which had been attacked by the PLO and Hezbollah. They attacked a school (not a military base on soldiers, but a school), killing several school-age children. In a counter attack, the IDF destroyed a tank and other weapons of the attackers. When the remaining school children were asked if they wanted the destroyed weapons removed from their school ground, they responded "No", their dead playmates should have toys to play with in heaven.
Now tell me about the devastation of a people whose sole goal is to erase the Jewish population of the world.
32
When one reads the history of Zionism, it becomes crystal clear that it did not have to be this way. There were other, softer, forms of Zionism that did not seek to take over and push Palestinian Christians and Muslims out of their own land. But the militant "political" Zionists won through force and violence; their version of Zionism was and is an angry brand of militant settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing. The only way forward now is liberty, justice, and equality for *all* within the context of one democratic state.
25
I wonder if the J Street and Peace Now cohort (which I tend to sympathize with in terms of political goals) met with officials of the Palestinian authority, so they could ask why they have done no nation building, why they abuse their own, why they didn't pay the Hamas led Gaza nation for electricity.
I'd love to see the group confront the political realities of the Palestinian Authority who is so inflexibly corrupt that journalists get arrested and/or killed for researching it. I'd love to see the questions asked of exactly when the next Palestinian elections will be. Let these American Jews get a full spectrum of vision of Israeli/Palestinian society, not just the left wing Israeli version.
31
Bravo to J Street for offering an alternative to Birthright. I have a strong connection to Israel (my father, a Holocaust survivor, immigrated to Israel as a teenager; I have family there; I grew up in the US but lived there for two years as a young adult). I both love Israel and am horrified by the occupation. The more centrists and leftists in Israel have support from the US Jews, the better. We have a moral imperative to find a path to a two-state solution.
21
A balanced view is great, but this does not appear to be balanced. Did J Street explain how many times so-called Palestinians turned down peace over the last four or five decades? How they still want to "drive Jews into the sea?" How people have not moved on from refugee camps because the leadership told them they would be able to return to Israel after the Jews were gone? Were they told about Arab attacks on Jews well before Israel was formed?
We need peace in the region, but this occupation continues largely because Arabs have refused peace.
41
The real historical fallacy is that Israel replaced "Palestine". The truth is "Palestine" was a name the British gave to territory it and the French carved out of the defeated Muslim Ottoman empire. The British Mandate for Palestine included territory that today is Jordan, the West Bank, Israel and Gaza. Why doesn't J Street (or the students on tour) ask the hard questions like why isn't Jordan, ruled today by a British installed monarchy since 1922, part of the solution (or really the problem)? Why is the Hahsemite Monarch not considered an occupying power to be removed and why doesn't the article (or the J Street tour guides) note that between 1947 and 1967, there was no "West Bank". The West Bank (a name popularized after the 1967 war) and Jerusalem were not even called Palestine. During that stretch, the West Bank (including Jerusalem) was called Jordan and the inhabitants were Jordanian citizens, not Palestinians. And those citizens did not object nor did international consensus or the PLO. In fact, the PLO's sole target was the territory Israel held btw '48 and '67. The PLO recognized Jordanian sovereignty in the West Bank and Jerusalem. Also, the Arab-held 1948 Jericho Conference confirmed that the West Bank and Jerusalem were Jordanian territory. How can one take the J Street tour seriously when it ignores a British implanted monarchy ruling over 80% of British Palestine (i.e., Jordan)? Talk about willful and shameful historical blindness (or ignorance).
27
@Mike Scheier
I think you'll find that the origins of the name Palestine go back to Herodotus...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_name_%22Palestine%22
Likewise, to understand all of this you need to go further back. Check out Zionist pioneer Ahad Ha'am's 1891 pamphlet, 'Truth from Palestine,' or the Eastern Front history in world war 1.
2
@Mike Scheier
The UK and France were imperial powers who added the Levant to their vast holdings and their positions regarding mass immigration of Jews to Palestine and the dividing up of land that had for the last 800 years Arab and Muslim were nothing less than a self serving attempt to empty Europe of its Jews.
7
I just went to a talk by Rabbi Yitzchak Wagner, the first German-born Rabbi since the Holocaust, and the first rabbi in his hometown of Krefeld in more than 70 years. He has nice things to say abut the German government's defense of its Jewish citizens (it's much better than France's, at least) but his child attends a Jewish kindergarten with security guards and bullet proof glass. Before the Syrian emigration to Germany, at least they only had to endure the occasional "enough already" shouts from their neighbors at Holocaust memorials. I'm contemplating where we can move the Rabbi's children, not the never ending suffering of the Palestinian people. There are plenty of new candidates for our help and pity on this planet, and climate change is going to increase that number; the UN says 75 million people are on the move. The Palestinians have had their chance, 80 years of it, and they can now either live with Israel or try to move to one of the 50 majority Muslim nations on this planet.
28
After WWII Germany was occupied and much of its pre-war territory was lost, with more than 10 million Germans forced from their ancestral homes. The Germans accepted that and, instead of fighting the occupiers, they slowly rebuilt on the land they were permitted to keep. When will the Palestinians follow that example?
22
@Donna Gray
It's not the Palestinians - the Arab countries failed to accept them into their lands, and thereby created the (false reality) millions of Palestinian Refugees.
Israel had no qualms about assimilating 850,000 Jews who were evicted from their homes in Arab lands.
25
I would really like to know the J-street position on the Six- Day and Yom-Kippur (known by the antagonists as the Ramadan or October) Wars. Would it have been okay for Israel to have been pushed into the sea on either occasion? What would have happened to the Israeli's at the time, if they had lost either one??
27
For readers who would like to get deeper perspectives on the necessarily difficult relationships between Israel and the Palestinians, I highly recommend the documentary film "The Gatekeepers" made in 2012, consisting primarily of interviews with all six of the surviving heads of Shin Bet, the Israeli security service.
Compared with what viewers (or NY Times readers) would likely expect, the interviews do not take a predictable course, nor express predictable views.
It is available commercially for streaming online.
13
These students are steeped into the progressive occupation, oppression, exploitation, struggle, liberation model of conflict analysis. The creation of most nations, the US, Poland, Romania, the Arab countries, Iran, India, Pakistan, mostly all, involved the movement of populations, and resettlement. On Somaria and Judea, the West Bank most people live a normal economically and educationally improving life, though not in a totally politically independent entity. Before Palestinian deliberate killing of Israelis in an effort to end Israel, no not to achieve a separate state, all lived together and progress was possible towards some limited independence for the Palestinians. Unpleasant situations are the result of Palestinian leadership and activists who prefer to withhold cooperation with Israelis in providing water and encourage the taking of public land for personal use and then claim oppression when removed. Presenting young naive Americans delivers in the existence of perfect justice or if lacking obvious oppressors is simple brainwashing. Let there be people of different outlooks on the tours so a real debate can take place.
13
It's almost like taking a group of Israelis, in order to acquaint them with America, to, let's say, the bad parts of Baltimore, or Detroit, or some of the poorest - and most dangerous - cities in the US...Why did the J Street people not take them to a gallery opening in Nazareth, a cinema premiere in Ramallah or any great restaurant there, a class at Birzeit University... The occupation is bad for both sides, of course, but both sides have their strengths - why not emphasize them instead of bringing everyone down? Who do you think is going to make peace? The Hamas and Abbas? Or the young, educated people on all sides who have had enough of their 'leaders' murderous repression.
97
@Jenifer Bar Lev the trip did go to Ramallah and to sites in Israel. They met with settlers as well as Palestinians , went to Yad Vashem, Dead Sea, a kibbutz, Jerusalem,and many of the participants had been on regular birthright trips, some like my daughter have studied the conflict extensively. This was not a group naive kids being lead around.
24
(from Naomi Shihab Nye, The Tiny Journalist poems)
Janna
...It's right in front of me,
I didn't go looking for it.
We're living in the middle of trouble.
No reason not to say it straight.
They do not consider us equal.
They blame us for everything,
forgetting what they took,
how they took it.
We are made of bone and flesh and story
but they poke their big guns
into our faces
and our front doors
and our living rooms
as if we were vapor.
Why can't they see
how beautiful we are?
The saddest part?
We all could have had
twice as many friends.
23
@Ann Walton Sieber
Only one side purposefully targets civilians, and democratically elects a terrorist group with genocide right in their mission statement. What a laughable false equivalence.
29
One notes that the promoters of the J Street tour did not choose West Bank cities, as, for example, Ramallah, nor the residences of the Palestinian Arab elite, nor indeed of its middle class, but deliberately chose to showcase an archeological site, without at all presenting its context, the rule of law, and the existence of negotiated agreements between the parties, and specifically made sure to risk the young people by feeding them questionable food while being surrounded by flies.
The entire enterprise and its publication is tendentious press manipulation, as is evident.
99
@Arthur Taub MD PhD
I am tired of J Street undermining Israeli policy in the United States. I also do not agree with everything Israel does, but resent an artificial Israeli organization fueling the "War of the Jews". If J Street has an issue they should run for office in Israel and stop admonishing Israel here.
13
Actually, I was a participant on this trip, and I can tell you that we did indeed visit Ramallah as well as East Jerusalem and Sakhnin. It's unfortunate that that information wasn't included in the scope of this article, but I can assure you that the historical context of the conflict was covered in minute detail and that we made sure to hear from Palestinians from many different backgrounds, including many different peace activists. Also, the food was delicious and we were very grateful to have shared a meal with the residents of Susya!
28
This is the result of carving out a homeland from land we didn't own. New Israel should have been established from a terrific piece of property within the Allies own borders after WWII. $3B in annual aid from the US x 60, 100, or 200 years would buy a such a beautiful piece of property, without the constant issues from the "have nots". Or, like West Berlin, simply tear down the walls.
12
What tours of the United States have these young people been on? There are deep and plentiful horrors here at home, likely close by, directly their problem and tied to their privileges.
8
The utterly bizarre thing about this is that it comes as any surprise at all. Yet, American Jewish institutions have either completely failed to educate Jewish youth about the history of the conflict in Israel/Palestine or filled them with shallow slogans and nationalist myths that are designed to obscure reality. The cause of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is incredibly easy to understand: Israel was created on land occupied by another people. That is, literally, all there is to it. Of course the rebirth of Hebrew culture was going to take place at the expense of another people; the creation of the state of Israel was only possible by dispossessing and displacing the people who were already there! The fact that Israel continues to do this is not surprising. That it does so while hiding behind a facade of morality and that the institutional Jewish community continues to offer it almost uncritical support is the real puzzle and tragedy.
123
@Shaun Narine "Israel was created on land occupied by another people. That is, literally, all there is to it.
First of all, this is not entirely accurate. Original Jewish settlements were created on an empty land bought from absentee Arab landlords. But when Israel declared Independence all Arabs brutally attacked the newly created state. As a result of the war that Israel has won with great difficulty, some of the Arabs fled and eventually some of their land was absorbed by Israeli state. That is a problem of Arab creation.
But taking your point further, Unites States, Australia, New Zealand and many other countries were created on land occupied by other people. Does it mean those countries need to be boycotted and their residents should go back to where they come from?
58
@Ilya
No it means Israel should do the same thing Australia, NZ and the USA did and give everyone equal rights. Keeping the natives on reservations isn't a solution.
30
@Shaun Narine
The Palestinians could have stayed in place or sold their property, as many did. Their displacement was primarily the consequence of the violence that they initiated, going back to 1920 (look up the 1920 Nabi Musa riots and the 1929 massacre of Hebron's Jewish community), long before Israel existed and long before the Jews had the means to defend themselves on land that they bought legally. Eventually the Jews had no choice but to defend themselves, which led to a simmering violent conflict, which led to a UN partition resolution in 1947, which led the Palestinians to launch a war to resolve the matter by force, which led to their displacement.
30
I noticed that there is no mention of the words "1967" or "negotiations" anywhere in the article.
I would submit that unless and until "J Street" includes some historical context in its tours -- and most importantly, teaches kids about the contemporary history of continuous Palestinian rejection of a negotiated settlement over the disputed territory -- its trips will serve merely to continue to polarize opinion.
145
@Frank J Haydn
Historical context is necessary, but honestly presented historical context will make both Israeli and Palestinian leadership look bad. There simply isn’t any way to tell the story honestly that won’t make people disgusted with most of the leaders on both sides, going back to the early part of the 20th century. And America’s role has been to act as Israel’s lawyer.
It’s obvious that what you mean by “ disputed territory” is “any territory that Israel would like to take”. And one of the words missing from your list of omitted words is “Nakba”.
53
@Frank J Haydn
I agree 100%. If criticism of either the Palestinian's or of Israel is not put into a historical context leaving out crucial information leading to the present conflicts then I consider the critique invalid. There is no mention of the Palestinian leaderships proclivity to terrorism as their mantra. No context as to why there are check points...and how the leadership does NOT accept Israel and has openly said they want Israel to perish....then their own people suffer while they go off shopping in Paris.
54
@Donald
Please do not put words in my mouth. I highly recommend UN Resolution 242.
As for "disgust" I do not get emotionally involved in such matters. I prefer to look at events factually.
As far as the "Nakba" is concerned, one can always go much, much further back in history. The Palestinians would have been wise to have accepted reality 40 years ago; they'd have their state by now.
33
Getting the Palestinian perspective without the history of why and how it got to this point is simply persuasive marking by those who want you to see their perspective. Yes, the plight of current Palestinians is a sad one, but they (as a group and not necessarily as individuals) made this bed they are now living in. When your leadership opts for death and mayhem over good faith negotiations, the other side must protect itself and continue thriving the best it can. The day the Palestinians actually come to the table to finally settle this matter in a reasonable and peaceful manner is the day their plight starts to get way better. History tells us not to waste much energy waiting for them to act in their own self interest, at least in a peaceful manner.
133
@RMM This is all true, but the building and expansion of settlements is a way to prevent any future two-state solution.
37
@RMM The Palestinians did not "make this bed they are now living in." That bed was fashioned for them in 1948 when the Jews implemented "Plan D" to forcefully and by threat of violence pushed out over 750,000 Palestinians from over 500 villages in what became the new state of Israel (if in doubt, research the Israeli archives).
In 1967, that bed was enlarged after the Six Day War when the Israeli government occupied the West Bank, the Golan Heights and Gaza, and began massive theft of Palestinian lands, and oppressive control of the inhabitants.
The Israeli Jews continued to enlarge the bed the Palestinians now live in by the construction of Jewish only settlements, Jewish only highways, "security areas" reserved for the IDF and more recently thousands of former Gazan settlers, control of all water resources, most of which is denied to Palestinian farmers and others.
As for the Palestinians "coming to the table," since 2000, the Arab League has repeatedly offered to recognize Israel and to negotiate normal relations with it, if it agrees to provide separate independent statehood to the Palestinians. The Israeli government has refused to even acknowledge the Arab offers, let alone consider opening a dialogue with the Arabs.
21
@DonD
If you check the text of "Plan D" you will see that it was a plan of self defense, not of ethnic cleansing. Also, if you check the historical record, you will see that the day after the UN voted for a Partition Plan, the Arabs launched a war against the Jewish community, to resolve the matter by force. They now live with the consequences.
The Arab League "offer" always included the proviso of allowing descendants of Palestinian refugees to flood into Israel and claim the land their ancestors lost in the war they started in 1947, thus nullifying the possibility of a Jewish majority state that is not dependent on the mercy of a non-Jewish majority. So the "offer" was an excellent opportunity to re-ignite the war that the Palestinians started in 1947 and many (Hamas, openly) still swear to win.
15
I doubt J Street is educating these young people on the numerous attempts at peace between Israel and the Palestinians— all of which the Palestinians rejected, usually followed by murderous terror attacks against civilians. Nor are they hearing about the fundamental requirement of BDS — the return of millions of descendants of 1948 refugees to what is now Israel, effectively destroying Israel.
So yes, the living conditions of Palestinians is sad, but the anger should not be against Israel, but rather against the corrupt Palestinian leaders who keep their people in this state.
154
@Pragmatist In CT This is all true, but the building and expansion of settlements is a way to prevent any future two-state solution.
46
@Pragmatist In CT while I cannot speak about the background of every participant on this trip, I believe my daughter who is on the trip is typical. An international studies major who has focused a significant share of her course work on the conflict and has done birthright, her knowledge of the history, of the failures of Palestinian leadership, of the competing narratives, is deep, broad, and rooted in extensive research. These are not a group of naive young people. They are smart, knowledgeable, and skeptical. By the way J-Street is very much against BDS.
50
@Pragmatist In CT I've heard it said before, "...the return of millions of descendants of 1948 refugees to what is now Israel, effectively destroying Israel."
What you are saying is that in making a sanctuary for European Jews, the Palestinians HAD to be removed from their homes and to let them return means that you see Israel as a theocracy no matter how it was achieved.
28
Perhaps in 48, if the Arabs hadn't evacuated Israel (then Palestine) because of claims by neighboring countries that they would be massacred but stood with their Jewish neighbors against the Nazi inspired incursions from Syria, Jordan and Egypt; it would be a very different country now.
11
If these efforts to enlighten the public including young Jews to the conditions in the occupied territories they’d be labeled extremist perhaps even violence prone propaganda. As always, we can be thankful there are many Jews that are aware and empathize with the deplorable conditions of the Palestinians even those in the Gaza enclave ruled by Hamas. Palestinians are also human beings that want to go home.
8
"In the West Bank settlement of Har Gilo, they received a harsh history lesson from a veteran opponent of the occupation."
Does no one else see the irony in this? Some dude, living on stolen land in a settlement, has the audacity to oppose the occupation that his survival is dependent on? What a joke.
J-Street is cute but they're hardly a progressive organization that wants peace. Jewish Voice for Peace, If Not Now, and Breaking the Silence are legitimate advocacy groups, as shown through their support for BDS.
Until J-Street publicly supports BDS, they're just another ploy of the state trying to show its 'progressive' side.
6
@Laith Shehadeh
The "veteran opponent of the occupation" almost certainly lives on the Israeli side of the Green Line, within pre-1967 borders of Israel. There's no irony except on your part, because you put yourself forth as a supporter of peace, and yet you are unable to recognize an Israeli partner in your cause.
I just returned from a trip to Israel and Palestine during which I met with Israelis and Palestinians working to end the conflict and bring about peaceful coexistence. Nobody supported BDS. BDS plays right into the hands of Israel's right-wing leadership and undermines Israel's peace camp. (Note: while BDS is an appallingly wrong-headed tactic for coaxing Israel to change, those who support it are entitled to their views and to express their views, and shame on anyone who would limit their freedom of expression.)
2
To get a more balanced view, young Jewish Americans would need to take the Birthright trip as well. And I’d also recommend a side trip to Auschwitz to get some historical perspective.
19
Today's NY Times article on J St. youth tour of Israel/Palestine mirrored ours, in place and narrative: 2019 April/May dual-narrative tour with Mejdi/Combatants for Peace- highly recommended! Plus, inspiring meetings with Israelis and Palestinians activists, committed to non-violence and finding another way, through deep understanding and dialogue, action and growing a movement. Even in the face of such Settler extremism as this, condoned by American Jewish and fundamentalist Christian communities. Funded by the US government in cahoots with right wing Israel. Only through such alternate experiences will understanding emerge. My gratitude to J Street and the New York Times!
9
Articles like this act like Israel holds all the cards for peace. No place in this article does it mention that Hebron has not always been like this. That these security measures came from an open campaign to kill Israel civilians including children. Nor does it mention the generous peace deals the Palestinians have turned down time and time again. The Palestinians can’t even find peace with themselves and currently have their territory divided with a group whom the world recognizes as a terrorist organization. Abbas is 85 and is in his 16th year of a 4 year term. Any attempt for young, new, democratic Palestinian leaders is stifled by threats of violence. Does this group talk to any “settlers” to see there point of view. It mentions there are 800 Jews protected by the army but does it mention why that’s necessary? No. Maybe that’s because it would have to admit that they’d be massacres if the army left. But they’re the aggressors, right? Smh. To pretend Israel is holding all the cards and the Palestinians are ready to run their own state is disingenuous at best.
24
The sad thing about this whole horror story of constant wars and atrocities and hatred on both sides is that the people there are all semites ie the same ethnic background originally.
The people, Abraham, Moses, Moh., Jesus had to pervert it by bringing religion into the gov't.
We can thank the founding fathers for creating it and Lincoln for saving it, ie separation of church and state that we don't have this horror story here in America.
4
This is a great step and carries on the work done by Jewish young people in the South during the civil rights movement.
6
What J Street doesn't seem to know is that a picture is worth a thousand words and anyone can use them to make their own stories like the one they are doing. First of all, there is no occupation as no Israeli Jews live in any of those West Bank the Palestinians live. Another thing they tend to forget is that Palestinians have been given their autonomy since 1972, which was something Egypt never did when they had the Gaza Strip or when Jordan had the West Bank. Part of the reason why Birthright Israel never goes to the West Bank is mainly because of the fear of either Hamas or Fatah going to attack them, so they don't want to place any students into danger. However, going there does sort of expose the fact that Jews have lived there originally as the original names for that land was Judea and Samaria that go back to ancient time. There were even ancient artifacts that were discovered that proved just that. Unfortunately, J Street doesn't understand that the Palestinians hate all Jews including those who support their cause. In other words, they will only be with you for now, but they will turn on you later on as they only support themselves in the end. As for the settlements, they were built on lands the Palestinians never touched for decades, but only complained about it after the Israelis started living there as it never bothered to make use of it then especially when no Jew was living there when it was under Jordanian occupation and the world ignored that issue.
10
@Tal Barzilai
The Israeli Supreme Court calls it an occupation. In the article they discuss Hebron where Jewish settlers live. You are wrong on both counts.
6
@Joe
That was later on found out to be wrong and the West Bank was ruled that as long as it was a disputed territory, they can live there for the time being until a Palestinian state was made official.
4
The organization is called "birthright". Anyone really expected it to give a fair view of Palestine?
10
I'm amazed the Israeli immigration authorities allow these tours to go on. That said, I applaud those responsible for providing the missing bits and pieces to the nature of that troubled small land.
4
What is missing from the so called "History Lesson" of this article and trip is the reason for the situation the Palestinians the participants of this trip are seeing. Each and every one of Israel's attempts at a true and just peace for two thriving societies side by side has been answered with a loud and resounding no by the Palestinians, followed by mayhem and murder of innocent Israeli civilians with continuous suicide bombings of public buses, restaurants, cafes, clubs and shopping areas, car ramming murders at bus stops and on street corners, continuous random stabbing attacks of Israeli
Civilians, rocket barrages of towns and farms, the burning of thousand of acres of farmland and more. The Palestinian leadership have stolen billions of dollars of aide for their people and hidden it overseas, or spent it on weaponry, terror tunnels and more. They have convinced their people that if they wait long enough the world will take care of their "Jewish Problem" as it always has in the past. With the huge rise in and normalization of Anti Semitism we are seeing around the world today it is unconscionable for the news media and for the people promoting this trip not to give historical and present context to the truth about this very complex situation. The Jewish people have always stood along side others in their quest for justice and equality. By attempting to turn young Jewish students against the Jewish state you and J Street are aiding those who would once again see us gone.
115
@J bankSorry, I couldn't disagree with you more. Have you ever visited the West Bank? I have back in 2009 and the situation hasn't gotten any better since then. Have you ever considered what people do when they are oppressed? Such as the current refugees on the US southern border - desperate people do desperate things! So which came first - the acts of the Palestinians which you describe or the acts of the Israeli government? If you were to talk to an Israeli who has lived there early on in the communes you would get a totally different view of what they see happening by their government but alas, they are now outnumbered. What is the answer? First, stop the oppression!
23
@J bank
"True and Just peace." Lol.
8
@smae
Arabs were attacking legal Jewish Palestinians way before Israel became a state, in the early and early -middle 1900s. To answer your question, attacks by Arabs came first. Only then did they lose part of their land to the Jewish state.
20
Former Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs, Abba Eban, famously once said that Arabs will never lose an opportunity to lose an opportunity... Arab Palestinians have had many opportunities for Statehood, starting in 1948 all the way to the early 2000's with two Israeli Prime Ministers offering Arafat 98 % of the West Bank. More than 10 years ago Israel vacated Gaza and again Arab Palestinians had an opportunity to build the first part of a democratic State. And let us not forget that from 1949 to 1967 Arabs had total control of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and could have established the State they now claims.
The fate of Arab Palestinians is entirely the responsibility of the leaders they have chosen and those that were imposed on them. In 1977 I organized a Geneva, Switzerland, student trip (Jews and non-Jews) to Israel and I remember our meeting in Ramallah with Raymonda Tawil, then an Arab Palestinian activist and whose daughter later married Arafat. While far from a fan of Israel, she blamed her own leaders for rejecting all opportunities of peace with Israel.
I welcome for Birthright and similar trips of young Jews to include Arab Palestinians in their program, but using this to blame Israel is a falsification of history.
91
@Harry, so how do you think we Americans would react if a gaggle of foreign settlers were awarded approximately 55% of the American homeland in which to create a separate nation?
10
@Randall Pouwels
That’s exactly what you Americans did to the native Indians
11
It is not Israeli "occupation". It is Israeli "retaken land". Although the San Remo international agreement on the Palestine Mandate by the world war I powers in 1920 assigned the west bank land to the Jews, the west bank was taken forcefully by Jordan in 1948 until Israel retook the land in 1967.
13
It amazes me that the Birthright Israel people don’t see the folly and the injustice of their avoidance of Palestine and the oppression of the people there.
It’s exactly the same as the people who try to tell the American story without slavery and the eradication of native peoples.
I’m glad the J Street trips are happening. I hope that the Birthright folks are capable of change.
60
@Cousy What exactly would you like to happen ? Do you want Israel to let Arab Palestinians freely roam around, place bombs around Israel or shoot Israelis ? Or do you genuinely want a better life for them ? If the latter, then tell them to come to terms with Israel as a Jewish State in its original homeland. Tell them also that Israel's democracy, human rights, economic and scientific developments are a good example of how they could live themselves, actually benefiting from its advanced neighbor.
Don't fall for the myth that settlements are the obstacle for peace. Until 1967, they had full control of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and there were no settlements. Did they establish the State that they now claim ? No, they were seeking the destruction of Israel as Hamas and many other Arab Palestinians still want. Israel's presence in the West Bank is not an occupation, but a needed deterrence against terrorism. and let us not forget that Jesus was born a Jew in the West Bank and Jews are not a foreign object in where there ancestors have been for thousands of years.
Do we want and a need autonomy, freedom and a much better life for Arab Palestinians ? Absolutely and this is also in Israel's interest, but the solution lies with Arab Palestinians themselves.
20
@Harry And while they wait for autonomy, freedom and a much better life, Israel takes their all means of making a living more difficult of impossible. And while they wait, their lands are being robbed by enthusiastic "birthrighters" who, often as entitled Jewish Americans, think nothing of it. As a Jew, I find Israel besmirching all it was created for and all my grandmother contributed to its founding. Just take a look at its government and know its future is without hope.
14
@Madeleine
The Palestinian Authority forbids land sales to Jews. The punishment is death. So Palestinians make the transaction in Dearborn, MI, but say that Israel stole the land.
9
Three years ago, while in Jerusalem I thought it would be nice to go to Manger Sq, and see the Church of the Nativity. I decided to figure out how to get to Bethlehem by bus, as the locals might. The Israelis all told me to ride in a designated cab (the license plates are color coded). Palestinians told me to come with them, they would show me. I boarded a local bus and off we went. At the checkpoint (I believe the Pope drove thru the same checkpoint on his way to Bethlehem) the Israeli soldiers had everyone get off the bus while they checked ID's and bags. It was more than inconvenient. It was dehumanizing. My afternoon in Bethlehem was fantastic. It's wonderful place to wander. There I met college students from Bethlehem U who told me they were not allowed out of the W Bank to travel or visit friends. If they wanted to exit the WB they had to go to Jordan. They were impressed that I took the commuter bus; so much so that they walked me to the bus stop and waived me off. On our way back through the checkpoint we had to repeat the searches, ID's, questions. The process felt like we were being penned in like cattle. I realized then that Palestinians are living as if they're in a prison even though it's their home and country too.
83
@jimmboy Absolutely the same thing I experienced with a trip in 2009 with an interfaith group. Thank you for this accurate description!
16
@jimmboy
If you had also visited the scene in the immediate aftermath of a suicide bombing, with blood and body parts of women and children all over the place, and with Palestinian TV reporting the event as a magnificently successful operation, and Palestinians distributing sweets in the streets, would you feel dehumanized? Would you feel differently about the checkpoints?
31
@jimmboy
Why do checkpoints exist? Does it have to do with terrorist attacks in Israel, of which there has been many? A good question that you did not even ask, much less answer.
20
Ms.Foye's comment in this story says it all " “My joy and my light shouldn’t be coming from someone else’s darkness,” regardless of where you stand on the political issues this is a human tragedy.
13
The rich Arab oil countries, such as Saudi Arabia, are in a position to put considerable pressure on the international community to help Palestinians, but they seem to be doing almost nothing but providing them with some cash. I think that radical Arab organizations such as ISIS could gain adherents by attacking Israel, but Israel does not seem to be a target of the radicals at present. Perhaps that will occur in the future and turn the Middle East into a major international battle zone.
1
East Jerusalem has been occupied by Israel since June 1967 resulting from the Six Day War. Then in the PLO's Declaration of Independence 1988, Jerusalem was stated to be the capital of the State of Palestine. It is a very sad fact that both sides have a right to their history but not necessarily their former homelands. Today is not 3000 BC. However, the two sides need to work something out. Israel took this properly illegally and has never wanted to return it to the Palestinians while the P's cannot be trusted as their culture will need another 3000 years to change its perspective on history and learn that they are also not the real owners of this territory. Different groups found this part of the world somewhere between 70,00 and 270,000 years ago. These groups were neither Jewish or Palestinian back then. So, if either side feels that because of history they have the rights to this part of the world they need to be taken to the World Court and prove that they were the first to occupy this part of the world way before their heritages claim they did. Otherwise, all of the Middle East needs to be given back to those who currently occupy Africa. This would be fair, right. Oh, that goes too far back? Then, if the Israelis today want to keep Jerusalem and the other illegally occupied lands, then maybe the World Court needs to force Israel to give up as much of its southern land, that between Gaza and Jordan, to the point that an equal value in trade is forced upon both sides.
5
This article doesn't mention the reasons for the separation barrier which has effectively stopped suicide bombings that were so common in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem in the 1990s. Terrorists living in occupied areas can no longer bring bombs and bomb making materials so easily into Israel. These kids -- and adults too -- need to hear historical context. I highly recommend Daniel Gordis's book, Israel: A Concise History of a Nation Reborn for this necessary context.
17
@JGS
It's worth noting that there is a section of the border in Jerusalem where the separation barrier has not been constructed, and thousands of Palestinians cross through it every day, and there aren't suicide bombings. Maybe at least some parts of the separation barrier could be opened up as an experiment and a good-will gesture.
3
Bravo to J Street for sponsoring this more balanced trip, and bravo to the NY Times for reporting on it. As a Jew who prays every week for light to dawn in the minds of Israeli politicians and the citizens who elect them I too am looking for ways to be more active in remedying a situation which is a blot on the souls of contemporary Jews everywhere.
26
This article is heartbreaking but the comments are as important as the article in understanding context. Extremists on both sides ruin it for the people who live there. I well remember when Yiztak Rabin was murdered by a right wing zealot Israeli settler, destroying what had been a hopeful era of relative peace in Israel. Yasir Arafat's Intifada clinched it. Netenyahu's policies if allowed to continue will be the nail in the coffin of Israel's democracy.
29
@Jiminy
I hate to say that you are probably right Jiminy. When I heard Rabin had been killed by another Jew my heart fell through the floor. I was raised and educated to be a Zionist and to move from Canada to what is known in Hebrew as Ha'aretz which literally translated means "the land". I have Arab friends who came from Lebanon and Egypt. I think of them as Cousins. It is heartbreaking - especially when one knows that if a person is literally anti Semitic they are anti both Arabs and Jews. This to me is the saddest thing about the whole thing.
2
It’s unfortunately a very old story. The oppressed eventually becoming the oppressors. One wishes humans would evolve to something more civilized.
Kudos to these kids for becoming more empathetic and breaking this cycle.
33
It was 8 years ago, when I visited the exact spot in your photo, that I realized that the two state solution had been effectively nullified as an option by the extensive settlement construction on the West Bank. One look is all you need from this spot and you realize the game’s up.
182
@Henry Saltzman
The two state solution has been effectively nullified since the "Palestinians" threw away the Palestinian state offer included in Israel's founding, and continued to democratically elect a terrorist organization that sanctions the murder of civilians and has genocide in their mission statement.
18
@Henry Saltzman
On the contrary. The settlers are generally wealthier than the Palestinians so if settlers are offered Palestinian citizenship, their presence would help the economy of a Palestinian state.
8
@Henry Saltzman
If you are referring to that street of shuttered stores in Hebron, I've been there several times, though not in the last 3 years. Once the second intifada began, it became impossible to sustain Arab shopkeepers and Jewish shoppers in a safe manner. The Jewish community of Hebron isn't meant to be an affront to Palestinian life, anymore than Palestinians/Israeli Arabs are living in pre-67 Israel. Hebron was, and still is, a long running, very ancient Jewish town, from Abraham thru David, onward. Without this group of younger Jews, there would be NO prayer, no Jewish tourists, coming not only to the Tomb of the Patriarchs, which is a very holy site, but also to the over 1,000 year old Jewish cemetary, now totally surrounded by Palestinian homes. Imagine, 3 young Chicago boys murdered (and buried) in Hebron in 1929, and my (late) father's rabbi's son, from a small town in Lithuania, also. The two very short moments I spent in front of that mass grave have much meaning to me. Abandon a Jewish presence in Hebron? Explain why yes Palestinians in Israel, but none in the West bank. Huh?
11
Reading the comments here of those who blame the Palestinians for Israel's sins is sickening. The Israelis have never offered the Palestinians complete sovereignty over even a small part of the lands that were occupied by Palestinians before 1948. All the so-called Israeli peace proposals, if implemented, would have left the Palestinians as second-class citizens who would have still been at the mercy of the Israeli military, with Israelis in charge of all airports and seaports, elections, self defense, etc. Asking any ethnic group to remain subservient in their former lands would likely be rejected.
68
Some Palestinians want a state and some want Israel. Complete sovereignty would lead to attacks. Even the most staunch pro-Palestinian would be hard pressed to deny it. Israelis are under no obligation to make a deal that risks their lives.
20
@SPQR
While you assert that the Israelis “never offered complete sovereignty”, you fail to mention that the people of the World, acting through the UN, did just that. A UN partition plan providing Palestinian sovereignty was met not with acceptance by Arabs, but by their declaration of War. And while the issues of ‘Western’ influence following the fall of the Ottoman Empire are certainly relevant in the discussion, so too is the unbroken 2000+ years of Jewish presence in and intimacy with the land.
Reductionist descriptions of the conflict following the Six Day War (defensive per World view from Israel’s side) and the occupation of parts (the ‘West Bank’) which were Jordanian territory prior to the occupation — and part of the same divvying up by ‘western’ powers, handing it to the Hashemite Kingdom and not indigenous Palestinian Arabs — aren’t particularly helpful.
13
@SPQR - the world has, and Israel has also, offered Palestenians sovereignty multiple times. In fact the Palestenians do have sovereignty in Gaza, have you been following how that is playing out?
20
Thank you for this article. My opinion of the Palestinians was negatively forged from the terrorist attack during the 1972 Olympics, so on my first trip to the region in 2007, i went with that bias. I learned that life for Palestinians was that of a subjugated population, subject to checkpoints and a lack of personal freedom that few Americans would tolerate (live free or die). A visit to Bethlehem where the wall divides that city was instructive. Palestinians agreed that Palestinian leadership had been ineffective at best; and they seemed wearily acceding
to their reality. Regardless of one's personal beliefs, one cannot allow that their lack of freedom is acceptable.
43
This is a significant initiative, and very welcome as a start to revealing both sides of the reality of Israel and Palestine. But much more is needed by way of education right in schools and schuls across North America, so that those who can't be on one of these tours also benefit from a more balanced perspective on the reality of the situation.
65
"Birthright officials say their trips do address the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a limited extent, but that it is not their focus."
Well, no. Hard to indoctrinate impressionable young people on the idea of expanding the illegal occupation and oppression if it's featured in the brochure.
61
Responding to bias with counter-bias is still avoiding reality.
17
@trigorin: A trip to Israel should incorporate both points of view as well as visits to all relevant areas. That's true for adult visitors as well as for younger ones.
5
Thanks to the NY Times and J Street for this important article/programme. As a British/American Jew I have been concerned enough about this issue to make a documentary film about the conflict. The Tinderbox is due out next year and looks at how and why the conflict started and at how patterns established in the early 1900's still continue to this day. The story is not pretty and the clear lines of causality (who did what to who and when) will, I hope, underscore the need for critical thinking amongst Jews and a fresh approach to the so-called peace dialogue. Further, I am asking for a pan-Jewish dialogue on what it means to be Jewish in the 21st Century.
24
@Gillian
It is to hoped that you will also discuss the unfairness of the Balfour Declaration - the source for the depopulation of Palestine and its people.
7
@Solon
rest assured - the whole kit and caboodle!
Thank you, NYT, for publishing this article. Liberal American Democrats like myself try to understand Israel's actions and motives, but very little of the ugly details of Israel's occupation and oppression are prominently published in mainstream American newspapers. Nonetheless, I'm skeptical that J-Street's admirable efforts to inform young American Jews will have a saltatory and immediate positive impact on them. Trump's election teaches us that intelligence and education are rarely the most important criteria in even democratic elections.
57
@SPQR
Thank you for this. It says a lot about America. We have a lot of work to do to justify continuing to capitalise the d in the word democratic.
"Trump's election teaches us that intelligence and education are rarely the most important criteria in even democratic elections."
2
What seems to be missing is any experience of why the Israelis themselves see the Palestinians as an existential threat. The walls and checkpoints are problems, but they are also solutions to problems. I wonder if the J Street tours included any of the attack tunnels dug from Gaza (and I believe Lebanon/Hezbollah) into Israel. Did they visit any of the forests and fields burned by incendiary balloons, or the towns within rocket range of Gaza with their bomb shelters? How about any home in those towns, where a shelter room has to be included in the home? My point is not that mistreatment of Palestinians is in any way justified, but that Israelis feel far more threatened than a group of American students visiting for a week or ten days.
107
@Pete - completely agree with you on all points, and btw, it is not just the Israeli homes near border areas that have bomb shelters. These are a regular feature across Israel, which has been under one or another form of attack from neighboring Arab states (who btw have contributed greatly to, and have done far less than Israel to alleviate Palestenian suffering).
Ditto for the Palestenian national movement, which near as I can tell got underway around the point when it became clear that Arab hostility would not destroy Israel following their defeat in the Arab-instigated 1967 war.
18
@Pete
In my opinion being targeted by a desperate population is the Israelis' own fault. The Dutch colonials in Indonesia were not welcome there either. Hatred is the wages of guilt for taking another people's land.
And anyway, their casualties are dwarfed by the number of Palestinians they kill on a day to day basis.
10
@Pete actually, we did every one of the things you mentioned, but the nytimes reporter was not with us when we visited the Gaza border, burned fields, and a mother who lives on the kibbutz there.
6
This article uses the same anti-Israel terms to describe the territories of Judea and Samaria.
Shtakhim or territories is the Hebrew word used to describe these places. These are the historical lands of Israel described in the Bible. The Torah mentions them in the context of Israel, the homeland of the Jewish people.
They are not "occupied" except by those who settled there after Jews were driven out by others.
It is impossible to occupy your own land.
The Jewish people, three times a day, have prayed for 2,000 years to return to the Land of Israel.
Judea and Samaria are part of our Land, Erets Yisrael.
We are back in our Land.
We are not leaving.
2,000 years was long enough.
62
@simon sez The Europeans who came from Europe and colonized Palestine were not waiting for "2000 years." They weren't alive 2000 years ago.
10
@simon sez
The reason it is correct to call Israel's (X) of the West Bank "occupation" is that Israel controls the West Bank and the people living there, and yet does not annex it. Israeli citizens living in the West Bank are subject to ordinary Israeli law and are full participants in Israel's democratic institiutions. Palestinians living in the West Bank are subject to Israeli military law, cannot vote in Israel's elections, and can't participate in Israel's democratic institutions. That's why the word (X) is "occupation."
2
While there is blame on both sides, Israel gave up the moral high ground the day it built its first settlement. That high ground was fundamental to creating peace and progress, Now both sides have their narrative; it's their fault, not mine."
Israel was the partner with the resources and historical intelligence to solve the problem. Surrendering that obligation may not have started as a cynical land grab but it certainly wound up that way. Shame.
70
@ijarvis - actually, shame on you! I don't know how you can ignore the facts of a 2,000 year connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel, including continuous presence throughout what is now modern-day Israel and the West Bank. Hebron was just one such population center, which was the subject of a 1929 massacre by the Arab inhabitants, and forced depopulation in 1948 when it fell to Jordan in the war intended to snuff Israel out. No Jews were permitted to live in areas under Arab control between 1948 and 1967, a period in which synagogues, cemeteries and historic sites dating back centuries were destroyed and desecrated without consequence.
Compare this to the experience of Arab populations in Israel (since 1948) and the West Bank (since 1967), who by and large have equivalent rights and an opportunity for their own state if only they will agree to cease the conflict and compromise unrealistic, maximilist and historically-unfounded claims, and I think you may come away with a clearer view of the situation.
10
The return of obvious anti-semitism in the U.S. The 'both sides have very fine people'. These statements have something in common. The article belies the original reason for the state of Israel. Read the history of the Jewish state, as propagandized as it might be. There are still obvious results of the energy, research, and science that transformed a desert into arable land, and a thriving economy that tell a different story. There is nothing to be proud about their treatment of the Palestinians, but for the fact that a peaceful solution is impossible when their ultimate goal is the annihilation of Israel. Is it possible (gasp--anathema?) that they want to turn back the clock the same way the radical evangelicals in the US right now would do?
37
@Marcy, I am sure we in the U.S. can make the desert of Baja California bloom as well. But that does not give us the right to occupy Baja California to do so.
19
@Marcy
You might want to read " A History of the Jews" by Paul Johnson.
4
Thank you for this article. The topic has long been off limits in my experience as an Anglo-American living in a small college town in New England. Any attempt to defend a Palestinian point of view has, until now, been shut down by accusations of anti-Semitism. This article might help my NYT-reading friends to question their uncritical assumptions about who threatens whom in the Middle East. Even allowing the question would be a step forward.
167
Perhaps these trips will be a little more even balanced than the Theresienstadt Style of trips to Israel that omit the existence of the original inhabitants.
It certainly is galling that the US has spent trillions in the Mideast with no end in sight ONLY due to it's involvement with Israel. We have no border or security issues and spend more time and money than we shall ever do in Mexico , a country with real problems that we share a thousand mile common border.
60
@Donald - the "original inhabitants" of Israel are the Jews who have returned home after thousands of years where most were exiled, yearning to return, and far too many lost their lives via cruel anti-semitism (including in places like Theresienstadt).
13
@Nathaniel
Palestinians aren't even a Semitic people, they're ethnically Arab and arrived in the region along with the Ottoman invaders.
Jews, in contrast, have over 80% Semitic ancestry in common with other native Semitic peoples (native Lebanese, Syrians), and less than 20% admixture with the local European populations where they migrated.
Jews have also not left the region entirely even throughout the diasporas, so they have been living there uninterrupted for thousands of years. Palestinians are not "native" in any sense of the word.
9