 .  |
|
|
|
Dr Harry Hagopian,
LL.D - KSL
|
| . |
|
|
|
Dr Harry Hagopian,
LL.D - KSL
|
|
Shadowed Perspectives from Afar? |
|
|
|
Dr
Harry Hagopian, LL.D - KSL The
on-going conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is producing innovative
forms of expression these days! One
such upgraded form of expression has come from a number of Middle Eastern
designers who are using their new fashion collections to make hard-hitting
political statements. A recent display at the Tel Aviv Ascola School of Design
featured the creations of twenty-two Palestinian and Israeli artists. Their use
of helmets, flak jackets and camouflage clothing is a custom-made indictment of
the violence in the Holy Land in which well over 400 men, women and children -
Israelis and Palestinians alike - have lost their lives over the past five
months. There
is an evening dress by an Arab couturier with a fake bomb woven into the
floor-length and barbed-wire hoop skirt. Another one is a homicidal bag made
from x-ray films of knives, pistols and explosive devices. Better still, what
about eye lenses that are scored by tiny lines of wire for sharper vision? Or
even the perfect figure made out of a map of Israel criss-crossed by a thin
green ribbon - a reference to the Green Line separating Israel from the West
Bank and Gaza territories which Palestinians are struggling to reclaim for their
future state. The
shell-shocked frocks are reminiscent to the angry British punk attire and the
threads of American rappers of yesteryears. Fashion designers are working from
within a palpable sense of mounting pain and anger caused by the recent
bloodshed. For instance, Israeli designer Ronen Levine offers a harrowing
ensemble of a floor-length straitjacket made from the fabric of a keffiyeh, the
traditional Arab head-dress, and a Jewish kippa or skullcap that hoods the face
of the wearer as if he is about to be executed. A keffiyeh cord serves as both
necklace and noose. Alongside it, in crisp contrast, a shoe by Arab designer
Nassim Ghneim stands alone, half of it flawless, the other half crushed and
smelting into the mud. It symbolises the land, the unequal terrain and the march
forward. So long as the shoe retains its bent shape, no progress can ostensibly
be made in the negotiations between the warring peace partners of the Holy Land. Over
the past four years, I had the stanchable privilege of working with the Churches
of Jerusalem. During this short time, I witnessed
much prayer, hope and expectation being expressed for a better and
brighter future for this land. But then again, I also witnessed that same sense
of prayer, hope and expectation being squelched pitilessly let alone scarred
ruthlessly by people who did not seem to appreciate the God-given value of life
- any life, all life - or who placed political designs above human lives! And
much as I called for dialogue and coexistence between the ‘two peoples and
three religions’ of this small parcel of hallowed land, I often felt helpless
in the face of an indefatigable determination to sink deeper into the political
mire. Calls such as mine - and much
more importantly those made by the religious leadership - sounded vacuous at
best and redundant at worst! Intransigence was often the anti-dote for optimism,
and parvanimity the unyielding partner of magnanimity. Although people often
‘listened’ to what others were saying, they did not always ‘hear’ them
..! Today,
I am even more concerned about the future of the land where God chose to reveal
His divine will. Indeed, ever since the creation of a new Israeli government
under the challenging leadership of PM Ariel Sharon, local conditions have
become grimmer. The reality is acrid. The Palestinian territories have been
cordoned off. Hardly any movement is possible anymore. The siege has become
almost hermetic and people feel caged in. Consequently, hatred let alone bigotry
and distrust have become rampant in both communities, and the wounds on both
sides are not only festering - they are stenching too. Physical and structural
violence are commonplace these days, and rejection of the ‘other’ is the
rule rather than the exception. Are subjugation and surrender the awkward names
of this latest tactic? Is cutting off oil supplies or financial lifelines the
strategic answer for security let alone for good will and good faith between
both sides? Conversely though, can blowing off innocent civilian people in
bloody suicide attacks become an adequate riposte to political frustration?
I fear not! In
the past five months, Palestinians and Israelis have both been traumatised -
almost irreparably so - by the unstoppable confrontations that have ravaged
their collective psyches. Yet, I believe that no amount of brutal force will
resolve the conflict. Force is the anti-thesis of any solution. As the eminent
pacifist Martin Gilbert wrote recently in his latest tome, non-violence - be it
in the soul, the mind or the heart - is always the answer. So let me posit a
couple of observations that will appear facile and naive to both parties. They
will not sit comfortably with the flag-waving aspirations of both peoples and
will inevitably come across as being partisan!
Israelis
and Palestinians are destined willy-nilly to live together on the land of their
forefathers. Neither can cleanse the other out. Neither can delete the history
of the other. Neither can dominate the other for long. But in order to live side
by side, Israelis must accept once and for all that they cannot occupy a land
that is not theirs, and then expect Palestinians to cower under their
overwhelming military might. Freedom is a rejuvenating concept, and history
teaches its readers that force cannot vanquish all. Hand in hand with this
realisation though, Palestinians must equally learn to stake out their future
independent state in the spirit of give and take. It is no use talking about
peace when incitement continues in some quarters, and when the political concept
of ‘peace in proximity’ has not yet sunk in fully. But to achieve that, what
is needed in this land is a civil society whose intellectuals and institutions
have the moral probity and practical ability to enforce such an educational
exercise. The
best package deal I can offer - for all that it will matter to the bigwigs
negotiating in far-off places or calling the shots from their own little
fiefdoms - is for Israel to relinquish its unrelenting colonialist grip that
implies the control of another people and their basic freedoms through the
control of the land and its resources. Conversely,
Palestinians must learn to yield their lofty dreams and to settle instead for
more achievable and realistic goals. What
is obvious to me is that a lot of Palestinians and Israelis - despite the recent
hardening of positions - acquiesce to this scenario privately but disagree with
it publicly. But this is a human reaction that stems from emotive as much as
ideological or political considerations. My own concern is a moral one that
blends my own Christian religious beliefs with my moral precepts. Suffering is a recurrent theme in the Bible, and has also
become a malignant theme in the lives of both peoples here. Is it not time that this unjust chapter be brought to an end
with justice? After all, does
everybody not seek to spare this land of further pain, anguish and sorrow? And
in this way, might it not be possible to veer away from an endemic cycle of
hostility and think of another fashion show where the themes are somewhat …
more pacific? © harry-bvh @ 20 March
2001 |