The people of Imwas, Yalu
and Bayt Nuba on the run soon after
the 67 war.
A few days before Channel Two sent viewers of the reality show "Treasure
Hunt" ?(Mehapsim et Hamatmon?) to the Canada Forest, several employees of
the Jewish National Fund arrived and put up a sign describing the history of the
place. This wasn't the first sign they ever put up, but Eitan Bronstein, an
activist with the Zokhrot ?("We Remember" − in the feminine form
of the verb?) organization, was not pleased with the first one. His organization
posts signs with the names of villages that were destroyed in the War of
Independence; he wanted the sign in the Canada Forest to mention the villages
that the IDF destroyed during the Six-Day War. The JNF refused, as expected,
because installing benches and water fountains on the ruins of the villages is a
quality of life thing, but mentioning the destruction of the villages −
well, that's politics, and politics, as we know, is a bad thing.
Bronstein didn't give up. With the assistance of attorney Michael Sfard, he
tried to stand his ground, and he also appealed to the Civil Administration
− since this is occupied territory − and when the army also refused
to mention the destroyed villages, Bronstein appealed to the High Court. The
destruction of these villages, during the Six-Day War, is well documented and
was even filmed. Herein lays its uniqueness: Unlike anonymous villages that were
destroyed in the War of Independence, the ruins of Latrun
became a living legacy.
The IDF sometimes prefers to compromise − in order to avoid the need for
surrender to the Supreme Court, which is what happened in this instance: The
army informed the High Court that the sign would be posted. Bronstein actually
wanted a more explicitly worded sign; the army agreed only to a rather vague
sign, but as of this week, hikers in Canada Park will be able to see that they
are exploring an area that was once settled.
The first nine lines of the sign tell about the history of the place in
biblical, Byzantine and Crusader times. The next six lines are devoted to what
happened in the Six-Day War: 2,000 people lived in the village of Emmaus,
and 1,700 in Yalu. Today they live in
Jordan and Ramallah. The sign doesn't say that the IDF destroyed the villages,
but it does mention the "ruins" of Emmaus
and the water wells that were preserved in Yalu: If the houses weren't
preserved, they must have been destroyed.
This story illustrates yet again just how political and sensitive dealing with
the past still is. This week saw the publication of a sleek new guide to the
battle and memorial sites from 1948 ?("Madrikh Carta Le'Milhemet Ha'atzmaut"
− The Carta Guide to te War of Independence"?).
The author is the well-known historian Yehuda Wallach.It is essentially a volume
of military history, with battle maps crowded with numerous arrows, but politics
still speaks from nearly every page. The Israelis, as in the standard view, are
few and weak; the Arabs many and strong − it defies belief that the
Israelis were able to win. Nor would a stranger be able to understand how it was
decided which Israeli commanders would be mentioned by name in this book and
which would be consigned to oblivion.
Only someone who to this day is living the war between the forces of light and
the forces of darkness will understand why it is still necessary to obscure the
Irgun's part in the conquest of Jaffa. As
usual, there is no explanation of who this Kawkaji was, whose army is mentioned
occasionally, always in quotation marks, of course.
The Ministry of Education is soon to be free of Limor Livnat, but this book was
produced during her tenure and reflects the sort of language she wished to
introduce in textbooks: The IDF liberates and cleanses, the Arabs are organized
in gangs, the residents leave. Under the heading "The Liberation of Tiberias,"
the Carta guide reads: "The company occupied the Tiberias Hotel, opened the
way to the Old City, cleansed the houses in the surrounding area and destroyed
the barrier that the gangs had set up on the way to the Upper Galilee. On April
18, the Arabs of Tiberias surrendered and most of them left the city with the
aid of the British Army."
Like so many wars in the history books, this one, too, exposed the good in
people − and evidently at practically no cost. Here and there, some
casualties are mentioned, mostly Israelis; there's no way to know the whole
number. There's no way to know how many Arabs were killed. The phrase "Arab
refugees" appears just once, on page 268, very incidentally. In the course
of the war, a few hundred Arab villages were destroyed, but the Carta guide
mentions only a few of them; the residents "left," "fled,"
"abandoned" or "ran away." The fate of the residents in Ramle
and Lod are depicted in bold, almost post-Zionist language: "The next day
the evacuation of the residents of Lod
and Ramle was completed."
There's a mysterious nobility in this passive language: Who exactly
"completed" the "evacuation" of the residents and how
exactly was it done? Yitzhak Rabin will only be mentioned later on, in the story
of the war for Jerusalem. Among other things, this chapter mentions the
"tragedy of the Hadassah convoy." Dozens of passengers in the convoy,
including doctors and nurses, were murdered by Arabs on April 13, 1948. The
"Dir Yassin tragedy"
that took place four days earlier is not mentioned.
About the decision to occupy the Gaza Strip, the guide says: "The
cease-fire that was imposed on the seventh of January stole the fruits of
victory from the IDF." Just think how much nicer life in this land of ours
would be today had the IDF occupied the Gaza Strip in 1948, and the
"evacuation of the residents" been "completed."
Terner Watch ?
(continued?)
The women of Machsom Watch, who were not allowed last week to present a photo
exhibition at the Pedagogical Teachers' Center in Be'er Sheva, appealed at first
to the Administrative Court in the city, and when their petition was rejected,
to the High Court. Justices Miriam Naor, Edna Arbel and Elyakim Rubinstein also
ruled that the exhibit shall not be displayed at the center. The Be'er Sheva
municipality thought that it won, and it was right: The High Court ruled that
Mayor Yaakov Terner may prohibit political activity at the Teachers' Center.
But the ruling − 18 lines in all − is phrased in the spirit of the
Oracle at Delphi: After saying that it is prohibited to display the exhibit, the
Justices devoted a few more words to the fundamental aspect: "At the same
time, this is not to detract from our rulings regarding freedom of expression of
different opinions and the exchange of ideas in public spaces in a local
authority, all, of course, within the limits of the law."
The last sentence refers to a ruling that Justices Naor and Arbel, along with
Justice Dorit Beinisch, composed about a year ago. An organization for equal
rights between Arabs and Jews called Kol Aher ?("Another Voice?) sought to
hold events in the auditium of the Misgav regional council. The council refused,
arguing that the events constituted political activity. The organization
appealed to the high Court, together with the Association for Civil Rights in
Israel ?(ACRI?), and the three Justices wrote their ruling:
"The local authority must open its facilities that are designated for broad
public use, making possible the expression of different opinions, including the
possibility of giving a platform for political expression, without restricting
the expression to which it gives a platform on the basis of its content."
They cited, by way of example, Rabin Square in Tel Aviv: Would it ever occur to
anyone that the Tel Aviv municipality would prohibit the staging of political
demonstrations there?
Why then, is it not permissible for the Machsom Watch photo exhibition to be
shown at the Pedagogical Center in Be'er
Sheva? Eighteen lines aren't enough, apparently to explain this, and so the
ruling remains without explanation.
All about Bokovza
At the start of the present school year, Or Yehuda mayor Yitzhak Bokovza
announced that he would not let Ethiopian pupils into the town's schools. It was
a cruel, racist move, and Bokovza subsequently apologized. For a brief moment,
though, it appeared that Bokovza had achieved his end, anyway: Everyone agreed
with him that he had a problem.
Or Yehuda, a transit camp that grew into a town for immigrants from Arab
countries, has over the years managed to climb out of the backwardness of its
past; nothing scares the Libyan-born mayor more than a return to the bad old
days of grave impoverishment. About 35,000 people currently live in the city
− about one-third of the residents are of Mizrahi background, and there
are about 200 families from Ethiopia, most of which are in need of welfare. It
is truly difficult to care for them properly, and parents in the city schools
also aren't keen on having the children from Ethiopia there − just because
they're from Ethiopia.
A while ago, Bokovza received a message from the Ministry of Absorption, or as
he described it, a "delivery notice:" a list of names of 49 families,
totaling 215 people ?(including over 100 children?) due to settle in Or Yehuda.
Bokovza also has a lettere received from the Ministry of Education, containing a
pledge to send the children of the Ethiopian immigrants to schools in other
localities, at the ministry's expense.
Now spring is here and it's time for children to be registered for the coming
school year, but so far the Ministry of Education has not given the mayor any
indication of where the Ethiopian children will attend school. In a letter to
the State Comptroller, Bokovza complains that the Ministry of Education is
"acting with the expectation that this year, too, we'll get to the first of
September and everything will fall upon me. This time, I've decided, I won't let
that happen."
?(The Education Ministry responded that it will provide the information to the
mayor within a few days.?)
Click here to
view this article at Ha'aretz Daily
Post Your Comment
*It should be NOTED that your email address won't be shared, and all communications between members will be routed via the website's mail server.