Wohl Rose Garden
The final project that I decided to work on was the Wohl Rose Garden after my first spark of interest occurred when I saw some handicapped protestors on my first study abroad program, right before this one. During this program, we arrived at the Rose Garden on our Capital tour and I noticed them again along with all the other protesters. After seeing them again, I confirmed my decision that my final project would be on this garden’s history and the current protestors. During that second visit, we had a lunch, we gave our extra food to the handicapped protesters, and I learned that these people are very friendly and excellent candidates for an interview.
When I finally obtained an opportunity to make my return back to the Rose Garden, I went directly to the handicapped protestors to discover what their goals were. This task didn’t happen until I took several buses just trying to locate this place. The final bus took several detours because of the protests blocking the streets. They announced the reasoning for the detours and I could see the annoyance with the handicapped on many of the faces on the bus. When I finally arrived, it was so amazing, at least in my opinion, how this protest had enough strength with their rights to close off the main street of the capital without to many problems with the cops. At the handicapped protesting station, I found many people eagerly waiting to discuss their situation with me. The first person named Benny talked to me and explained how grateful he is to live in this democracy where people can strike and protest when the people see injustices within the society. After expressing his extreme gratitude for his government’s political structure, he started using his rights to show frustrations upon the injustices he perceives.
As Benny began expressing his frustrations he told me what was at the root of these injustices in the first place. The main cause is that the government pay actually decreased in the past seven years by nearly half. This pay cut causes a huge issue because these people cannot live off this pay when trying to pay for food, housing, and petrol to fuel their cars. This has become an increasing concern especially since these products’ prices have drastically increased during the past seven years. On top of this, many of the handicap people require twenty-four hour care giving and this funding is not enough for them to pay their workers. In many cases, if the extremely disabled people devoted all of their funding for care giving they would still fall short of being able to pay them.
In the recent days, the government has focused on just one of the issues over which the handicap people have expressed concern. The resolution is to increase the ability for disabled people to work while still getting funding. Currently, he describes that the law holds that if someone who is handicapped makes 1,060 ₪ or more per month, they will no longer obtain any governmental funding. To many, this would discourage them from working because at they might receive less total money or about the same and they would have to spend time working. The new bill, if passed, would encourage disabled members of society to work because the 1,060₪ mark will only be the point where governmental funding will just start to reduce. Once the people make 5,400 ₪, then their funding will be eliminated. Another important change with this would allow the disabled person to receive their full government payment immediately when they cannot work for any reason and not have to wait to receive their funding as they do now.
Since the recent cuts in funding, the most severe disability can only receive government funding of 2,100₪ per month. This amount of money is roughly 600 United States Dollars and almost any American would agree that it is difficult to live off this amount even without considering the expenditures of having a disability. This amount varies drastically depending upon the severity of the disability, obviously. For example, if a person can still work, then they would receive much less than someone who cannot participate in society because of their individual disability. He kept bringing up the point that this money does not even come close to the cost of living especially if someone needs a caregiver around the clock.
Then I had a chance to talk to a woman whose husband is disabled and she supports him by helping him organize this protest he wanted to start. She decided to take a few moments to explain answers to any other questions I still had. I was quick to discover that Benny did a good job, but I still obtained a few more minor details about the protest. One of which was the reasoning behind the police officers blocking of the street. It is completely for the safety of the disabled protestors so they do not have to be at risk of being hit accidentally by a vehicle that normally passes through. Then she went on to tell me what would ultimately satisfy the protesters. They would be satisfied with the government completely paying for the petrol for their cars, and caregivers for those who require one. Another interesting fact is that there are approximately 180,000 Israelis currently eligible for funding. Her last remark was that anyone could become disabled by just crossing the street so it is very important to support every handicapped person because it can be you one day. This got me thinking about how many of these people were in perfect shape at birth and some accident in their life caused them to have the need for assistance from the state.
Then I talked to David Sinai who is a Jew originally from Morocco before he moved to Israel in 1962. When I approached him, he was interested to see who I was and what I wanted to know. With great curiosity, I asked him what he was protesting about and he was quick to respond and say that he is conducting a personal, private protest in regards to a civil case but he wanted to refrain from any details. Then he explained how this is his first time protesting and he had to get permission from to Knesset to stay for a long period in a tent at this particular location. If that was not enough, he then had to get the police to approve his request. He finally was able to begin his protest on 7 May, 2007. Several of the other people who have been protesting arrived in their tents over three years ago. His protest is very silent so the media never once has visited him nor any member of the Knesset. Most people would find this very discouraging, but David is very committed to his protest so much so that he has not returned to his home in the Golan Heights since he began to protest. Since he has been here he has seen several groups of protestors that have included the people from Darfur who stayed about a year ago for two or three weeks, and the other group he saw was the Bedouins who also stayed for a few weeks. Other than that, it has been quiet by him except for the new group of disabled protestors, tourist groups that pass through and ask question, some people protesting by the Supreme Court to leave Gaza, and teacher strikes there for only a few days.
For at least thirty-five years, this place has served as a protest location as he remembers people protesting after the Yom Kippur War. He is not sure if this location was used for protest immediately after the building of the Knesset, which was completed in 1966. This location has served similar purposes to the Washington D.C. “Mall”.
To me, it is important that the government looks out for every individual to have their representation with the right of a protest. I also learned through the discussions with various people there that the Knesset does a great job representing the people because the country has many political parties and each has direct representation upon how the country votes in its elections. This experience has given me a good outlook on how the country allows you to express your issues publicly as long as you receive permission and keep them relatively peaceful.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Haredi Lifestyle—Emily Forrest
There are many misconceptions that surround the Haredi community. Many people pass judgment on the Haredi people and fail to investigate why many of their customs are in place. Through conducting interviews and spending time with a Haredim family, I was able to understand the impressions people got from the Haredi community and also understand the other side of the story. While conducting interviews I realized a lot of people only created opinions of the Haredim by things they had observed, rather than getting to know the Haredi people. I decided then to take it upon myself and develop a relationship with a Haredim family to better understand their laws.
Sarah and Shel Frankel immigrated to Israel in the mid 1990’s from the United States and have begun raising a family here in Jerusalem. With three young girls, the Frankels have instilled their Ultra Orthodox values in their daughters by strictly following Jewish Law. Through observing family interactions and dinner conversations I was able to really appreciate their way of life. Though it may be different, the values they’re teaching their children are completely justified and understandable given their explanations. Although this is not how I would raise my children, given their passion for their faith this is the correct lifestyle for their family. Before discussing their family traditions I was very judgmental of their lifestyle. I shared the same feelings as many of the people I interviewed that the Haredi Laws were extremely pro-male advancement and completely left women in the background. Although, after discussing Jewish Law with the Frankels their story made the Haredi community more human, and legitimized their lifestyle. I was able to learn and understand, and really appreciate their ideals.
Before meeting with the Frankels I conducted interview around Hebrew University’s campus to a mixture of people from all diverse backgrounds. The main consensus that I got was many people felt the Haredim were a very anti-feministic society. One girl mentioned, “The gender roles are clearly marked and heaven forbid anyone cross them.” This female is referring to her observations of a pregnant woman pushing a baby cart up a steep Jerusalem hill while her husband walked up the same hill. Women are in charge of all household duties and making money to support the family. The largest confusion is that Haredi men don’t give their wife’s recognition for the work they do to support their husbands. A male I interviewed said he feels it would be great to just study the Torah and not do any work. Although he was sarcastic, the impression that men don’t have an equal share of marital duties exists among people outside of the community.
While instances like this girl described happen, other ways of appreciating wives occur. While I visited the Frankel family I observed Sarah doing all the picking up and took immediate responsibility to her children. But looking in Shel’s eyes it was obvious he longed for more involvement in his children’s lives. While sitting with him he said, “They don’t love me as much as they love her [Sarah].” He looked at Sarah has having the most influence in their children’s lives and he said he felt he missed out on a lot of things because she was always their “go-to” person. While people believed men in Haredi communities do not want to cross those gender roles, once you enter the home and you put society aside it seems men long to have more involvement. The Haredi society puts a lot of pressure on men to study the Torah and stick to those gender roles, so disregarding society and entering the safe haven of the home, people can show their true desires.
Along with desiring more family involvement there are religious traditions that show men’s appreciation to their wives. Lighting the Shabbat candles, symbolizing the start of the holiest day, gives women much pride and importance in the celebration. Also before the dinner the husband sings a blessing to his wife. The words, “Her husband laces his trust in her and only profits thereby,” show the dedication the husband has towards his wife and how he could not go on without her by his side. Later in the blessing the man recognizes all that she does for him and the family and praises her for her “strength and dignity.” Every week the man sings this blessing to his wife, and it truly shows his dedication to her.
On the contrary there are negative forces towards women within the community. While women are given the opportunity to enter the work force and make money for their family, many people recently fear women are becoming too independent and therefore delaying their family obligations of getting married and having a family. A recent article in Haaretz shows the ruling of the Rabbinic Council to limit the education of women. Before women were educated in many different subjects such as literature, science, math and history in order to prepare them for the workforce. Now, the Rabbinic Council believes, “This has shifted the balance of power within ultra-Orthodox society. The women have established themselves as breadwinners, and as more educated and independent.” Statics have shown that today, more and more girls are delaying getting married and having children. This threatens the entire Ultra Orthodox society and the Rabbinic Council feels the best decision would to halt bachelor degree programs. This would result in only allowing women to complete their teaching certificate. This would then “solve” the problem of delayed marriages and allow women to have children.
Although this article oppresses women by discontinuing their education it is not the entire consensus of the community. Only a small majority of people feel women are becoming unruly because of their independence received by education. While education is being limited, women are branching out in their clothing and embracing their femininity. More women are buying wigs, still covering their hair, but also still feeling beautiful in their skin. Clothing is changing; the idea that all Haredi women only wear dark colors is changing. More women are dressing in lighter and brighter colors showing off their figures. While walking through the streets of a Haredi community you can see the divide in “old” Haredim and “new” Haredim. The “new” are still following Jewish law but are changing their style of dress to show off their femininity.
While the clothing is beginning to change in some Haredi sects, others are sticking to the traditional Polish clothing. Men who wear black hats, ¾ length jackets and pants, show their dedication to their heritage and modesty. Men also wear Tzitzit, a 4-cornered shirt with tassels representing Moses’ 4-corner garment. The call to wear this 4-cornered jacket is in Numbers and Deuteronomy in the Jewish Bible. The men also show their manhood by not shaving their beards as soon as the first boy is born into the family. Women have the same type of customs. Their clothing shows their commitment to modesty. Women cover their hair when married, wear long sleeved shirts, long skirts and often cover their legs with either socks or pantyhose. When I discussed this clothing style with Sarah she liked dressing this way. Some people, she felt, believed the clothing is made to make women unattractive, but she feels it’s more to be less attracting. By not dressing provocatively men are less accustomed to approach you and make sexual references. She mentioned, ‘As a married woman I do not want men coming up to me in inappropriate manners, and neither do I want that for my children.” By dressing to these modest standards the Haredi community is channeling provocative behavior and creating an age appropriate community.
Some people feel the dress code for women is sexists in that it doesn’t allow women to show their individuality. One argument against this is the evolution of clothing within the Haredi community. The fact that women are beginning to now wear wigs, and are outwardly expressing themselves by different colors and styles, shows the evolution of clothing within the Haredim. Others would argue that men and women are held to the same modesty requirements. Therefore, this is not a sexist community because both sexes are treated the same and held to the same standards.
Although these counterarguments exists the people I interviewed still felt that women were hiding themselves under clothing; sacrificing their femininity to control the urges of males. One female said, “why should they [women] pay the price for mans inability to control their urges and stay focused on the Torah.” When I discussed this argument with Shel, he said, “What are men supposed to do, stay inside?” Instead both men and women are held to the same modesty standards and are both able to focus on studying the Torah. One Rabbi in Huntingwoods, Michigan said, these temptations for the opposite sex are natural, and in order to keep temptations at the minimum and not control peoples lives would be to enforce modesty and Kosher rules.
Lastly, most people I interviewed had some misunderstandings on the religious practices of the Haredim. Some people misunderstood the intention for separating the sexes in daily life and in Synagogue. The Haredim believe it is the best way to keep people focused on God. By channeling temptations for the opposite sex to something greater such as your relationship with God, the Haredim constitute gender separation. Also some people disagree with the extreme view Haredim follow the Torah. Some non-religious Jews feel by taking every passage literally is somewhat obsessive. The Haredim, on the opposing side, feel that by following Jewish Law they are singlehandedly brining the coming of the Messiah.
There are many misconceptions surrounding the Haredi community. Many people disagree with the separation of sexes in social and religious settings, claiming this is one of many customs that constitutes anti-feministic behavior. While members of the Haredi community feel this type of separation allows people to channel their temptations for a greater good. Others feel the gender roles and educational institutes continue to put females in the background. After speaking with the Frankel’s I received explanations for all these customs and traditions of the Haredi community. Although some of the explanations do not fully change doubter’s minds, hopefully they do bring awareness to the Haredi belief systems.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Media Coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict—Zack Colman
The role of the media in the Israel/Palestine conflict cannot be underestimated. As an American, the common picture we see of Israel is one of violence and perpetual unrest. We do not get to see the inner-workings of Israeli society. We do not get to hear about the millions of people who crave peace — we only hear about the minority that does its best to prevent peace. But, as we noticed from living in Israel, while terror and fear is certainly part of daily life, it tends to be exaggerated by the American media.
The media has the ability to shape the public’s perception of the world, and it does so by being society’s gatekeeper. The gatekeeper is quite possibly the most important function of journalism. Journalists single-handedly decide what the public will read, see and hear. They decide how important the issue is by where the story is placed in a newspaper or news broadcast. They can decide to not print or broadcast anything about a story at all.
Gatekeepers, though, are humans, and humans have natural biases. With many powerful members of the media being Jewish, it is no surprise that the Israel/Palestine conflict gets a massive amount of coverage and prominent placement in television broadcasts and newspapers. Abe M. Rosenthal, the former editor of the New York Times, was a Jewish man with a pro-Israel stance. As people look back to the “newspapers of record,” Rosenthal’s stance on the Israel/Palestine conflict will continue to influence scholars. But gatekeeper bias doesn’t stop at the gatekeeper himself — in order to get more bylines and more big stories, reporters have to cater to what their editors desire and their editors’ biases. The whole chain of command below Rosenthal, therefore, took a pro-Israel stance whether they liked it or not.
One thing greatly affecting the way newspapers are run is the current crisis the industry faces with the emergence of the Internet. On the Internet, people can receive real-time updated news for free, and newspapers have yet to find a way to make advertising (through which most revenues are earned) profitable. People have developed what is called “banner blindness” and thus do not even notice advertisements on the Internet. The free, more in-depth content on the Internet has led to a decline in subscriptions. As a result, newspapers have cut staff, page size, story size, and international news coverage.
This presents a major problem for the Israel/Palestine conflict. As newspaper organizations continue to cut and cut, they will become more localized — even “hyper-localized.” Soon enough, coverage of international events will be left to a select few wire services that don’t have the space to go in-depth or run human-interest stories. There will be fewer news outlets to offer their opinions and we will end up with the same take on international events.
This doesn’t sound all that bad until you take into account the “if it bleeds, it leads” philosophy. In order to capture viewers or sell papers off the newsstands, news organizations tend to emphasize the guts and gore of the world. Stories about gruesome killings sell more than ones about the economy or new fashion trends, and news organizations know this. By attracting subscribers or viewers, news organizations can then gain more advertisers and pad their pockets.
Now, take these two problems and put them together. What you have is less space devoted to international coverage (which is the content are declining most at newspapers, according to a July study), but an engrained penchant for publishing the guts and gore of the world. When discussing the Israel/Palestine conflict, what you will get from this equation is fewer articles that deal with issues other than terrorist attacks or threats to any sort of stability in the area. Even now, there is a lack of coverage concerning matters of peace (I browsed a month’s worth of articles on CNN.com and found only one dealing with peace) and most stories about Israel will be about a possible attack on or from Iran or terrorist attacks. With less space devoted to international coverage, this is all readers will be likely to see from Israel.
Linda Gradstein of National Public Radio has said it’s already difficult enough to push through human-interest stories about Israel. Peace coverage generally fails to get into the mainstream media because it would change the image the media has concocted about the region. Much of this image rests on the journalism concept of currency.
Currency, in journalism terms, is following an event from beginning to end. This is most common in court trials, where the story will recapitulate the series of events leading up to today’s news at the end of the main story.
With the Israel/Palestine conflict, currency presents two problems. Since most stories about Israel relate to terrorism and death, recounting previous events at the end of each story only serves to embed the idea that Israel is a dangerous place. It doesn’t allow the reader to think maybe this is an isolated incident — by listing everything that happened before (even if years apart), it gives a negative image of the area.
The most significant problem with currency is context — where does one start to recount events? With thousands of years of history, it’s impossible to go all the way back to the beginning of the land to explain the conflict. But with so many uneducated people in the world, a history lesson would go a long way to eliminate potential biases and confusion. By not giving enough context (or too much), though, reporters run the risk of being tagged as an Israeli or Palestinian sympathizer, depending on the circumstances.
Assumed bias is difficult to avoid with such an emotional topic, especially when people don’t understand the true meaning of “balance and fairness.” Most people expect that “balance and fairness” means equal representation of both sides in a story, which is not the case. In a story where three Israelis are killed by a Palestinian suicide bomber, some sources don’t need to be contacted. For example, there would be no need to speak with a Palestinian about the event — he would say the Israelis got what they deserved, and this would further fan the flames without adding anything of value to the story. At the same time, though, Palestinian sympathizers would say the Western media has once again thwarted them. Still, there is not much a journalist can do to quiet these people.
What then is the role of the media? Clearly there is a large problem facing international news media, as there will be fewer and fewer pages for fewer and fewer staff to devote to such coverage. And, if you’re an international news reporter who needs to get published, you’re going to write about what is traditionally eye-catching — inhumane violence, terrorism, war. As Gradstein mentioned, it’s already hard enough to publish a human-interest story, and it’s only going to get harder given the constraints the news media has to deal with.
The media’s role is generally understood as unbiased observer. The media takes information from various sources, pieces them together in an entertaining and informative way, and then presents them to readers in a logical manner. There is no real room for interpretation, as that would present a sort of bias.
But when you have the pen, when you have the public’s eyes and ears held captive, should you do more, as a journalist, to shape the way the world works? In some ways, journalists accomplish this through editorials. Generally, though, editorials are about more localized or national issues — hardly ever will international events be discussed in an editorial, unless it is giving the American government advice. Therefore, editorial content about the Israel/Palestine conflict is absent unless the U.S. is involved.
There are hardly any stories about terrorist attacks in Israel that mention peace negotiations. It seems to me that such a mention would flow logically in such a story, yet the connection is rarely made. In fact, had second the bulldozer attack not occurred, I doubt I would have even known it was on the same day Mahmoud Abbas and Ehud Olmert were meeting to discuss peace. There was no coverage about such a meeting before the attack, only a mention about it after the attack — but no separate story for the meeting was published.
It could very well be that the media has no business sticking its nose in peace talks. Obviously, publishing peace negotiations or progress (if one were lucky enough to retrieve such information) could derail such negotiations or progress. But, at the same time, it could also expedite them. Unfortunately, there are not enough historical examples to point to one direction or the other.
Maybe, though, that means it’s time to start writing about peace in the Middle East instead of violence — however infrequent both of them are.
The media has the ability to shape the public’s perception of the world, and it does so by being society’s gatekeeper. The gatekeeper is quite possibly the most important function of journalism. Journalists single-handedly decide what the public will read, see and hear. They decide how important the issue is by where the story is placed in a newspaper or news broadcast. They can decide to not print or broadcast anything about a story at all.
Gatekeepers, though, are humans, and humans have natural biases. With many powerful members of the media being Jewish, it is no surprise that the Israel/Palestine conflict gets a massive amount of coverage and prominent placement in television broadcasts and newspapers. Abe M. Rosenthal, the former editor of the New York Times, was a Jewish man with a pro-Israel stance. As people look back to the “newspapers of record,” Rosenthal’s stance on the Israel/Palestine conflict will continue to influence scholars. But gatekeeper bias doesn’t stop at the gatekeeper himself — in order to get more bylines and more big stories, reporters have to cater to what their editors desire and their editors’ biases. The whole chain of command below Rosenthal, therefore, took a pro-Israel stance whether they liked it or not.
One thing greatly affecting the way newspapers are run is the current crisis the industry faces with the emergence of the Internet. On the Internet, people can receive real-time updated news for free, and newspapers have yet to find a way to make advertising (through which most revenues are earned) profitable. People have developed what is called “banner blindness” and thus do not even notice advertisements on the Internet. The free, more in-depth content on the Internet has led to a decline in subscriptions. As a result, newspapers have cut staff, page size, story size, and international news coverage.
This presents a major problem for the Israel/Palestine conflict. As newspaper organizations continue to cut and cut, they will become more localized — even “hyper-localized.” Soon enough, coverage of international events will be left to a select few wire services that don’t have the space to go in-depth or run human-interest stories. There will be fewer news outlets to offer their opinions and we will end up with the same take on international events.
This doesn’t sound all that bad until you take into account the “if it bleeds, it leads” philosophy. In order to capture viewers or sell papers off the newsstands, news organizations tend to emphasize the guts and gore of the world. Stories about gruesome killings sell more than ones about the economy or new fashion trends, and news organizations know this. By attracting subscribers or viewers, news organizations can then gain more advertisers and pad their pockets.
Now, take these two problems and put them together. What you have is less space devoted to international coverage (which is the content are declining most at newspapers, according to a July study), but an engrained penchant for publishing the guts and gore of the world. When discussing the Israel/Palestine conflict, what you will get from this equation is fewer articles that deal with issues other than terrorist attacks or threats to any sort of stability in the area. Even now, there is a lack of coverage concerning matters of peace (I browsed a month’s worth of articles on CNN.com and found only one dealing with peace) and most stories about Israel will be about a possible attack on or from Iran or terrorist attacks. With less space devoted to international coverage, this is all readers will be likely to see from Israel.
Linda Gradstein of National Public Radio has said it’s already difficult enough to push through human-interest stories about Israel. Peace coverage generally fails to get into the mainstream media because it would change the image the media has concocted about the region. Much of this image rests on the journalism concept of currency.
Currency, in journalism terms, is following an event from beginning to end. This is most common in court trials, where the story will recapitulate the series of events leading up to today’s news at the end of the main story.
With the Israel/Palestine conflict, currency presents two problems. Since most stories about Israel relate to terrorism and death, recounting previous events at the end of each story only serves to embed the idea that Israel is a dangerous place. It doesn’t allow the reader to think maybe this is an isolated incident — by listing everything that happened before (even if years apart), it gives a negative image of the area.
The most significant problem with currency is context — where does one start to recount events? With thousands of years of history, it’s impossible to go all the way back to the beginning of the land to explain the conflict. But with so many uneducated people in the world, a history lesson would go a long way to eliminate potential biases and confusion. By not giving enough context (or too much), though, reporters run the risk of being tagged as an Israeli or Palestinian sympathizer, depending on the circumstances.
Assumed bias is difficult to avoid with such an emotional topic, especially when people don’t understand the true meaning of “balance and fairness.” Most people expect that “balance and fairness” means equal representation of both sides in a story, which is not the case. In a story where three Israelis are killed by a Palestinian suicide bomber, some sources don’t need to be contacted. For example, there would be no need to speak with a Palestinian about the event — he would say the Israelis got what they deserved, and this would further fan the flames without adding anything of value to the story. At the same time, though, Palestinian sympathizers would say the Western media has once again thwarted them. Still, there is not much a journalist can do to quiet these people.
What then is the role of the media? Clearly there is a large problem facing international news media, as there will be fewer and fewer pages for fewer and fewer staff to devote to such coverage. And, if you’re an international news reporter who needs to get published, you’re going to write about what is traditionally eye-catching — inhumane violence, terrorism, war. As Gradstein mentioned, it’s already hard enough to publish a human-interest story, and it’s only going to get harder given the constraints the news media has to deal with.
The media’s role is generally understood as unbiased observer. The media takes information from various sources, pieces them together in an entertaining and informative way, and then presents them to readers in a logical manner. There is no real room for interpretation, as that would present a sort of bias.
But when you have the pen, when you have the public’s eyes and ears held captive, should you do more, as a journalist, to shape the way the world works? In some ways, journalists accomplish this through editorials. Generally, though, editorials are about more localized or national issues — hardly ever will international events be discussed in an editorial, unless it is giving the American government advice. Therefore, editorial content about the Israel/Palestine conflict is absent unless the U.S. is involved.
There are hardly any stories about terrorist attacks in Israel that mention peace negotiations. It seems to me that such a mention would flow logically in such a story, yet the connection is rarely made. In fact, had second the bulldozer attack not occurred, I doubt I would have even known it was on the same day Mahmoud Abbas and Ehud Olmert were meeting to discuss peace. There was no coverage about such a meeting before the attack, only a mention about it after the attack — but no separate story for the meeting was published.
It could very well be that the media has no business sticking its nose in peace talks. Obviously, publishing peace negotiations or progress (if one were lucky enough to retrieve such information) could derail such negotiations or progress. But, at the same time, it could also expedite them. Unfortunately, there are not enough historical examples to point to one direction or the other.
Maybe, though, that means it’s time to start writing about peace in the Middle East instead of violence — however infrequent both of them are.
Magen David Adom in Jerusalem—Becca Steinman
By: Becca Steinman
Magen David Adom (MDA for short) is the only ambulance service in Israel. Magen David Adom was created in response to the Arab riots in 1929. Jews living in Palestine during this period of time saw the necessity for a quick and responsive form of medical help. They felt that an ambulance service was the best way to provide quick transportation and treatment. Therefore, Magen David Adom was founded in 1930 in Tel Aviv to meet this need. The MDA building was about the size of a small shack and the only assets that they had were one ambulance full of basic medical supplies (4.) Here, in Tel Aviv was the beginning of what would later become a huge international organization.
Before understanding Magen David Adom in Jerusalem, one must know the facts about this organization. Magen David Adom means “The Red Star of David” in English. MDA is also a part of the International Red Cross. In recent years, MDA has teamed up with the Red Crescent Movement. The Red Crescent Movement is an equal movement to MDA. It too is a part of the International Red Cross. Both MDA and the Red Crescent Movement joined the International Red Cross in 2006 where Hillary Clinton was present to announce the happy occasion. The Red Crescent movement can be found in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Magen David Adom wont put a cross or star on their ambulance because it is a Jewish service and the Red Crescent movement only has a Crescent on their ambulance for the same reason (3.)
Magen David Adom and the Red Crescent Movement follow seven important Fundamental Principals:
- Humanity: To protect human life and ensure respect for all human beings with cooperation and friendship amongst everyone.
- Impartiality: No discrimination of race, religion, class or political opinions.
- Neutrality: No taking sides in any situation
- Independence: They are independent movements and will work alongside other movements but will not necessarily always take the same stance.
- Voluntary Service: No one is hired prompted by desire for gain.
- Unity: There is only 1 Red Cross, MDA or Red Crescent Movement but all are open to everyone in either community or society.
- University: They committed to helping nationally and worldwide with equal status amongst other nations. For example: MDA was part of the Katrina Relief effort in America after Hurricane Katrina.
(3.)
With the facts given above, one is now able to understand the over all function of this organization and can now understand the purpose of the Jerusalem Magen David Adom Station. The location of the Magen David Adom Jerusalem main station is in Romema, Jerusalem and is the third MDA location. This obviously means that it is part of the Jerusalem Region. The first building was erected in 1963, renovated in 1970 and is going to be renovated in 2008. The expansion was supposed to begin in February of 2008 but unfortunately there has not been any work done on it since the placing of the corner stone back in February. This station has a paid staff of about 60 paramedics, 90 Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs), 160 ambulances drivers, and 600 constant and solid volunteers. The Jerusalem Region is the largest region in the country, supplying service from the border of the West Bank Territories to the Jordan Valley and from Beit Shemesh to the Dead Sea. This means that there are about 1 million people in this service area. In fact, in 2007, there were about 3,150 volunteers for the Jerusalem region (1.) This region includes stations located in Pisgat Zeev,Makor Chaim, Ofrah, Talmon, Efrat, Tekoa, Gush Etzion, Zur Hadassah, The Old City, Beitar Ilit, Biet Shemesh ,Maaleh Adumim, Givat Zeev, Megilot, and the Knesset. The Jerusalem region also includes blood banks, regional and national dispatching center, regional management, and both volunteer and training departments (2.) It also has the highest amount of blood usage in the country. However, all of the blood that is donated is used 100% in the Israeli Defense force and makes up 95% of the blood found in other Israeli hospitals. The MDA Jerusalem region also supplies service to both of the Hadassah hospitals, Shaare Zedek, and Bikur Holim (5.) These are the three hospitals located in Jerusalem.
An interesting fact is that Magen David Adom has two different kinds of ambulances. One kind is just a regular ambulance with basic medical supplies. These are ambulances that usually just drive around the city and are placed at special events. They are recognized by their colors yellow and red. There are also intensive care ambulances, which are placed in highly populated areas, and areas that need high security and control. They can be defined by their colors white and red. Some of these ambulances can be found around Jerusalem on Ben Yahuda Street and near the Knesset. There are also other vehicles that Jerusalem uses for medical transportation as well. They use motorcycles and have equipped them with a large metal box on the back including the most important life saving necessities. These motorcycles are designed especially for the Jerusalem region because of the Old City. It is very hard to get an ambulance in to specific areas of the Old City so these motorcycles carrying supplies can rush to a scene and get the situation under control until the person can be moved or until an ambulance can get within range of the patient (5.)
One thing that Magen David Adom in Jerusalem places a lot of importance on is strategic placement. MDA Jerusalem region not only strategically places their ambulances, but they have also strategically placed their absorption centers. These are centers where ambulances can be dispatched. MDA Jerusalem recognizes the fact that Jerusalem is a highly populated city full of religious tensions and that an accident or attack can occur at any moment. Therefore they strategically place ambulances at high-risk areas to be able to have faster response times and therefore have a better chance at saving a patients life. The absorption centers have also been erected in strategically chosen locations in order to also provide a quick response time. These absorption centers also have certain areas that they supply service to, and within these areas there are designated hospitals that people are taken to. This is designed to ensure efficiency and accuracy. For example, the response time for an ambulance that arrived on the scene at the attack on July 22nd near King David Hotel was 4 minutes and 23 seconds. That is because there was an ambulance nearby that was strategically placed there since it is considered a high-risk area. MDA posts that position every day and this ensured a quick response time and fortunately saved lives. Nobody was killed in this particular attack (5.)
For people who are interested in volunteering for Magen David Adom, there are various options. However, the most popular option for American’s is Hagshama. Hagshama heavily subsidizes trips to Israel and training for participants. However, anybody who wants to volunteer for MDA must train at the main station in Romema, Jerusalem. Training programs like Hagshama also provide activities like trips to the Old City and Mount Herzl to help participants get a better understanding of Jerusalem. It is definitely a great experience for anybody who is interested in the medical field. No experience is required and everybody does what he or she is comfortable with. All the training is provided during the training sessions in Romema (5.)
So what can be done to help this organization that started out with only one ambulance? Well, for starters, stop donating ambulances! The Jerusalem Region has too many ambulances but not enough medical supplies. Communities like to donate ambulances to Jerusalem because they know that it is the biggest region and they like to see their name on the side of an ambulance. They like to donate something that will be seen by many people. However, what Jerusalem really needs are defibrillators, syringes, heart monitors, and other medical supplies. Communities are not donating these items because they know that people will probably not recognize their name on the side of a defibrillator or heart monitor (5.)
Magen David Adom is very vital to the existence of the Israeli population. The Jerusalem Region is not just the biggest but is also an example to the rest of the organization. Hopefully, with the help of donations and volunteering from other countries and communities, Magen David Adom will be able to continue saving lives every day.
Bibliography
1.) American Friends of Magen David Adom. 7/21/2008/.
http://www.afmda.org/
2.) Magen David Adom in Israel. 7/21/2008. http://www.mdais.org/e/295/.
3.) Magen David Adom in Israel. 7/21/2008. http://www.mdais.org/e/RC_
4.) MDA in Israel. 7/21/2008.
http://www.afmda.org/
5.) Noormid, Michael. Phone Interview. 7/20/2008.
Where Has All the Water Gone?—Eric Dropkin & Elina Fonarev
Where Has All the Water Gone?—Eric Dropkin & Elina Fonarev
With the changing environment and the large population growth that will occur throughout the next few decades the water supply in Israel will become even more insufficient. All over the world ground water tables are falling and depleting at an astonishing rate. This is especially the case in the Middle East and Israel where water is becoming a scarcity. The Sea of Galilee and the aquifers within Jerusalem are approaching the black line. Over the next 50 years, wars will no longer be fought over oil, but water, which is why a case study will be conducted in dealing with the water supply within east and west Jerusalem. It is suggested that the water crisis is not only a natural phenomena but also created by mismanagement. This mismanagement of water in Jerusalem leads to a conflict between east and west Jerusalem inhabitants as well as a general crisis within the city.
If one traces the history of water within Jerusalem one can start to understand the circumstances of the current water crisis and the politics that surround it. In the city of David, around 700 BCE, Hezekiah's tunnel carried water from The Gihon Spring into the city. The Gihon Spring was outside the city walls; therefore, the tunnel was used to generate a constant supply of water to the city, which was especially important during times of siege and war. The tunnel was built in reaction to a fear of assault by the Assyrians. This way, the Assyrians would not be able to acquire water and would be forced to either surrender or travel to farther places to find water and eventually fail in their attempts to take over the city. In reality, there are actually multiple tunnels leading from the spring into the city, but Hezekiah’s is one of the most famous, and was cut acutely by two teams following a natural fault in the rock. Here one sees the most basic politics concerning water during the time of the City of David. Not only was water important to a political situation but also for sustaining life; thus, the tunnel represents how important water was throughout Jerusalem’s history.
The mismanagement of water in Jerusalem began as early as 1516 when the Ottomans conquered Israel. While the establishment of Ottoman rule brought the first water pipes to Jerusalem, the city was not seen as significant and thus the water supply was poorly orchestrated. Suleiman the Magnificent did however establish pipes to feed water to the Sabils (water fountains) throughout the city. These Sabils were an attempt to create a more hospitable environment for pilgrims traveling to Jerusalem as well as to those who had already settled there. Still, most families received little water, and the water that they did obtain came from community wells or cisterns which were filled by rain water. According to Itai Naamat, a student in the Department of Soil and Water Sciences at Hebrew University, the cisterns and wells often pulled water from the same aquifer below the city. Politically, during the time of the Turkish rule, Jerusalem was not seen as significant a place as it is today, thus, there was no money or time put into the up-keep of the city and it remained under unfavorable conditions until the British Mandate.
Following the defeat of the Turks in World War I, the British were given control of Jerusalem and Palestine under a mandate system. During what would later be called the British mandate, Jerusalem was modernized. Roads and hotels were built; this included a modern water system, houses were connected by pipes and running water rather then local community wells. After independence was declared in 1948, west Jerusalem was controlled by Israel, and east Jerusalem was under the authority of Jordan. This division led to the current political tension concerning water within Jerusalem.
The total population of municipal Jerusalem was approximately 680,000 in 2005; of that 680,000, Palestinian residents made up approximately 33 percent of the population in Jerusalem while Jewish residents account for the other 67 percent of the population. Like all of Israel, Jerusalem gets the majority of its water from the Mekorot Water Company. Mekorot Water Company Ltd. is a Government-owned national water supply company. Mekorot produces and supplies roughly two-thirds of the total amount of water used in Israel. As the national water supply company it is responsible for managing the country's water resources, developing new sources, and ensuring regular delivery of water to all localities. This is important because here one can try to distinguish between national policies and policies within Jerusalem. While Mekorot supplies the majority of the water, the Jerusalem municipality is responsible for the up-keep of pipes and infrastructure within both east and west Jerusalem. However, because East Jerusalem has only been under Israeli since 1967 its infrastructure has been slower to change and modernize especially with West Jerusalem’s current mismanagement crisis.
Jerusalem has virtually no water supply of its own and as a result of ineffective water infrastructure and city planning water is becoming more and more sparse. Currently Jerusalem gets the majority of its water from four pipes that stem from the Keneret. Also, it draws a significant portion of water from the Aquifer. Thus, Jerusalem gets little water from these two areas, and as a result of its population growth and mismanagement, the water received is not enough to maintain both agriculture and potable use. According to Mekorot chairman Eli Ronen, “With the rising Jerusalem population and the expansion of the city into new neighborhoods water demand will continue to increase.” Mr. Mazon, Director of joint Jewish and Palestinian Water Committee, suggests that for the last 20 years the city has neglected to carefully manage the water supply and the infrastructure. Therefore, the current water crisis exists today in both east and west Jerusalem.
If one looks at the data associated with water supply and demand within east and west Jerusalem there is a discrepancy between the two sides of the city. Residents in East Jerusalem often have no water for four to five days out of the week. Also, the price of water that East Jerusalem residents must pay is 25 percent more than that of the residents that live within West Jerusalem. Meanwhile, Jewish neighborhoods in the Jerusalem area use four times the amount of water that Palestinian villages use, even though there are fewer infrastructures per inhabitant. The difference in water quality that East Jerusalem and West Jerusalem receives is also different. East Jerusalem gets its water directly from the mountain aquifer making its water more polluted than West Jerusalem, who uses recycled water as well as water pumped in from the northern regions of Israel. This has to do with the fact that East Jerusalem does not have a treatment plant while West Jerusalem does. In 1999 the Soreq sewage treatment plant was opened, the plant purifies sewage from West Jerusalem, while there is no treatment plant for East Jerusalem. Due to the poor sewage system in Jerusalem much of the waste that leaves the pipes gets carried out to streams and valleys in the West Bank and enters the mountain aquifer. Critics have argued that this amounts to discrimination and neglect on the part of the Israeli and local Jerusalem governments. This causes arguments between East Jerusalem residents that West Jerusalem is favored while East Jerusalem is neglected.
There are multiple theories of why there are inequalities in the water supply between east and west Jerusalem. After the 1967 war, Israel reunited east and west Jerusalem and the Jerusalem municipality agreed to take over the East Jerusalem Arab villages as well as the laws that govern the city. Here is where one starts to see the major arguments that deal with the disproportionate water supplies to east and west Jerusalem. According to Ahron Roseber of the Jerusalem municipality, the infrastructure in East Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967 was neglected. She suggests that the water problems in East Jerusalem came from this neglect rather then current local policy. Furthermore, she pointed out that Palestinian neighborhoods are growing at a faster rate then those of West Jerusalem. This growth rate is putting higher stress on an older water system, causing the previously mentioned problems. It’s not that the Israeli government is shutting off the water to East Jerusalem like some Palestinians may suggest, but rather that there own demand is causing the shortage. She then suggested that due to higher demand and weaker infrastructure, residence in East Jerusalem pay more for water than those that live in the west. Furthermore, Israeli officials suggest that Arab villages in east Jerusalem have dug illegal wells, hastening the water shortage. Thus, East Jerusalem is facing a graver water situation than West Jerusalem.
However, there have been attempts to help stop the water shortage. There are multiple plans in the works. There are plans to build a fifth water pipe to supply more water to Jerusalem. The new system will include: a 3.5 meter in diameter tunnel, 14 km long and dug beneath the Judean Hills as well as pumping stations, reservoirs, and transformer stations. The pipeline will supply up to 500,000 cu. m. of water a day at a peak operating capacity (150 million cubic meters a year) from Israel’s coastal plain to the elevated heights of Jerusalem. If predictions are correct, this pipeline could provide enough water for the next 30 years to both east and west Jerusalem. Also, there are attempts to improve water conservation within the city. Normally only 60 to 80 percent of water pumped through a city is actually used while the rest escapes out of the water pipes as a result of pressure which overloads the pipes and causes them to leak. Israel is implementing The Smart Pressure Reduction Controller (SPRC) in Jerusalem. SPRC automatically sets the pressure according to water demand in real time, so that when demand is low, the pressure is lower, and less water leaks out. Another proposition to help the water crisis is to build a canal from the Jordan River to the Red Sea. The Jordan River is in bad condition because of decades of overuse and abuse. The lower portion of the river has been reduced to a seep of mainly raw sewage and saltwater runoff. Thus, in an attempt to clean this area as well as to provide water plans for a canal have been offered. However, with much opposition from Jordan and Egypt as well as environmentalists, this proposal was put on hold if not eliminated altogether as an option.
Today, when people are asked about the water problem that Jerusalem is facing most do not even realize it is a problem. In 2001, when there was a giant drought, many were aware of the situation. However, not much has been done to secure water for the future. East and west Jerusalem are still facing a water shortage question with many solutions but few attempts to actually compromise on a final agreement. Politics surround the issue as well as a history of mismanagement. While there are no clues as to whether there will ever be enough water for the Middle East, it can be stated that the next time one is in Israel, drink lots of water but remember that you’re drinking something more valuable in the Middle East than oil.
With the changing environment and the large population growth that will occur throughout the next few decades the water supply in Israel will become even more insufficient. All over the world ground water tables are falling and depleting at an astonishing rate. This is especially the case in the Middle East and Israel where water is becoming a scarcity. The Sea of Galilee and the aquifers within Jerusalem are approaching the black line. Over the next 50 years, wars will no longer be fought over oil, but water, which is why a case study will be conducted in dealing with the water supply within east and west Jerusalem. It is suggested that the water crisis is not only a natural phenomena but also created by mismanagement. This mismanagement of water in Jerusalem leads to a conflict between east and west Jerusalem inhabitants as well as a general crisis within the city.
If one traces the history of water within Jerusalem one can start to understand the circumstances of the current water crisis and the politics that surround it. In the city of David, around 700 BCE, Hezekiah's tunnel carried water from The Gihon Spring into the city. The Gihon Spring was outside the city walls; therefore, the tunnel was used to generate a constant supply of water to the city, which was especially important during times of siege and war. The tunnel was built in reaction to a fear of assault by the Assyrians. This way, the Assyrians would not be able to acquire water and would be forced to either surrender or travel to farther places to find water and eventually fail in their attempts to take over the city. In reality, there are actually multiple tunnels leading from the spring into the city, but Hezekiah’s is one of the most famous, and was cut acutely by two teams following a natural fault in the rock. Here one sees the most basic politics concerning water during the time of the City of David. Not only was water important to a political situation but also for sustaining life; thus, the tunnel represents how important water was throughout Jerusalem’s history.
The mismanagement of water in Jerusalem began as early as 1516 when the Ottomans conquered Israel. While the establishment of Ottoman rule brought the first water pipes to Jerusalem, the city was not seen as significant and thus the water supply was poorly orchestrated. Suleiman the Magnificent did however establish pipes to feed water to the Sabils (water fountains) throughout the city. These Sabils were an attempt to create a more hospitable environment for pilgrims traveling to Jerusalem as well as to those who had already settled there. Still, most families received little water, and the water that they did obtain came from community wells or cisterns which were filled by rain water. According to Itai Naamat, a student in the Department of Soil and Water Sciences at Hebrew University, the cisterns and wells often pulled water from the same aquifer below the city. Politically, during the time of the Turkish rule, Jerusalem was not seen as significant a place as it is today, thus, there was no money or time put into the up-keep of the city and it remained under unfavorable conditions until the British Mandate.
Following the defeat of the Turks in World War I, the British were given control of Jerusalem and Palestine under a mandate system. During what would later be called the British mandate, Jerusalem was modernized. Roads and hotels were built; this included a modern water system, houses were connected by pipes and running water rather then local community wells. After independence was declared in 1948, west Jerusalem was controlled by Israel, and east Jerusalem was under the authority of Jordan. This division led to the current political tension concerning water within Jerusalem.
The total population of municipal Jerusalem was approximately 680,000 in 2005; of that 680,000, Palestinian residents made up approximately 33 percent of the population in Jerusalem while Jewish residents account for the other 67 percent of the population. Like all of Israel, Jerusalem gets the majority of its water from the Mekorot Water Company. Mekorot Water Company Ltd. is a Government-owned national water supply company. Mekorot produces and supplies roughly two-thirds of the total amount of water used in Israel. As the national water supply company it is responsible for managing the country's water resources, developing new sources, and ensuring regular delivery of water to all localities. This is important because here one can try to distinguish between national policies and policies within Jerusalem. While Mekorot supplies the majority of the water, the Jerusalem municipality is responsible for the up-keep of pipes and infrastructure within both east and west Jerusalem. However, because East Jerusalem has only been under Israeli since 1967 its infrastructure has been slower to change and modernize especially with West Jerusalem’s current mismanagement crisis.
Jerusalem has virtually no water supply of its own and as a result of ineffective water infrastructure and city planning water is becoming more and more sparse. Currently Jerusalem gets the majority of its water from four pipes that stem from the Keneret. Also, it draws a significant portion of water from the Aquifer. Thus, Jerusalem gets little water from these two areas, and as a result of its population growth and mismanagement, the water received is not enough to maintain both agriculture and potable use. According to Mekorot chairman Eli Ronen, “With the rising Jerusalem population and the expansion of the city into new neighborhoods water demand will continue to increase.” Mr. Mazon, Director of joint Jewish and Palestinian Water Committee, suggests that for the last 20 years the city has neglected to carefully manage the water supply and the infrastructure. Therefore, the current water crisis exists today in both east and west Jerusalem.
If one looks at the data associated with water supply and demand within east and west Jerusalem there is a discrepancy between the two sides of the city. Residents in East Jerusalem often have no water for four to five days out of the week. Also, the price of water that East Jerusalem residents must pay is 25 percent more than that of the residents that live within West Jerusalem. Meanwhile, Jewish neighborhoods in the Jerusalem area use four times the amount of water that Palestinian villages use, even though there are fewer infrastructures per inhabitant. The difference in water quality that East Jerusalem and West Jerusalem receives is also different. East Jerusalem gets its water directly from the mountain aquifer making its water more polluted than West Jerusalem, who uses recycled water as well as water pumped in from the northern regions of Israel. This has to do with the fact that East Jerusalem does not have a treatment plant while West Jerusalem does. In 1999 the Soreq sewage treatment plant was opened, the plant purifies sewage from West Jerusalem, while there is no treatment plant for East Jerusalem. Due to the poor sewage system in Jerusalem much of the waste that leaves the pipes gets carried out to streams and valleys in the West Bank and enters the mountain aquifer. Critics have argued that this amounts to discrimination and neglect on the part of the Israeli and local Jerusalem governments. This causes arguments between East Jerusalem residents that West Jerusalem is favored while East Jerusalem is neglected.
There are multiple theories of why there are inequalities in the water supply between east and west Jerusalem. After the 1967 war, Israel reunited east and west Jerusalem and the Jerusalem municipality agreed to take over the East Jerusalem Arab villages as well as the laws that govern the city. Here is where one starts to see the major arguments that deal with the disproportionate water supplies to east and west Jerusalem. According to Ahron Roseber of the Jerusalem municipality, the infrastructure in East Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967 was neglected. She suggests that the water problems in East Jerusalem came from this neglect rather then current local policy. Furthermore, she pointed out that Palestinian neighborhoods are growing at a faster rate then those of West Jerusalem. This growth rate is putting higher stress on an older water system, causing the previously mentioned problems. It’s not that the Israeli government is shutting off the water to East Jerusalem like some Palestinians may suggest, but rather that there own demand is causing the shortage. She then suggested that due to higher demand and weaker infrastructure, residence in East Jerusalem pay more for water than those that live in the west. Furthermore, Israeli officials suggest that Arab villages in east Jerusalem have dug illegal wells, hastening the water shortage. Thus, East Jerusalem is facing a graver water situation than West Jerusalem.
However, there have been attempts to help stop the water shortage. There are multiple plans in the works. There are plans to build a fifth water pipe to supply more water to Jerusalem. The new system will include: a 3.5 meter in diameter tunnel, 14 km long and dug beneath the Judean Hills as well as pumping stations, reservoirs, and transformer stations. The pipeline will supply up to 500,000 cu. m. of water a day at a peak operating capacity (150 million cubic meters a year) from Israel’s coastal plain to the elevated heights of Jerusalem. If predictions are correct, this pipeline could provide enough water for the next 30 years to both east and west Jerusalem. Also, there are attempts to improve water conservation within the city. Normally only 60 to 80 percent of water pumped through a city is actually used while the rest escapes out of the water pipes as a result of pressure which overloads the pipes and causes them to leak. Israel is implementing The Smart Pressure Reduction Controller (SPRC) in Jerusalem. SPRC automatically sets the pressure according to water demand in real time, so that when demand is low, the pressure is lower, and less water leaks out. Another proposition to help the water crisis is to build a canal from the Jordan River to the Red Sea. The Jordan River is in bad condition because of decades of overuse and abuse. The lower portion of the river has been reduced to a seep of mainly raw sewage and saltwater runoff. Thus, in an attempt to clean this area as well as to provide water plans for a canal have been offered. However, with much opposition from Jordan and Egypt as well as environmentalists, this proposal was put on hold if not eliminated altogether as an option.
Today, when people are asked about the water problem that Jerusalem is facing most do not even realize it is a problem. In 2001, when there was a giant drought, many were aware of the situation. However, not much has been done to secure water for the future. East and west Jerusalem are still facing a water shortage question with many solutions but few attempts to actually compromise on a final agreement. Politics surround the issue as well as a history of mismanagement. While there are no clues as to whether there will ever be enough water for the Middle East, it can be stated that the next time one is in Israel, drink lots of water but remember that you’re drinking something more valuable in the Middle East than oil.
A Brief History of Mount Scopus—Cherylanne Glassner
A Brief History of Mount Scopus—Cherylanne Glassner
I believe that it is important to know the history of the land on which you are living. After four weeks here, it was pretty clear that no one really knows anything about Mount Scopus. What follows is a brief history lesson on the mountain we called home for about five weeks of the most memorable experience of our college careers.
The Hebrew name for Mount Scopus is Har Hatzofim. Literally translated, the mountain is named, “Mountain of the Watchers.” Standing at 834 meters above sea level, about 100 meters above the old city, Mount Scopus got its name for the spectacular view. From the top of Mount Scopus, one can see the entire old city, as well as the Judean desert in the east. It has been said that on a clear day it is also possible to see the Dead Sea. In October 1948, Baruch Neumark, the commander of the Israeli forces on Mount Scopus, said “I believe that he who controls this commanding ground will rule Jerusalem.” This was confirmed through the vast military history of the mountain.
Military History
Due to the height of Mount Scopus, the mountain has proven to be incredibly useful in military strategy. Mount Scopus was used as a vantage point for the Roman army during its suppression of the Great Jewish Revolt in 66 CE. In 70CE, it was used by Titus’ Roman legions as a base to carry out its siege of the old city. During this siege, the walls of the Second Temple were breached – this is what Jews remember on 17 Tamuz (usually falls in July). Then in 1099, the Crusaders used Mount Scopus as a base. Mount Scopus was also used as a base for General Allenby’s Egyptian Expeditionary Force during World War I.
Mount Scopus from 1948-1967
Mount Scopus has always been in Israeli hands, however, the circumstances surrounding the mountain have not always been simple. From the year 1948 to 1967, Mount Scopus existed as an Israeli exclave within Jordanian territory. Everything in West Jerusalem was Israeli, and everything in East Jerusalem was Jordanian – except for Mount Scopus. The situation caused many problems, seeing as both the hospital and the university were on Mount Scopus, and access to both was limited.
On July 7, 1948, the Israelis and the Jordanians agreed to the demilitarization of Mount Scopus. There were 6 conditions to this agreement:
1. Area placed under UN protection.
2. Creation of a no-man’s land.
3. Arab and Israeli “armed police” placed on duty in respective areas under UN command.
4. UN to arrange for both parties to receive food and water, visitation, and to limit the population.
5. The area cannot be used as a military base, attacked, or unlawfully entered.
6. If the Arab Legion withdraws from the area, the UN must be notified in writing.
And thus, three areas were created – a Jewish zone, an Arab zone, and a no-man’s land.
Beginning in March of 1949, Israeli and Jordanian representatives entered into peace talks. On April 3, the armistice agreement was signed. The agreement ended the official fighting of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and established armistice lines between Israel and the West Bank, also known as the Green Line, until the 1967 Six-Day War. Another key provision of this agreement was safe movement between Israeli held West Jerusalem and Mount Scopus.
Unfortunately, the principles of the agreement were not put into practice, and travel to Mount Scopus remained difficult. In September of 1949, Moshe Dayan, the Israeli military commander at the time, urged Prime Minister David ben Gurion to sanction a military attack in order to open up a passage to Mount Scopus. Ben Gurion refused, claiming that he did not want to reopen the war. Furthermore, it is important to note that any attack of the kind would have been in violation of the 5th Condition of the 1948 Demilitarization Agreement.
After being moved to Mount Scopus for a larger plot of land in 1947, the Biblical Zoo was again transferred in October 1950 from Mount Scopus to an Israeli area of Jerusalem. This move was done out of concern for the welfare of the animals, who had been traumatized by the gunfire during the 1948 War of Independence. Included in the transfer were one lion, one tiger, two bears, one hyena, three kangaroos, one monkey and several birds.
In July 1952, tentative conditions were proposed for an Arab-Israeli settlement. The proposal called for the recognition by all Arab States of Israel’s and Jordan’s sovereignty over their respective sectors of Jerusalem and a promise of support in the United Nations for a resolution giving such recognition. Also suggested were adjustments to the line of separation. This included Israeli surrender of all claims to Mount Scopus, which would be handed over to Jordan. Not surprisingly, this proposal was not favorably welcomed, and was eventually taken off the table.
The Six-Day War began on June 5, 1967. By the end of the war, Israel had captured East Jerusalem, and the city was reunited under Israeli rule. Once again Israelis could travel freely about Mount Scopus.
Important Landmarks
Hadassah Hospital and Hebrew University have been, and remain, the most important Jewish sites on Mount Scopus. The cornerstone for the Hebrew University was laid in July 1918, and the University opened in 1923. Attendees at the inauguration ceremony included General Allenby, Arthur Balfour, Albert Einstein, Herbert Samuel, Chaim Weitzman, and many other dignitaries. In fact, Einstein gave the first academic lecture on his Theory of Relativity. Due to Mount Scopus’ existence as an exclave within Jordanian territory, and the difficulty of accessing the campus, the University was forced to leave. In 1954, the cornerstone for the Givat Ram campus was laid. It was not until 1981 that major university functions returned to Mount Scopus.
The other important landmark is Hadassah Hospital. The Hospital was partially funded by the Hadassah Women’s Zionist Organization of America, the organization from which the hospital gets its name. The cornerstone was laid in 1934, and Hadassah Hospital’s doors were opened in 1939. On April 13, 1948, an armored convoy was ambushed while making its way to the hospital. Seventy-seven doctors, nurses, medical students, and other staff were killed in what became known as the Hadassah Medical Convoy Massacre. After the Massacre, Hadassah Hospital could no longer function, and the Ein Kerem site was opened in 1961. In 1975, the Mount Scopus hospital was rededicated, and the doors were reopened in 1978.
Also on Mount Scopus is the British military cemetery. The cemetery was a gift from the Jews of Palestine honoring the British soldiers who died in WWI. Buried here are the troops of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force that fought under General Allenby. In the western section, 24 stones are marked with Stars of David for the Jewish soldiers buried here. At the end of the cemetery is a memorial chapel. On the walls on either side of the chapel are the names of soldiers who fell in action and have no known graves. of the cemetery
Just outside the cemetery is a memorial to the Australian forces. It was erected by Commonwealth War Graves Commission for the Australian Government in 1935 in memory of the Australian Imperial Force (AIF). The AIF was formed in 1914 following Britain’s declaration of war against Germany. The AIF was a purely volunteer force for the duration of the war. During WWI, there were 17,244 troops in Egypt and Palestine. There is also a memorial within the cemetery (next to the chapel) for the troops of the AIF who died fighting and whose graves are unknown.
Situated on the south-eastern part of Mount Scopus, overlooking the Mount of Olives, the Kidron Valley, and the Old City, is the Brigham Young University Jerusalem Center. BYU is the largest religious university in the United States, with satellite schools all over the world. The school’s curriculum focuses on Old and New Testament, ancient and modern Near Eastern studies, and language (Hebrew and Arabic). The school is owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Plans for construction of the Jerusalem Center were announced in 1979, and a 49 year lease of the land was finally obtained in 1984. However, the construction of the center faced strong opposition from the Haredi (ultra-orthodox) community. The Haredim claimed that the building would be used not as a school, but as a center for Mormon proselytizing efforts in Jerusalem. The opposition stalled the construction, and Knesset investigations took place. Construction was finally allowed to continue in 1986, and the center opened in 1988. During the years of the second intifada, 2001-2006, students were not admitted to the school.
Just behind the Brigham Young University Jerusalem Center stands the Augusta Victoria. It was built in 1907 for the German Protestant community, and is named after Empress Augusta Victoria, the wife of German Kaiser Wilhelm II. The Augusta Victoria includes the Evangelical Lutheran Church of the Ascension, a chapel commemorating the ascension of Jesus Christ. The building was used as a hospital for the British during WWI. It also served as the official residence of the British High Commissioner of the Palestine Mandate from 1920-1927. The Augusta Victoria currently serves as a hospital for the Arab residents of East Jerusalem.
Conclusions
There is so much history in Jerusalem, and Mount Scopus is no different. I hope now, with a deeper understanding of the history of this great mountain, we can all better appreciate where we lived and learned for 5 weeks this summer.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
The Logic of Suicide Terrorism—Kallie Eisenberger
The Coercive Logic of Suicide Terrorism in Jerusalem—Kallie Eisenberger
Using violence as a means of diplomatic coercion is not a new phenomenon. Since the beginning of conflict, parties have used violence to ensure cooperation, gain power, and intimidate their enemy. Military force, as seen in the past and present, is the power and ability “to hurt” someone by destroying value in addition to taking and protecting things of value. But, up until about sixty years ago, the pain, shock, loss, and grief were all incidental aspects of war and not necessarily intentional. Among the many lessons and military developments of World War II, however, the power to hurt was harnessed and came to be among the most impressive of military attributes. The realization that if violence could be incidental, it could also be purposeful was used to affect change and eventually became a crucial tool in international diplomacy. Take for example the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was not so much because of the direct impact of this bomb that led to surrender, after all more citizens were lost in the fire-bombings carried out through the war. But instead, it was the knowledge of the power to hurt held by the United States, and the fear of the Japanese that this power would be used again. Likewise, the Cold War was based on the promise of violence and not the actual use of violence as in other wars. The promise to hurt is perhaps what kept nuclear war from breaking out at all. The progression of violence over the last century in particular has lead to the realization of the effectiveness of violence when used as a form of diplomacy and coercion, and it is out of this new realization that suicide terrorism has not only been implemented, but become a logical strategic move.
It is hard to imagine that anything as horrible and devastating as suicide terrorism could be anything but fanatics but, in its most basic sense, terrorism is also the power to hurt. It is particularly difficult, after seeing images from terrorist attacks in Jerusalem, to entertain the idea that there could be any thought, logic, or goal in this kind of violence. But, unfortunately, there is. Suicide terrorism in particular follows a strategic logic with specific goals, targets, and times. My goal in this presentation is to show that, much like other coercive forms of diplomacy, suicide terrorism is a logical process synonymous to international coercion. Significantly, according to Robert Pape, the specific strategy of suicide terrorism can be seen in five explicit principles which further support the argument of suicide terrorism as a logical form of coercion. First, suicide terrorism is strategic in that it occurs in clusters as a part of a larger campaign by an organized group to achieve a specific political goal. Significantly, this organization will publicly announce a specific political goal and will stop attacks when said goal is reached. The second principle suggests that suicide terrorism is purposely designed to coerce a modern democracy to make concessions to national self-determination. The politically organized terrorist group seeks mainly to achieve specific territorial goals, especially withdrawal. Factual evidence supports this principle, in that every suicide terrorist attack has taken place against a democracy. Israel, and Jerusalem in particular, highlight these two ideals in that most suicide terrorists are Palestinians with nationalist goals and that Israel is in fact a democracy. Waves of suicide terrorism in Jerusalem often follow political actions that directly or indirectly impact the Palestinian movement, as the outbreak of the Second Intifada clearly showed.
The third principle supporting the logical attributes of suicide terrorism exists in the fact that acts of suicide terrorism have steadily risen in the last few decades, suggesting the success of this form of violent coercion. Observers within the terrorist national community, neutral analysts, and targeted government leaders all agree that suicide terrorist operations often accelerated of lead to concessions, further explaining the increase in suicide terrorist attacks. Indeed, statistics from the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs also indicate that the trend in suicide bombing attacks has increased since 2000. Between September 2000 and June 2002 alone, there have been 85 suicide attacks. In the attacks in this period, 307 Israelis were killed and 2,235 were wounded or maimed. This is out of a total of 576 killed.
It naturally follows that if suicide terrorism is a logical form of coercion, there must also be a diplomatic way to combat such acts, and this leads to the last two principles. Although some experts suggest that moderate acts of suicide terrorism led to moderate concessions, more ambitious suicide campaigns are not likely to achieve still greater gains and may well fail completely. The effectiveness of suicide terrorism relies on the threat to inflict low to medium levels of punishment on civilians and has rarely caused modern nation states to surrender high political goals. States may be pressured to make concessions in response to the panic of the civilian population, but they will not be willing to sacrifice important economic or security interests. Israel, again, is a prime representation of this principle. While Israel has perhaps been more open to peace talks, negotiations, and have in fact withdrawn from Gaza, they have yet to, and are not likely to, make many concessions on issues such as refugees or Jerusalem, which are too politically charged.
The final principle which highlights the strategy behind suicide terrorism lies in the best method or approach to combat this particular form of violence. According to experts, the best way to contain suicide terrorism is to undermine the confidence of the terrorists in their ability to carry out their attacks on the target society. Experts also tend to agree that offensive military action or concessions alone are unlikely to have much of an impact, and should instead invest significant resources in border defenses and other means of homeland security. While Israel has attempted both military action and concessions in the past, its recent investment in the security barrier has proven effective. Also, the security checkpoints in and around Jerusalem itself appears to have deterred terrorists to some extent, as the number of terrorist attacks in Jerusalem have decreased in recent years.
The understanding of target states of suicide terrorism also contributes to its inherent efficiency. Firstly it is understood, perhaps because it is promised by the terrorist organizations, that suicide terrorism is rarely a one time event. Because of this crucial component, then, suicide terrorism creates leverage both from the immediate panic associated with each attack and then with the promise of continued civilian punishment in the future. The heart of the strategy of suicide terrorism, then, rests on the same logic of coercive diplomacy used by stated when they employ sanctions or air strikes in that it causes mounting civilian costs which will eventually supercede the target states interests. It is, therefore, this promised “power to hurt” in the future that creates political leverage and therefore a capable strategy. Further, the act of suicide terrorism itself is a way to signal more attacks precisely because it violates societal norms and therefore suggests the seriousness of the organization in its willingness to achieve political goals.
Suicide terrorism is and will continue to be a major threat to Jerusalem precisely because of its anticipated effectiveness as a means of coercive diplomacy. Thousands of Israelis have died as a result of suicide bombers and it poses several serious questions to Israel, but Jerusalem in particular. About one-fourth of all terrorist attacks occur in Israel, largely because of the very politically and religiously charged atmosphere of the city. Not only are physical losses inherent in these attacks, but mental afflictions such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder are becoming more and more common in Jerusalem as a result of not only witnessing terrorist acts, but anticipating more. It is particularly this fear and insecurity, however, that the political organizations behind most terrorist attacks rely on, giving them the fuel to continue these horrific acts of violence. Gaining a more comprehensive knowledge of these acts will hopefully help in combating terrorism in Jerusalem so that terrorist attacks, like those listed below, can be decreased. Below is a list of only a few terrorist attacks that have occurred in Jerusalem:
Aug 21, 1995 - Three Israelis and one American were killed in a suicide bombing of a Jerusalem bus.
Feb 25, 1996 - In a suicide bombing of bus No. 18 near the Central Bus Station in Jerusalem, 26 were killed (17 civilians and 9 soldiers). Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
Mar 3, 1996 - In a suicide bombing of bus No. 18 on Jaffa Road in Jerusalem, 19 were killed (16 civilians and 3 soldiers).
Jul 30, 1997 - 16 people were killed and 178 wounded in two consecutive suicide bombings in the Mahane Yehuda market in Jerusalem.
Sep 4, 1997 - Five people were killed and 181 wounded in three suicide bombings on the Ben-Yehuda pedestrian mall in Jerusalem.
Nov 2, 2000 - Ayelet Shahar Levy, 28, and Hanan Levy, 33, were killed in a car bomb explosion near the Mahane Yehuda market in Jerusalem. 10 people were injured. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack
Mar 27, 2001 - A car bomb exploded at 7:40 in the morning in the Talpiot industrial/commercial zone in Jerusalem. Seven people were injured, one moderately. The Islamic Jihad has claimed responsibility for the attack.
Mar 27, 2001 - 28 people were injured, two seriously, in a suicide bombing directed against a northbound No. 6 bus at the French Hill junction in Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
15 people were killed, including 7 children, and about 130 were injured in a suicide bombing at the Sbarro pizzeria at the corner of King George Street and Jaffa Road in downtown Jerusalem. Concealing the explosives in a guitar case which he had carried with him into Jerusalem, the terrorist entered the restaurant just before 2 PM and detonated the bomb. The 5 kg.-10 kg. bomb, which was packed with nails, screws, and bolts to ensure maximum damage, completely gutted the restaurant, which was full of lunchtime diners. The terrorist was killed in the blast. His controller was on the list of wanted terrorists submitted by Israel to the Palestinians Authority this week. Hamas and the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.
Dec 1, 2001 - 11 people were killed and about 180 injured when explosive devices were detonated by two suicide bombers close to 11:30 P.M. Saturday night on Ben Yehuda Street, the pedestrian mall in the center of Jerusalem. A car bomb exploded nearby 20 minutes later. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
Mar 2, 2002 - Eleven people were killed and over 50 were injured, 4 critically, in a suicide bombing at 19:15 on Saturday evening near a yeshiva in the ultra-Orthodox Beit Yisrael neighborhood in the center of Jerusalem where people had gathered for a bar-mitzva celebration. The terrorist detonated the bomb next to a group of women waiting with their baby carriages for their husbands to leave the nearby synagogue. The Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade took responsibility for the attack
Mar 9, 2002 - 11 people were killed and 54 injured, 10 of them seriously, when a suicide bomber exploded at 22:30 PM Saturday night in the crowded Moment cafe at the corner of Aza and Ben-Maimon streets in the Rehavia neighborhood in the center of Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
Mar 17, 2002 - A suicide bomber exploded himself near an Egged bus no. 22 at the French Hill junction in northern Jerusalem. 25 people were lightly injured
June 19, 2002 - Seven people were killed and 50 injured - three of them in critical condition - when a suicide bomber blew himself up at a crowded bus stop and hitchhiking post at the French Hill intersection in northern Jerusalem shortly after 7:00 P.M., as people were returning home from work. The Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack
July 31, 2002 - Nine people were killed and 85 wounded, 14 of them seriously, when a bomb exploded in the Frank Sinatra student center cafeteria on the Hebrew University's Mt. Scopus campus. The explosive device was planted inside the cafeteria, which was gutted by the explosion. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
Nov 21, 2002 - Eleven people were killed and some 50 wounded by a suicide bomber on a No. 20 Egged bus on Mexico Street in the Kiryat Menahem neighborhood of Jerusalem. The bus was filled with passengers, including schoolchildren, traveling toward the center of the city during rush hour. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
May 18, 2003 - Seven people were killed and 20 wounded in a suicide bombing on Egged bus no. 6 near French Hill in Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
A second suicide bomber detonated his bomb when intercepted by police in northern Jerusalem. The terrorist was killed; no one else was injured.
Mar 6, 2008 - Eight students of the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem were killed when a terrorist armed with a Kalashnikov assault rifle infiltrated the yeshiva and opened fire in the library where about 80 people were gathered, mostly teenagers. Eleven others were wounded, three critically. The terrorist, a resident of East Jerusalem, was killed by an IDF officer
*Note: The articles of Robert Paper and Thomas Schelling contributed to this project.
Using violence as a means of diplomatic coercion is not a new phenomenon. Since the beginning of conflict, parties have used violence to ensure cooperation, gain power, and intimidate their enemy. Military force, as seen in the past and present, is the power and ability “to hurt” someone by destroying value in addition to taking and protecting things of value. But, up until about sixty years ago, the pain, shock, loss, and grief were all incidental aspects of war and not necessarily intentional. Among the many lessons and military developments of World War II, however, the power to hurt was harnessed and came to be among the most impressive of military attributes. The realization that if violence could be incidental, it could also be purposeful was used to affect change and eventually became a crucial tool in international diplomacy. Take for example the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was not so much because of the direct impact of this bomb that led to surrender, after all more citizens were lost in the fire-bombings carried out through the war. But instead, it was the knowledge of the power to hurt held by the United States, and the fear of the Japanese that this power would be used again. Likewise, the Cold War was based on the promise of violence and not the actual use of violence as in other wars. The promise to hurt is perhaps what kept nuclear war from breaking out at all. The progression of violence over the last century in particular has lead to the realization of the effectiveness of violence when used as a form of diplomacy and coercion, and it is out of this new realization that suicide terrorism has not only been implemented, but become a logical strategic move.
It is hard to imagine that anything as horrible and devastating as suicide terrorism could be anything but fanatics but, in its most basic sense, terrorism is also the power to hurt. It is particularly difficult, after seeing images from terrorist attacks in Jerusalem, to entertain the idea that there could be any thought, logic, or goal in this kind of violence. But, unfortunately, there is. Suicide terrorism in particular follows a strategic logic with specific goals, targets, and times. My goal in this presentation is to show that, much like other coercive forms of diplomacy, suicide terrorism is a logical process synonymous to international coercion. Significantly, according to Robert Pape, the specific strategy of suicide terrorism can be seen in five explicit principles which further support the argument of suicide terrorism as a logical form of coercion. First, suicide terrorism is strategic in that it occurs in clusters as a part of a larger campaign by an organized group to achieve a specific political goal. Significantly, this organization will publicly announce a specific political goal and will stop attacks when said goal is reached. The second principle suggests that suicide terrorism is purposely designed to coerce a modern democracy to make concessions to national self-determination. The politically organized terrorist group seeks mainly to achieve specific territorial goals, especially withdrawal. Factual evidence supports this principle, in that every suicide terrorist attack has taken place against a democracy. Israel, and Jerusalem in particular, highlight these two ideals in that most suicide terrorists are Palestinians with nationalist goals and that Israel is in fact a democracy. Waves of suicide terrorism in Jerusalem often follow political actions that directly or indirectly impact the Palestinian movement, as the outbreak of the Second Intifada clearly showed.
The third principle supporting the logical attributes of suicide terrorism exists in the fact that acts of suicide terrorism have steadily risen in the last few decades, suggesting the success of this form of violent coercion. Observers within the terrorist national community, neutral analysts, and targeted government leaders all agree that suicide terrorist operations often accelerated of lead to concessions, further explaining the increase in suicide terrorist attacks. Indeed, statistics from the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs also indicate that the trend in suicide bombing attacks has increased since 2000. Between September 2000 and June 2002 alone, there have been 85 suicide attacks. In the attacks in this period, 307 Israelis were killed and 2,235 were wounded or maimed. This is out of a total of 576 killed.
It naturally follows that if suicide terrorism is a logical form of coercion, there must also be a diplomatic way to combat such acts, and this leads to the last two principles. Although some experts suggest that moderate acts of suicide terrorism led to moderate concessions, more ambitious suicide campaigns are not likely to achieve still greater gains and may well fail completely. The effectiveness of suicide terrorism relies on the threat to inflict low to medium levels of punishment on civilians and has rarely caused modern nation states to surrender high political goals. States may be pressured to make concessions in response to the panic of the civilian population, but they will not be willing to sacrifice important economic or security interests. Israel, again, is a prime representation of this principle. While Israel has perhaps been more open to peace talks, negotiations, and have in fact withdrawn from Gaza, they have yet to, and are not likely to, make many concessions on issues such as refugees or Jerusalem, which are too politically charged.
The final principle which highlights the strategy behind suicide terrorism lies in the best method or approach to combat this particular form of violence. According to experts, the best way to contain suicide terrorism is to undermine the confidence of the terrorists in their ability to carry out their attacks on the target society. Experts also tend to agree that offensive military action or concessions alone are unlikely to have much of an impact, and should instead invest significant resources in border defenses and other means of homeland security. While Israel has attempted both military action and concessions in the past, its recent investment in the security barrier has proven effective. Also, the security checkpoints in and around Jerusalem itself appears to have deterred terrorists to some extent, as the number of terrorist attacks in Jerusalem have decreased in recent years.
The understanding of target states of suicide terrorism also contributes to its inherent efficiency. Firstly it is understood, perhaps because it is promised by the terrorist organizations, that suicide terrorism is rarely a one time event. Because of this crucial component, then, suicide terrorism creates leverage both from the immediate panic associated with each attack and then with the promise of continued civilian punishment in the future. The heart of the strategy of suicide terrorism, then, rests on the same logic of coercive diplomacy used by stated when they employ sanctions or air strikes in that it causes mounting civilian costs which will eventually supercede the target states interests. It is, therefore, this promised “power to hurt” in the future that creates political leverage and therefore a capable strategy. Further, the act of suicide terrorism itself is a way to signal more attacks precisely because it violates societal norms and therefore suggests the seriousness of the organization in its willingness to achieve political goals.
Suicide terrorism is and will continue to be a major threat to Jerusalem precisely because of its anticipated effectiveness as a means of coercive diplomacy. Thousands of Israelis have died as a result of suicide bombers and it poses several serious questions to Israel, but Jerusalem in particular. About one-fourth of all terrorist attacks occur in Israel, largely because of the very politically and religiously charged atmosphere of the city. Not only are physical losses inherent in these attacks, but mental afflictions such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder are becoming more and more common in Jerusalem as a result of not only witnessing terrorist acts, but anticipating more. It is particularly this fear and insecurity, however, that the political organizations behind most terrorist attacks rely on, giving them the fuel to continue these horrific acts of violence. Gaining a more comprehensive knowledge of these acts will hopefully help in combating terrorism in Jerusalem so that terrorist attacks, like those listed below, can be decreased. Below is a list of only a few terrorist attacks that have occurred in Jerusalem:
Aug 21, 1995 - Three Israelis and one American were killed in a suicide bombing of a Jerusalem bus.
Feb 25, 1996 - In a suicide bombing of bus No. 18 near the Central Bus Station in Jerusalem, 26 were killed (17 civilians and 9 soldiers). Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
Mar 3, 1996 - In a suicide bombing of bus No. 18 on Jaffa Road in Jerusalem, 19 were killed (16 civilians and 3 soldiers).
Jul 30, 1997 - 16 people were killed and 178 wounded in two consecutive suicide bombings in the Mahane Yehuda market in Jerusalem.
Sep 4, 1997 - Five people were killed and 181 wounded in three suicide bombings on the Ben-Yehuda pedestrian mall in Jerusalem.
Nov 2, 2000 - Ayelet Shahar Levy, 28, and Hanan Levy, 33, were killed in a car bomb explosion near the Mahane Yehuda market in Jerusalem. 10 people were injured. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack
Mar 27, 2001 - A car bomb exploded at 7:40 in the morning in the Talpiot industrial/commercial zone in Jerusalem. Seven people were injured, one moderately. The Islamic Jihad has claimed responsibility for the attack.
Mar 27, 2001 - 28 people were injured, two seriously, in a suicide bombing directed against a northbound No. 6 bus at the French Hill junction in Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
15 people were killed, including 7 children, and about 130 were injured in a suicide bombing at the Sbarro pizzeria at the corner of King George Street and Jaffa Road in downtown Jerusalem. Concealing the explosives in a guitar case which he had carried with him into Jerusalem, the terrorist entered the restaurant just before 2 PM and detonated the bomb. The 5 kg.-10 kg. bomb, which was packed with nails, screws, and bolts to ensure maximum damage, completely gutted the restaurant, which was full of lunchtime diners. The terrorist was killed in the blast. His controller was on the list of wanted terrorists submitted by Israel to the Palestinians Authority this week. Hamas and the Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.
Dec 1, 2001 - 11 people were killed and about 180 injured when explosive devices were detonated by two suicide bombers close to 11:30 P.M. Saturday night on Ben Yehuda Street, the pedestrian mall in the center of Jerusalem. A car bomb exploded nearby 20 minutes later. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
Mar 2, 2002 - Eleven people were killed and over 50 were injured, 4 critically, in a suicide bombing at 19:15 on Saturday evening near a yeshiva in the ultra-Orthodox Beit Yisrael neighborhood in the center of Jerusalem where people had gathered for a bar-mitzva celebration. The terrorist detonated the bomb next to a group of women waiting with their baby carriages for their husbands to leave the nearby synagogue. The Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade took responsibility for the attack
Mar 9, 2002 - 11 people were killed and 54 injured, 10 of them seriously, when a suicide bomber exploded at 22:30 PM Saturday night in the crowded Moment cafe at the corner of Aza and Ben-Maimon streets in the Rehavia neighborhood in the center of Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
Mar 17, 2002 - A suicide bomber exploded himself near an Egged bus no. 22 at the French Hill junction in northern Jerusalem. 25 people were lightly injured
June 19, 2002 - Seven people were killed and 50 injured - three of them in critical condition - when a suicide bomber blew himself up at a crowded bus stop and hitchhiking post at the French Hill intersection in northern Jerusalem shortly after 7:00 P.M., as people were returning home from work. The Fatah Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for the attack
July 31, 2002 - Nine people were killed and 85 wounded, 14 of them seriously, when a bomb exploded in the Frank Sinatra student center cafeteria on the Hebrew University's Mt. Scopus campus. The explosive device was planted inside the cafeteria, which was gutted by the explosion. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
Nov 21, 2002 - Eleven people were killed and some 50 wounded by a suicide bomber on a No. 20 Egged bus on Mexico Street in the Kiryat Menahem neighborhood of Jerusalem. The bus was filled with passengers, including schoolchildren, traveling toward the center of the city during rush hour. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
May 18, 2003 - Seven people were killed and 20 wounded in a suicide bombing on Egged bus no. 6 near French Hill in Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack.
A second suicide bomber detonated his bomb when intercepted by police in northern Jerusalem. The terrorist was killed; no one else was injured.
Mar 6, 2008 - Eight students of the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem were killed when a terrorist armed with a Kalashnikov assault rifle infiltrated the yeshiva and opened fire in the library where about 80 people were gathered, mostly teenagers. Eleven others were wounded, three critically. The terrorist, a resident of East Jerusalem, was killed by an IDF officer
*Note: The articles of Robert Paper and Thomas Schelling contributed to this project.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Hadassah Hospital—Roman Krivochenitser
Hadassah Hospital—Roman Krivochenitser
Unlike most of the James Madison students on our trip, I study medicine back in the United States. Therefore, I decided to focus my project on medicinal practices in Israel, specifically focusing on Hadassah. Hadassah is the biggest and most famous hospital in Jerusalem. I specifically aimed to highlight two themes within my presentation. One of which was the unraveling of many myths surrounding Israeli medicine and the treatment of its patients. The second theme was to present Hadassah as one of the best and most successful peacekeeping programs in the Middle East. By the end of my presentation, I hope most of the students would see what great innovations and positives come out of Israel and what can be achieved even amidst hostile conditions. The media tends to portray Israel in a negative light, only focusing on death and war. Hadassah is a beacon in the Middle East that deserves much more praise and recognition.
To begin, one must have a basic overview of Hadassah’s history and where it came from. Established in 1912 in New York City, Hadassah was founded by a group called the “Daughters of Zion” led by Henrietta Szold. The idea was to spread Zionistic ideals throughout America by heading education and public health initiatives. The name Hadassah was derived from the Hebrew holiday of Purim. It happened that the group had its first major meeting on Purim and the name was adopted from the Hebrew name for Esther (Hadassah). This once again stressed the importance of Women to the Zionist movement. Eventually, the organization began to expand and they decided to send two American nurses to Palestine during WWI. The nurses set up a small clinic to help the wounded and ended up staying in Palestine, helping the Jewish communities prosper. In 1939 the first Hadassah hospital was established on Mount Scopus in East Jerusalem. Mount Scopus is part of the Hadassah Medical Organization (HMO) which also features the second Hadassah hospital at Ein Kerem. At the time, Hadassah was the foremost hospital in Western Asia. Hadassah played a pivotal role in the war of independence. Positioned in Jerusalem, the hospital was in the midst of the greatest fighting. On April 13, 1948 the Hadassah Convoy Massacre occurred where Arab captured a Hadassah truck driving under a white flag full of doctors and patients and killed everyone. There were about 80 dead and Israel shut down the hospital on Mount Scopus. As a result, the new Hadassah wing was opened in Ein Kerem in 1961. This is now the biggest hospital in Jerusalem, not in all of Israel though. It is known worldwide for its trauma center. The Hadassah at Mount Scopus was reopened in 1967 but is not used as much as Ein Kerem.
Data for my presentation was acquired from two main sources. My first source was a paramedic working for Magin David Adom by the name of Tsvi. Tsvi used to be an EMT back in the United States but has lived in Israel and worked in Israeli medicine for the past 16 years. My other source was a current medical student for Hadassah by the name of Misha. Misha was finishing up his first year at medical school at the time of our interview. Both of my sources stressed the level of difficulty and work required to become a doctor in Israel. The school format is very similar to that of the United States – 4 years basic training followed by 3 years clinical and then 1 year of residency and after that a specialization if you would like. However, Israeli doctors must know the medical practices on all continents, Europe, Asia, and especially in America. Also, the lectures or taught in the native language, Hebrew, whereas all of the textbooks are in English. Israel functions on a socialized medicine basis. Therefore, even after all the work and time that doctors put in they still only make around $50,000/year. This is only slightly over average Israeli income. In comparison, doctors in the USA make around $100,000 more money for the same job and less time.
Medicine is the toughest field in Israel to be accepted into. Only 100 students are allowed in per institution out of about 1500 applicants. Since there are only 4 medical institutions in all of Israel, this means that there are only 400 new doctors each year out of 6000 who are interested. Therefore, only the best of the best can practice medicine in Israel. What ends up happening is that many students travel oversees to Europe to get their medical degree and can practice medicine in Israel if they pass the entry exam. However, even with this there is still a shortage of doctors in Israel.
One of the most popular myths surrounding Hadassah is about its discrimination towards Palestinian Arabs. This is a tool for the media to hide the facts and once again present Israel in a negative light. In reality, about 20% of all medical students are Palestinian and 30% of the current doctors in Jerusalem are Palestinian Arabs. Furthermore, Hadassah and all of Israel never discriminate when it comes to treating patients. In fact, Hadassah was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 and numerous other exceptional health care awards for its patient care practices and treatment of all individuals. Even terrorists are treated in the hospital before being sent off to their respective disciplinary institutions. In Judaism, life is valued over all else and therefore it is unthinkable to deny anyone that basic right. This is one of the reasons Israel has socialized medicine that is available to all. It is a wide-known fact that Israel and specifically Hadassah provides the best health care in the Middle East. Over the past decades, Arab leaders from different countries have all in secrecy flown in to get treatment in Israel because the quality of healthcare is that much better. Just as an example at the level of healthcare provided we can look back into history during the war in 1967. At that time, 310 operations were performed in just over 60 hours and out of 985 patients only 11 had perished. Now, 40 years later the health care has kept exponentially improving.
The quality and improvement of healthcare has effected all populations, especially Palestinians. As Palestinian obstetrician and gynecologist Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish said, “Israeli hospitals extend humanitarian treatment to Palestinians from the Gaza Strip and West Bank. These efforts continued when all other cooperation between Palestinians and Israelis came to a halt during the most recent intifada.” The statistics of healthcare for Palestinians is also astounding. Not only have mortality rates among Israeli Arabs fallen by nearly two-thirds but also life expectancy has increased from 70 (in 1970) to 76 today. Today, the average Palestinian living under Israeli authority can expect to live longer than a white European male. Despite this, Israeli hospitals still receive negative media attention with their treatment of Palestinians. Many Palestinians do not trust Israel and therefore do not go to their hospital, only going to the very poor hospitals in their area. By the time they are transferred it is too late and there is nothing that can be done. Also, Magin David Adom, the Israeli ambulance service, is not allowed to go into “Palestinian Land” without a police escort. Therefore, even if a life is at stake the Palestinian Authority will not let the Israelis in simply out of principle. By the time the patients arrive to the hospitals it is also too late. Based on these misfortunate happenings many people have a skewed view of Israeli medicine.
Israel has the best medicine because they use the latest medical technology that is produced in Israel. Israel as a country is one of the largest producers of biomedical innovation. One example is Given Imaging, a company that developed the Pill cam. The Pill cam is a camera in a small tablet that is swallowed and takes pictures of the GI tract, small bowel, and colon. The camera takes 55000 images, producing a movie of about 6 – 8 hours that can be viewed to see if there are any problems within the patient. The patient wears a data recorder as a belt while the pill is in the body and all of the information is collected onto a database. Companies such as these work closely with Hadassah and other medical institutions in Israel. Hadassah itself does a lot of research. Half of all medical research in Israel is conducted in the Hadassah Medical Centre in Jerusalem. Israeli scientists are part of the leading researchers for stem cell development and innovation. This advanced technology is not available in Arab countries because they do not accept Israeli products and therefore their quality of healthcare suffers because of it.
One important aspect of Israeli medicine is response to crisis and terrorists attacks that can occur on a daily basis. There is a special class that everyone has to take in medical school so that everyone can be aware of the protocol. During a country emergency, all doctors and staff are on call and working. Israel has one of the best response times in the world. In fact, institutions from different countries send representatives to see how Israeli medicine functions under a crisis because it is world-class. The main reason is the quality of communication between Magin David Adom, the ambulance service, and the hospitals. It takes no more than 20 min to clear up the biggest attack and to have everyone in the hospitals already receiving treatment. There is a correspondent in every hospital from Magin David Adom working 24/7 to be in constant communication. Therefore, the hospitals know which kinds of patients are on their way to which hospital so they can mobilize and prepare right away for treatment. The patients are immediately carted into the right room for operation and the whole process flows smoothly.
It is unfortunate that Israel has to be so proficient in this, but it is the reality of the situation of which they live in. Israeli medicine continues to thrive in the face of negative media scrutiny and hostilities in the area. Hadassah employs and treats everyone as equals, promoting peacekeeping efforts while continuing a standard of the highest quality medicine in the world.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Opposing Viewpoints of Israeli Wall—Eric Awerbuch
Opposing Viewpoints of Israeli Wall
The conflict in the Middle East between
The government of
Furthermore, the government of
Moreover,
In addition, “It obliges us to establish a barrier wall which is the only thing that can minimize the infiltration of these male and female suicide bombers,” said Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, who has emphasized that “the fence is not political, [and] is not a border.” (Associated Press 2005) As a result, the government of
These last two statements have to do with a lot of political pressure put on
In contrast, both
Moreover, the International Court of Justice in
In addition,
The American government has a viewpoint that differs from
While President Bush has spoken favorably of the wall at times, he also feels that the wall could potentially be a problem. On July 25th, 2003, the President had the following to say regarding the wall, “I think the wall is a problem...it is very difficult to develop confidence between the Palestinians and
However,
In addition,
Furthermore, since the construction of the wall, the number of terrorist attacks on
In conclusion, it is obvious that the world is torn on whether there should be a blockade separating
What do Israelis think?
Eliezer Eiseman- From New Jersey, living in
Michael Katz- From Ukraine, Living in
Majdi Hosein- Israeli Arab, born in
Yanir Shelef- Former Israeli Soldier, born in Israel “I think that like between all normal countries there needs to be a border, especially if there is a conflict. The fence helps reduce and prevent terror attacks by so much, and that saves so many lives. If there was no terror - we would love not to have a fence, but since there is such a horrible war of terror against us - for now that's the only way to save lives and maintain a normal life here. Basically - it's an anti-terror fence, and it works.
Works Cited
Buergenthal, Thomas. “Declaration of Judge Buergenthal.”
“FAQS.” 4 Oct. 2003. FAQS.
“Israel Official: Wall to Ensure Jewish Majority.” 2005. Associated Press. 11 July 2005.
“Israel’s Security Fence.” 2006. Jewish Virtual Library.
Norton, James and Gauette, Nicole. “Palestinians Say Wall is a Noose.” The Christian Science Monitor. Article # 1906. (March 2003). 27 Feb 2003
“Olmert's Sweeping Plan to Withdraw Behind Wall Draws Fire From the Right.” 2006. Israel Insider. 10 March 2004.
Shahil. 21 July 2004.
“The Separation Wall.” 25 July 2003. American Task Force on Palestine.
Suri, Sanjay. “Palestinian Win Rises Higher Than Israeli Wall.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)