Waiting
on the Jerusalem side of the Bethlehem
terminal. (Eduardo Castaldo/eduardocastaldo.com)
“They
are stealing our time. Everything takes so long!”
Muna lamented, referring to the Israeli system
of permits and checkpoints that governs daily
mobility in the West Bank and makes the normally
short trip from Ramallah to Jerusalem a nightmare
of delays. She had just been granted a one-day
permit to travel those six miles, a requirement
for West Bank Palestinians who want to enter
Jerusalem. Obtaining such a pass requires advance
preparation: a trip to the Palestinian office
that coordinates with the Israeli office that
confers travel documents. A wait of days or weeks
then ensues, followed by another trip to pick
up a permit that allows entry into the city for
a delimited period of time. On top of such preparation,
the actual trip, which in the past would take
about 15 minutes, now takes anywhere from one
to two hours, given the expanded network of roadblocks
and checkpoints along nearly every route in the
West Bank.
In
view of such new daily impediments, it is not
surprising that Palestinians routinely share
the stories of their travel woes. Twenty-year
old Ziad’s Kafkaesque narrative of his attempt
to visit his family in Jenin, once a two and
half hour trip from Ramallah, offers a glimpse
into the intrusive and capricious restrictions
on Palestinian mobility:
On
Friday, I left Ramallah around 7:30 am. Stopped
at a checkpoint, I was told to go back. I
asked, “Why?” The soldier said, “There is
a curfew in Jenin and since you are from
Jenin, you are under curfew wherever you
may be.” I tried waiting at the checkpoint
to find a taxi to take me to Nablus. The
soldier yelled at me, “Go away!” Finally,
I got a taxi to Nablus and I had to go through
a checkpoint I had already passed going the
other way. The soldiers saw me returning
and laughed at me. They knew I would be turned
back at that checkpoint. I was so angry!
I went to Nablus but could not find a taxi
to Jenin. People told me to go to the Bayt
Iba checkpoint in the north. There, people
were lined up single file to cross through
the electronically controlled metal turnstile.
I was stuck in there for five minutes. The
soldiers control it with a button and sometimes
they lock people in for the fun of it. When
I exited the soldier smiled and said, “Shalom.”
He took my identity card, put it in a tray,
pushed it toward me and said, “Take it.”
He did not want to hand it to me. After Bayt
Iba, I failed to find a taxi to Jenin. I
didn’t want to return to Nablus and I didn’t
want to go through the Bayt Iba checkpoint
again so I found a taxi to take me back to
Ramallah…. One more checkpoint—the soldier
said I can’t go to Ramallah because I am
from Jenin. I told him I work there and he
finally let me go.I got back to Ramallah
around midnight.
Ziad’s
story is one of mobility constrained and denied,
of prolonged waiting and perpetual delays. Time,
like space, has been critical to colonial rule
in Palestine. Time is sharply contoured by an
interlinking repertoire of mechanisms of control
over the subject population. The direct corollary
of Israeli freedom of movement and expansion
through space and control of time is that Palestinian
space shrinks, time slows and mobility is constricted.
Palestinians wait at checkpoints for hours before
being allowed to pass with no explanation as
to why they are being delayed. Soldiers take
their identity cards and simply walk away.
Palestinians
and Israelis occupy different zones defined by
walls, bypass roads, permit systems and checkpoints.
Hierarchy is thus written in both time and space.
Israeli settlers speed to their destinations
along well-groomed bypass roads. No checkpoints
or permits for them! For Palestinians to go nearly
anywhere requires moving through an obstacle
course of checkpoints and a multitude of closed
roads. Checkpoints have become signposts on the
landscape that guide Palestinians’ spatial cognition.
When a bus driver asks a woman boarding the bus
where she is going, she replies, “I am getting
off just before the checkpoint in Beit Hanina.”
Moreover,
time itself is increasingly clocked by checkpoints
and inevitable waits of unpredictable duration.
One refrain heard from Palestinians about passage
through checkpoints is: “It all depends on the
mood of the soldiers.” Once Palestinian vehicles
are halted, usually after being made to wait
before approaching the checkpoint, the young
soldiers continue to talk, play around and flirt.
Rarely do they board immediately—they continue
whatever they were doing and then saunter over,
all the while continuing their conversations
or flirtations for at least several minutes.
The only discernible logic to these checkpoint
encounters is the calibrated chaos that enables
the expropriation of land and water, the expansion
of settlements and the immiseration of daily
life for Palestinians. As Israelis move through
time and space with choice and ease, Palestinians’
own right to determine their mobility is thus
severely compromised and their experience of
time slows to a crawl.
In
general, colonial regimes tend to fashion the
native as occupying a different, timeless and
motionless zone, distinct from the settlers’
modernity and civilization—what anthropologist
Johannes Fabian in his book Time and the Other (1983)
referred to as the “allochronic.” In the Zionist
imagination and often in the media, space and
time are telescoped to draw a direct line from
biblical time to the present. Nearly 3,000 years
of local non-Jewish history and presence magically
disappear to make way for assertions of a sacred
linkage between past and present that endows
some (Jews) with rights and the privileges of
citizenship. If the events of 1948 are narrated
by Palestinians as a veritable catastrophe (nakba)—a
moment of radical rupture and a trope for ongoing
suffering—for Israelis 1948 serves as a temporal
marker of a long-desired restoration and renewal.
Israel and its supporters further gloss 1948
via the lens of statehood and even attractiveness:
“Israel: Still Sexy at 60” was the self-described
“marketing slogan” used at the celebration of
1948 by a Georgetown University student group.
And what is true of 1948 is true of 1967 as well.
The “reunification” of Jerusalem in the course
of the 1967 war is jubilantly cheered by Israeli
Jews on an annual basis.
In
the meantime, as talk of negotiations proceeds
slowly, bulldozers are at work every day building
roads and settlements in and around Jerusalem.
When the occupation began in 1967, settlements
were cast as “temporary” but then became facts
on the ground. The $3 billion “separation
barrier,” a complex of fences and 25-foot cement
walls destined to be 700 miles long, has been
referred to as “temporary” as well. Negotiators
for Israel and its US ally have consistently
deployed a strategy of delay premised on present
necessity: They may assert readiness to negotiate
on mundane current issues while relegating to
“later” the critical “final status” issues. Negotiations
therefore focus on the short-term exigencies
of checkpoints and mobility rather than the long-term
questions of borders, refugees, Jerusalem, settlements
and resources, putting the Palestinians politically
in a state of perpetual beginnings. In other
words, the events of 1948 and 1967—the nakba and
the occupation—are treated as faits accomplis.
Time
has thus become another commodity, like land
and water, which Israel expropriates from the
population in the occupied Palestinian territories.
In the wake of the 1967 occupation of the West
Bank and Gaza, native time was appropriated for
the extraction of labor. Since then, Israel has
weaned itself from Palestinian labor by turning
to the global labor market, but has continued
to steal Palestinian time through myriad tactics
of enforced waiting. The temporal dimension in
the final stage of colonization of Palestine
is apparent. Economic strangulation and immiseration
are intended to create a stream of migrants—a
sort of slow-motion ethnic cleansing—in contrast
to the fast-paced military operations of 1948
and 1967 that engendered mass exodus of refugees.
The third phase of colonization is difficult
to name or label because there is not one discrete
or identifiable moment in time as in the momentous
years of the past. It is a continuous process,
a relentless march of settlements, of dispossession
and displacement. For Palestinians, this is the
larger meaning of nakba.
Bob
Woodward’s four books chronicling the wars of President
George W. Bush are sensitive barometers of conventional wisdom in Washington.
Whereas the first volume, published in 2002 at the height of the self-righteous
nationalism gripping the capital after the September 11, 2001 attacks,
hailed Bush’s self-confidence in acting to protect the homeland,
the 2008 installment depicts the same man as cocksure and incurious.
This much is not news. More educational are Woodward’s hints
about the worldviews that will outlast this unpopular administration,
embedded in the organs of the national security state. Full
Story>>
The Egyptian
regime has once again succeeded in stifling freedom of speech, this
time not in Egypt, but in the US. Earlier this month, an Egyptian court
convicted a prominent Egyptian-American activist for his outspoken
criticism of the regime’s poor human
rights record in American public fora. The court accused Saad Eddin
Ibrahim, of "tarnishing Egypt's image" abroad. The conviction
referred primarily to writings he published in the foreign press; most
notably among them an August 2007 op-ed in the Washington Post in which
he criticized Egypt's human rights record and questioned the reasons
behind US aid to Egypt. Full
Story>>
Militant
Islam is under global scrutiny for clues to conditions that foster
its rise, and to strategies for reversing that growth. But the key
is not in Islamic doctrine, US foreign policy or formal ties to various
nations, as many analysts have asserted. It lies at the community
level, with clan and local leaders. Full
Story>>
Kurdish
parties have become kingmakers in Baghdad , and they know it. As
no federal government can work without them, they are pulling every
available political lever to expand the territory and resources they
control, trying to build the foundation of an independent Kurdish state.
But even more than territory, they need security. If everyone acts
quickly and wisely, that understanding could help resolve one of the
Iraq war’s thorniest issues. Full
Story>>
The
debate over the war in Iraq follows a yellowing script: The minute
someone suggests that the US move to withdraw its troops, war supporters
cry “Havoc!”
True to form, when no less a figure than Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri
al-Maliki stated he wants a timeline for a US pullout, John McCain
summoned the specter of dire consequences. “I’ve always
said we’ll come home with honor and with victory and not through
a set timetable,” McCain said. In his major foreign policy speech
on July 15, Barack Obama affirmed his support for a withdrawal timetable,
adding that the US must “get out as carefully as we were careless
getting in.” Obama’s position is the correct one, but he,
like many other war critics, has done too little to counter the refrain
that withdrawal is simply
“cutting and running,” a recipe for disaster. Full
Story>>
At
the annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs
Committee (AIPAC) earlier this month, presidential candidates
John McCain and Barack Obama competed over who would become the “candidate
for Israel.” The match came to a draw when both candidates
pledged undying and unconditional support for Israel. While their
support for “Israel right or wrong” was unquestionable,
at the end of all the commotion, the most pertinent question for
Americans and the world remained unasked and unanswered: Who is
the candidate for peace? Full
Story>>