So, I actually go to school here. I know, I know, I forget too sometimes given the four-thousand pounds of analysis and excitement I waft through daily.
Academically, it was one of those days that you realize why you love to play the intellectual. I learned to see perspectives not represented in the US and I thought it would be a shame to keep all this to myself.
So, here are some things I learned at school today.
Three classes: Arabic, The Politics of Water in the Middle East, Contemporary Thought in the Islamic World.
In Arabic I learned that obviously I do not devote enough time to studying every night (resolution #1- focus on school work and stop writing blogs, analyzing life and exploring Amman). My priority from here on in is to devote a portion of my day to intensive Arabic studies (despite the fact that three hours a day that is all I do, not to mention the fact that I live here…).
In my Water class I started to doze off when we talked about the main water sources in Syria (resolution #2- seriously, get more sleep).
On the other hand, I woke up with a surprising jolt when the powerpoint went off, the lights went on and my professor began to ask us what we knew about the realities of the Arab/Israeli conflict on our border. A few of us spat out the random factoid regarding historical incompatibilities, World War II, and hearsay from CNN. What we did learn was absolutely beguiling to me. We are learning about the politics of the greatest political dilemma of this generation from an Arab perspective.
This is phenomenal because living in the states (whether you knew it or not) you are actually mostly getting the other side. My hand could not replicate the sounds I was hearing fast enough or adequately and I feel as though a tape-recorder would have behooved me on this day.
If you thought you knew something about this issue and want to be more informed anyways, read on. This is what we learned today:
Zionism (a sort of Jewish nationalism) arose in the 1880s due to the heavy anti-Semitism of the era. The Zionist felt the Jews needed their own independent state because they were being discriminated against. (Militant aside: We are only two or three generations from the greatest human exploitation based on race in the history of the world, and yet is there a Black homeland? I think not). Jewish immigration headed in the direction of Palestine from 1882 to 1914, and by that time composed approximately 5% of the population in that region. The World Zionist Organization helped to purchase the land in Palestine to create this independent state as a spiritual and political renewal of their people in the Palestinian homeland. They were seeking freedom from Western degradation. The slogan they used in order to justify this purchase of land was “A people without a land to a land without a people”. The justification lay in the fact that there was no population in Palestine. The population of Arabs was in fact nearing a million by 1914 and the Jews occupied 5% of this. This land had belonged to the Ottomans.
It was around this time that the Brits (who were currently occupying Egypt and other vestiges of the Middle East) gained support for the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein ibn Ali and persuaded him to launch an Arab revolt against the Ottomans to gain their independence. A British commissioner, Henry McMahon promised that in return, Hussein would be awarded an empire spanning from Egypt to Persia. Instead, Hussein’s forces ended up helping the Brits take control of Palestine, Transjordan (today, Jordan) and Syria. The Sykes-Picot (1916) agreement was a secret accord between France and Britain which did nothing but sneak behind Hussein while he was planning his revolt and divided the Middle East between themselves (Lebanon, Syria and North Iraq for France, while Transjordan and Southern Iraq went to Britain). The other issue was that in 1917, the Balfour Declaration stated that the formally free state of Palestine (at least, a state under international control) was being given by the British to the Jews as a national home.
The British did not do this because they felt some sympathy for a subjugated people, instead, by giving the Jewish people a home, they encouraged the American and Russian Jews to press their government to fight harder in Europe during World War I (a grand incentive, shall we say). The British were able to place their troops and control the areas surrounding the major port of the Suez Canal and holy cities around Jerusalem (sanctioned now by the League of Nations). Jewish nationalism is given precedence over the rights of the occupying Palestinians. Prince Abdullah is given the rule of the area the British sanctioned off as “Jordan”; Prince Faisal is given the invisible lines between which now lies Iraq while King Saud is ruler of Saudi Arabia.
Life works this way and the Brits have a mandate over Palestine officially by 1922. On the other hand, people who lived there, those who had their homes and lives settled in this land before it was divided up by global super powers for access to resources and to wage successful wars were beginning to get antsy. In 1946, the Palestinian population showed that the only city that was actually dominated by the Jewish people was Tel Aviv (with an overall Jewish occupation at 10% of Palestine).
The UN was working to divide Palestine between the Arabs who had their homes and the Jewish people who were given the “vacant” landmass. The Partition Plan of 1947 relegated 60% of the land to the 10% of the population (the Jews) with access to the Dead Sea, the Red Sea, The Mediterranean Sea and rivers from Syria and Jordan while giving the 40% remainder to the Arabs with little access to any of these water sources in the land most arid and infertile.
When the Arabs saw this plan, they rejected it and claimed that Palestine was theirs by right.
Israeli terrorist gangs formed with the strong nationalism sparked (potentially) by Zionism and forced the Arabs to leave the land that the Partition Plan stated now belonged to them.
On May 14, 1948, Isarel declared its independence.
On May 15, 1948, Israel was attacked by Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
Israel prevailed thanks to its well trained and well equipped army, and its great financial support from the United States. In 1964, Israel began coveting water from the Jordan River at no political cost to them thanks to their support from the US. This body of water was once the pivotal feeding spot for the Dead Sea. It is now polluted and practically empty due to the siphoning of water. (The Dead Sea is just that, but just because there is no life within it, does not mean it is unimportant if it runs out. When this happens, the fresh water (which is seperated by the delicate balance of geology) will begin to leak into the salt water and we will lose our fresh water sources. This also forms sink holes the size of a small house on the ground above so the buildings and cars which drive on this land will sink into the ground).
The Arab states began constructing a diversion plan which diverted the water before it reached the Sea of Galilee and would flow to Jordan, Syria and Lebanon instead. There are many border disputes other than this one which sparked the war of ’67. But as a result of the war, Israel gained control of the Sinai, Gaza, West Bank, Jerusalem and the Golan Heights (all still reflecting the geopolitics of the current era).
The realities of the water siphoning, polluting and misusage have caused countries like Jordan immense obstructions of not only their water supply, but their political relations with neighboring countries. The Jews who inhabit the West Bank currently have a water theme park, a pool, and running water in all homes (consuming 59% of the Jordan River- a body of water used also by Syria, Lebanon and Jordan) and dumping much of its waste into the lower quarter of the Jordan River. In the Arab side of the West Bank, the per capita consumption for Palestinians is 60 liters per day (some reduced to numbers like 10-15 liters) The Jewish side of the West Bank on the other side of the wall (with the water parks and green golf courses) consumes over four times that. The US per capita consumes nearly 1000 liters per day. Most Arab homes are not connected to any main system of running water and collect it in buckets weekly from a water truck. People bathe, wash dishes and drink from the two or three buckets they collect weekly. It is a reality, not a joke. It is also much more salient when you know you can see this part of the world from the downtown or your own damn window.
That was water class today.
On another note, Contemporary Islamic Thought began today with a commentary on women and the hijab. Huge controversy, obviously, everywhere you go. Our teacher is a brilliant Muslim woman with a 14karate heart who chose to wear the hijab herself. Since we were on the topic, Elspeth and I proceeded to bombard her with insightful questions (in our opinions) that we had been working through for the past couple of days. She began by making a comment on the women who choose to veil themselves entirely (over the face, eyes or both). She said that she doesn’t really understand why that choice of dress is necessary. She says that while sometimes it is a pious family’s choice of carrying on tradition, most times it is a woman trying to be her most pious self. She stated that in the Quran it says that the wives of the prophet were special women. They were to cover themselves entirely because they were on a different level. They were twice as close to the Prophet, so twice as close to becoming the best Muslims they could be, or could be reprimanded with twice the punishment. Women who chose to cover themselves entirely are choosing to be as close to the wives of the Prophet as possible.
I ask: “Does it say in the Quran that the wives covered themselves entirely?” My professor answers yes, however it is reserved only for the wives of the Prophet, and is not meant for the rest of humanity. I follow up by asking about this differential we keep hearing about regarding the hijab as a part of “cultural” Islam, and not “religious” Islam. What does this mean?
She explains to us that historically, the Christians, for example, wore a head covering not so dissimilar to the Muslim women. It was simply the “style” of the time, before the Prophet, during the Prophet and after the Prophet. It was what women wore as today they wear dresses. On the other hand, Muslim women were to be known as such. They were to differentiate themselves from the slaves and other people and did this via their clothing. The individual was not important, the Muslimness, on the other hand, was.
Elspeth asks: Does the Quran say WHY women are to cover themselves this way? Is it to protect themselves from men? Or something else?
Our professor astutely answers that the Quran and God do not specifically give reasons for these things all the time. This is the definition of faith. You are free from all servitude of man when you resign yourself to God. If everything were stated clearly, you could rationalize and disagree and vow against. Instead, you do not need to use your rational mind because that is not faith. Faith is not rational. It does say in the Quran, one thing regarding this issue and that is the aforementioned theory on Muslim women being their own and recognized through their clothing.
We touched upon a great thinker in Islamic thought, Sayyid Qutb. My hand could once again not keep the pace with my mind. He wrote of this theory called “Deen” indirectly translated as “religion” but really means a comprehensive way of life. It does not have to be divine. It is for the believer, but for the atheist, the deen applies too.
Any power that you reference in life is your deen. This is what controls you, your individual philosophies on life, and it is from that the person derives all beliefs. I asked for a specific example of what this deen would be for the atheist. She answered “accident, and chaos”. If you take this theory, you are liberated from all moral control, and if you chose to have a specific moral it is because it is coming from inside of you. Chaos. Accident. My beliefs were solidified today in class. I am this person and not afraid of it.
What is your deen?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Alex. This is so interesting - I think this is a fascinating perspective of an incredibly complex and often misunderstood conflict.Our perceptions are certainly impacted by a vocal and biased media so your "from the front" reporting is very important. Thank you for taking the time to provide all your readers with this insight.
ReplyDeleteI,too, would have asked the same questions of your professor as I find it difficult to recognize the fine line between sexist persecution and submission and absolute faith in religious tenets we just don't comprehend. Thanks for providing some insight into their faith. So interesting