Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumLet’s Talk About the Occupation in (American) English
Ari Shavits strategies for bridging the gap between U.S. Jews and Israel effectively act to obscure the line that separates Israel from the occupied territories. That line is what Breaking the Silence seeks to protect.Avner Gvaryahu Mar 13, 2016
At the height of the onslaught against Breaking the Silence two months ago, Haaretz columnist Ari Shavit joined the commotion by criticizing the organizations operations abroad in an op-ed, "Why I broke my silence". "As a long-time silence breaker, I hope that the new silence-breakers find a better and more appropriate way to say their piece," he wrote.
Shavit wrote that he understands our motivation to discuss the reality in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) but "doesnt like" the fact that we talk about the occupation in English....... .....( you and he both shira )
It was therefore interesting to read his recent article about touring campuses across the U.S. in which Shavit says he shared his opinions with thousands of students on dozens of campuses over the past year. Clearly his own views arent bound by self-censorship in front of an English-speaking crowd. But why are Shavits views more worthy of being heard abroad than those held by Breaking the Silence, myself and fellow members included, participants in an organization of over 1,000 soldiers who have served in the OPT over the past decade?
As someone who has been working with Jewish communities across the world for years as part of my job with Breaking the Silence, I agree with Shavit on one foundational issue. He is right to identify the central problem facing those who wish to maintain and strengthen the relationship between Israel and American Jews: The growing crisis between the Diaspora and Israel over the latters policy of prolonged occupation of the Palestinian territories.
read more: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.708486
Israeli
(4,247 posts)This policy of occupation, like the extremist and messianic positions voiced by senior members of our government internationally, make it difficult for liberal Jews to support and identify with Israel. The Israeli government continues to sink deeper into its own international isolation and is rapidly distancing itself from the liberal values that inform the Western world. At the same time, American Jews as a minority in the U.S. sanctify the value of "tikkun olam" (repairing the world) and see it as a civic duty. The systematic oppression of another people with no end in sight does not sit well with this worldview.
But where I part ways with Shavit is how he proposes to solve this crisis. Shavits solution: Establishing a "Jewish Peace Corps" as a way to improve Israels image ("Only a 'Jewish Peace Corps' Can Save Zionism From Its Millennial Crisis" .
Instead of tackling the problem itself, instead of stating loud and clear that we must fight to end occupation for the sake of this countrys future and the future of its relationship with world Jewry, Shavit wants to send Jews to Yerucham, Ukraine and Cambodia on behalf of Israeli "hasbara." In this sense, Shavit is essentially trying to mask the occupation. But millions of Palestinians deprived of rights are not going to disappear, and no number of diversions can help. For Israel to be "identified with human rights, social justice, environmental activism and the effort to make the world a better place," it actually needs to embody these values, not just pretend to.
Shavits approach is well aligned with the current government's, which in trying to rationalize the occupation and the settlement enterprise, is working to obliterate the distinction between Israel and the occupied territories. The government is presenting world Jewry with two choices: Either you are pro-Israel, which means pro-settlements and pro-occupation, or you are anti-Israel. This approach to "hasbara" paradoxically works to bolster the BDS movement abroad, which argues that supporting Israel is equivalent to supporting the occupation and vice versa. Instead of pushing for a solution based on the 1967 borders, we have gone backwards to fight for our right to live within the green line.
This is exactly why Breaking the Silence operates in English in the U.S. We believe that we must show the world another way of understanding what is happening in Israel today. We tell our audiences that it is important to distinguish between Israel proper and the OPT. As Israelis and former soldiers, we try to clarify what the occupation is and why it is important to distinguish it from the debate over Israels very existence. We tell people that we love Israel, but hate the occupation.
I am currently a student at one of the American campuses that Shavit has visited. "Apartheid Week" is being held here, but I wont be participating. As an Israeli who is dedicating his life to improving the countrys future, I am vehemently opposed to the notion of obscuring the Green Line. That is why I also wont participate in Shavits efforts to do exactly that by establishing a "Jewish Peace Corps."
Ari Shavit, if you still yearn for a genuine solution to Israels existential problem, its relationship to Diaspora Jewry, or its democratic character and are convinced that the countrys right to exist as a national homeland for the Jewish people must be distinguished from the occupation say so. Be explicit about it, instead of continuing to stick spokes this time in English into the wheels of the struggle to end the occupation.
Avner Gvaryahu served in the IDF as a sergeant in the Paratroopers Brigade from 2004 2007. He is a member of Breaking the Silence
and is currently pursuing his M.A in New York.
Source : http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.708486
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Can you point to where he says that in his piece?
Israeli
(4,247 posts)Source : http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.692278
A-Z: Common sayings from the Bible: Tell it not in Gath
Usage :
Don't mention this, especially to someone who might take pleasure in it.
Definition:
David laments the death of Saul and Jonathan, but does not wish the news to be a cause of rejoicing to their enemies.
Bible References
2 Samuel 1:19-20
Source: http://crossref-it.info/repository/sayings/Tell-it-not-in-Gath?p=6&q_repository=
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Nowhere in the article does he say that he doesn't like to talk about the occupation in English.
That is just completely made up by the author of the OP you posted.
In fact, Ari Shavit has talked about the occupation in English quite frequently.
Here's an article he wrote for The Guardian (in English):
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/26/un-gaza-war-report-preserving-israeli-occupation
Seems odd for a person who supposedly doesn't like to talk about the occupation in English to publish an op-ed piece about the occupation in The Guardian in English.
Wouldn't you agree?
Israeli
(4,247 posts)..... " Not to tell it in Gath,
It is not ... " just completely made up by the author of the OP you posted. "
You asked me "Can you point to where he says that in his piece?"
I pointed you to where he says it .
At least shira is honest .....more than I can say for you or Ari Shavit oberliner.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Even if you are losing the argument here.
It doesn't add to your argument nor does it score you any points.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And he has written about the occupation in English, including publishing op-eds about the occupation in major English language newspapers.
If he doesn't like people talking about the occupation in English, why write a piece in The Guardian about the occupation? That doesn't make any sense.
Israeli
(4,247 posts)It was not easy to confront celebrated, high-ranking, commanders alone, neither as a conscript nor as an army reservist. But when the going got tough, I thought of Natan Alterman and Yizhar Smilansky (S. Yizhar). The establishment poet did not mince his words about the actions of Israeli soldiers in Lod in the summer of 1948. The Knesset member from the Labor Party precursor Mapai did not hesitate to write Khirbet Khizeh and Hashavui (The Captive) immediately after the War of Independence.
Both Alterman and Yizhar broke the silence, but they did not do so before international organizations that are tainted by anti-Semitism and are hostile to Israel. They broke the silence at home, in order to clean house. They broke the silence with great pain and with great love, and out of unending devotion to the Zionist enterprise.
Israels public arena is poisoned. There is no dialogue, no attentiveness, no discussion. Each side wants to silence the other side and to put it behind lock and key. As a democrat, I will defend to the end the right of everyone to have his say. But as a long-time silence-breaker, I wish that the new silence-breakers would find a better and more appropriate way to say their piece.
Ari Shavit
Haaretz Correspondent
read more: http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.692278
He is fine when it is he writing about the occupation in English oberliner.....but not when it is Breaking the Silence talking about it ..................get it now ????????????????????
oberliner
(58,724 posts)The writer of the OP claims that Shavit "doesnt like" the fact that they talk about the occupation in English. This is a blatant lie. Not only does no such statement appear in the article he references, but Shavit has written and spoken extensively about the occupation in English.
Israeli
(4,247 posts)....but I get it that you dont get it oberliner
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 13, 2016, 03:38 PM - Edit history (1)
https://www.facebook.com/Israel.MyTruth/videos/1571640493075205/