I am reading Jeffrey Goldberg's book "Prisioners" about his friendship with a Palestinian intellectual from the Jabaliya Refugee Camp in Gaza. Goldberg is one of the American Jews who came to Israel and found himself serving reserve duty in the Army. I served in an unit mostly composed by American and Russian immigrants about the same year, and we all ended spending one month periods in Ketziot. I was with five Americans in a faraway guardpost near the Egyptian border, near Azuz, and rarely visited the "michlaot" which were fenced in areas where the prisioners lived in tents. It was forbidden to talk to them and I never had the opportunity.
Goldberg is said to have ended in the military police, which think is a mistake, as I never met an American immigrant in that unit. The origin of the misunderstanding, I think, was the Keddumim Camp, a former Jordanian Army camp, which was turned into a conscripts training camp of the Military Police (For some reason they mixed immigrant conscripts with Israelis with police records). Later, Goldberg served as a guard at Ketziot, the vast, desolate prison camp that Israel set up in its southern desert to hold the Palestinian rebels of the first intifada, which broke out in 1987. All the guards were civilians doing their annual one-month reserve duty, nothing to do with military police.
Goldberg felt compelled to speak to the men he helped keep incarcerated. He hoped that by talking he might come to understand them and bring them to understand Israel. One prisoner in particular caught his attention: Rafiq Hijazi, a Palestine Liberation Organization leader, college math teacher and devout Muslim from the ugly Jabaliya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. Later Goldberg returned home and Hijazi also moved to the United States so they continued their conversation.
There are many misinterpretations in the book - Goldberg is an American who like most immigrants, did not really immersed himself in Israel (I started to swim in the Israeli mainstream only when left TAHAL and when my children went to school). For example he confiscates a stone from a prisioner. The context of this action is missing: the prisioners had a "postal service" with paper messages attached to small stones, which they threw from one "michla'a" to the other. This stones were regularly collected and given to the small intelligence unit in the camp.
My memories refer mostly to the Roman ruins in the desert area where we had our small "machsom" - check post. Once I had to guard the Red Cross people who came almost every day, and once I had to accompany the prisioners carrying food to their camps. They were given all the food they wanted and they took it to their tents to prepare it as they wanted. These Palestinian cooks were given kitchen knives, which amazed me at the time. I arrived to the conclusion that they were not prisioners in the European or Russian sense, Israel simply collected thousands of young boys from the most troublesome neighborhoods, extracting them from "Intifada", and later, when things quieted down, they were sent home. As far as I know there were no interrogations and they were left alone in their tents. The only interesting happenings I know of were sexual: homosexuality was rampant (imagine thousands of well fed and bored Arab teenagers at night) and what I observed from outside were some apparent rapes and "marriage ceremonies" with boys dressed white. My American collegues were mostly interested in religious questions, what Rabbi had signed the kashrut certificate of the sardines (some Rabbis were not kasher enough for them), and if they can be eaten before or after the cottage cheese.
12 comments:
As a complete outsider, let me guess-before the sardines?
Anon.
I never knew. There were intense consultations between different checkposts and units in the camp and the kashrut superviser, even the military rabbi was asked, but I cannot remember what was the final consensus. Maybe I was not very interested. Generally, these Talmudic disputes are never resolved.
Interestingly, our officer was a leftist "subversive" and commented that we were doing something illegal holding people without trial for months. When asked something he used to answer "I am not here". The general enviroment was that we didnt want to be there. The real officers managing and maintaining the place were the Druze carrier soldiers. There were also Beduin units patrolling the Egyptian border during the night.
In the Ashkenazi minhag, there is no prohibition against eating dairy with fish - they can be eat before, after or even together in the same dish (bagel with lox (smoked salmon) and cream cheese is a famous Jewish combination). Some Sephardim do not eat fish and dairy together - the Sephardic rabbis believed that this was unhealthy for the digestion (the Torah does not mention any religious prohibition of this combination).
Interestingly, (non-Jewish) Italians also believe that fish with cheese is a bad combination. Most Italians avoid this combination but don't even know why - if you ask them they say that it doesn't taste good, which is not true. Perhaps the Pope's Sephardic Jewish physicians spread this custom to the larger population?
K
K
(For some reason they mixed immigrant conscripts with Israelis with police records)
I think this shows the low opinion Israelis have of (American) immigrants and unfortunately I think they are right (but still did not justify treating the immigrants this way) . The American Jews who end up in Israel are mostly either religious fanatics (who argue over obscure points of halacha - whether the heksher of Rabbi A is better than the heksher of Rabbi B) or lost souls (or both). I recall hearing of a lot of Jewish kids who volunteered at kibbutzes getting assigned the most disgusting jobs such as shoveling the manure out of the chicken coops. I grew up on a chicken farm and did not need to travel 5,000 miles to shovel chicken droppings for free - I could do this right at home any time I wanted to. But surely this was not a good way to encourage immigrants to stay - this is typical Israeli self-defeating behavior.
I don't know if the Arabs are particularly afflicted with homosexuality or whether it just stands out because it is so at odds with their macho ethic. There are many rumors that Arafat died of AIDS that he acquired thru homosexual conduct. Apparently, in common with Catholic priests, he preferred teenage boys.
K
K,
Regarding mixing of different populations of drafted soldiers, I think there must be some sociological or "reasonable" explanation. It is possible that immigrants and police-record Israelis are too small a group to train them alone, or that they are afraid to mix bad elements with good ones, or idealist immigrants like us are less spoilable like the natives. Maybe we were bad soldier material and were considered a marginal group. I really dont know. Our officers were very intellectual and pretended to dislike what they were doing, nothing like the militaristic American officers.
Regarding Arafat, he was a homosexual and died of AIDS. Traditional Arab societies live under great sexual stress, partly because of polygyny, but nowadays they are becoming Westernized.
As you know, nowadays the US has an all volunteer military, so if an officer doesn't like what he is doing, he can simply quit when his term is up. I would think that "militaristic" would be a compliment for a military officer. Real American officers, BTW, are mostly nothing like what you see in the movies. Some drill sergeants do affect a character like that seen in the movies in order to toughen up their soldiers in basic training, but it is usually just an act.
Regarding Arafat, you are almost certainly correct but since the proof in the public record is less than 100% persuasive (maybe 95% persuasive) to be polite I called them "rumors". It is no coincidence that child abuse is found in groups (Arabs, Catholic priests) where hypocrisy is a major element in the society - your public "face" must conform rigidly to the societal norms no matter what your inner nature is.
K
You see, the image of American soldiers is like in Avatar, and nothing can change it. The Israeli officer's attitude of pretending to dislike everything related with the military is a pose. We love it like everybody else. The world hate Jews armed and in uniform.
I remember we had "Know the enemy" classes in the Army 20 years ago and we were told very clearly that Arafat liked painted boys. Not that it makes any difference.
It also occurs to me, that just like the American sergeants who pretend to be gruff and shout at their trainees, the officers who said that they didn't want to be there were perhaps also using this as a training technique that was suited to their particular society and circumstances - the conscript trainees didn't want to be there either so they would identify with the officers. Perhaps these officers really liked their job more than they were willing to admit (even to themselves). Another part of the Israeli character (inherited from the shtetl even though the society was set up in opposition to shtetl values) is to always grumble about what you are doing and never admit that you are happy and things are going well. If you admit it, then you will attract the attention of the ayin hora and you will be struck down. In the US all volunteer army such a pose would only antagonize and puzzle the trainees and would not be at all effective. What people say in public and what they really are thinking and doing are often 2 different things.
K
J, I see that as always you are ahead of me even as I type and well understand that the pretending to dislike everything shtick was just a pose (as is the gruff drill sergeant shtick, or the gruff drill sergeant who secretly has a heart of gold). After a while people become so affected by the stereotypes that they see in movies that they feel compelled to act like a movie character - supposedly a lot of Mafia members watch the Godfather movies and take pointers in how to act like a Mafioso from them. Art imitates life which imitates art, etc.
Regarding Arafat, I suppose all leaders are hypocrites, especially when it comes to their personal life (see John Kennedy, John Edwards, Bill Clinton, etc. - although they at least preferred women of legal age) but knowing the nature of their particular hypocrisy does give some insight into the enemy's character - Arafat was a man with a self constructed public identity at odds with his true nature - an Egyptian pretending to be a "Palestinian" - this in turn colored the whole "Palestinian" racket. The Arabs have been (due to the decayed and violent nature of their societies) singularly "unlucky" in their leaders - instead of Washington or Ben Gurion they get Arafat or Saddam Hussein. I put "unlucky" in quotes because the notion that you get the leaders you deserve is to some extent true.
K
Arafat was a degenerate and did much harm to his people and to Israel. He loved the role of "freedom fighter" and could never grow out if it. We in Israel thought he will turn into a responsible leader if given a country, but he didnt.
If you look at the post-revolutionary history of most countries (going back to the Maccabees), the qualities it takes to be the military leader of an uprising are usually not the same qualities desirable in leading a peaceful country after the war of liberation is over - in fact often the opposite. Washington (putting aside his association with slavery which was not considered a flaw in his time and place) was a man well ahead of his time (read his letter to the Jewish community of Newport) and understood that he was setting an example to future generations and other nations and had the strength and discipline not to give in to the easy temptations that come with power. But such saints are born rarely and it would not be the Jew's luck to have such an enemy. Instead we get Haman, Hitler and Arafat. In the end, the enemies of Israel all suffer a dark fate but not before causing much suffering first.
K
Yes, we are like that. Israelis will always grumble about what you are doing and never admit that you are happy and things are going well.
Post a Comment