 |
Washington Report, July 2005, pages 80-83 International Activism “My Name is Rachel Corrie”
THE ACCOUNT of Rachel Corrie, the 23-year-old American peace activist killed by an Israeli bulldozer as she tried to prevent the flattening of Palestinian homes in the Gaza Strip, has received a bout of mainstream publicity thanks to a new play about her life currently showing in London’s West End. “My Name is Rachel Corrie,” which had a sold-out run April 14 to 30 at the Royal Court Theater, tells the story of how a young, idealistic American from Olympia,Washington becomes a committed peace activist who ultimately dies for her cause. The play opens in Corrie’s messy bedroom, where she has stuck memos all over the wall and can barely find clean clothes to wear. Corrie certainly is concerned more than most by the world’s injustices, but she also has the obsessions one would expect of others her age—she loves Dali and Zelda Fitzgerald, has contempt for her ex-boyfriend and disapproves of her “Economics-major-high achiever-khaki-and-high-heels-Yalie corporate sister.” After she has lived in Rafah in the Gaza Strip for six weeks, we see a starkly different Corrie. Played excellently by Megan Dodds, Corrie has become so impassioned by the suffering of Palestinians who live in “the constant presence of death” she can see nothing left to do except continue to fight for their cause. “I think it is a good idea for us all to drop everything and devote our lives to making this stop,” she writes, shortly before she is killed. “I don’t think it’s an extremist thing to do anymore,” she tells us. The play is haunting throughout—not only because we know all along Corrie’s tragic fate, but also because much of her story is told through e-mails to her loving parents. Like her parents, the sometimes tangibly surprised London audience learns from Corrie about the fear, pain and plain inconvenience occupied Palestinians live with on a daily basis. Particularly moving is Corrie’s report of the rounding up of 150 Palestinian men—with guns fired over their heads—while tanks and bulldozers destroy 25 greenhouses. As Corrie points out, these greenhouses represented the livelihoods of 300 people. She describes the delay of Gazan flower shipments to Europe due to Israeli security inspections which made the produce worthless and eventually led to the demise of the business. On March 1, 2003, Corrie notes in her diary that workers at a Rafah well—which provides 25 percent of the town’s water supply—were fired upon. She also quotes one of her acquaintances, Dr. Samir: “I have not gun in my house, nothing. 30 years collecting money for house. We also afraid no other place to go, three hours they can destroy house.” “I can’t believe that something like this can happen in the world without a bigger outcry,” Corrie writes, incensed. “It hurts me, again, like it has hurt me in the past, to witness how awful we can allow the world to be,” she adds. The reaction of Corrie’s parents to their daughter’s activism intersperses the script. “I have worried a little, because it seems to me that it could be easy to be manipulated by one faction or another,” her mother gently warns. But she then goes on to admit that she feels like she is “fighting a lifetime of indoctrination” as far as the Palestinian issue is concerned. “I’m…proud of you—very proud. But as Don Remfert says: I’d just as soon be proud of somebody else’s daughter,” her father wryly writes. The play—compiled from Corrie’s writings by Hollywood director Alan Rickman and Guardian journalist Katharine Viner—already has provoked response. Campaigners have been handing out literature calling on Londoners to stop buying the popular products of the company Caterpillar, which manufactured the bulldozer used to kill Corrie and demolish Palestinian homes, including the one she was trying to protect. The Corries actually are suing Caterpillar, accusing the company of war crimes. Some have suggested that Corrie was a naïve do-gooder who should not have been in Rafah in the first place. The London Times described a few of the play’s scenes as “unvarnished propaganda.” Praise for Corrie has been much more in abundance, however. The Observer said the production is a “fiery witness to Palestinian suffering,” while the Daily Telegraph welcomed Corrie’s “courage of youthful idealism.” As Rickman notes, “the activist part of [Corrie’s] life is absolutely matched by the imaginative part of her life. I’ve no doubt that had she lived there would have been novels and plays pouring out of her.” In one of her e-mails to her daughter Corrie’s mother wrote “Palestinians have really been invisible to me.” The same is true for many Britons—but Corrie’s death and the play “My Name is Rachel Corrie” have gone some way in changing that. —Lucy Jones Barakat Film Moves Audience
Following a May 11 screening of his latest documentary, “Rachel: An American Conscience” (see the May/June Washington Report, p. 47), Palestinian filmmaker Yahya Barakat spoke to a packed audience at a Palestine Center event co-sponsored by the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, DC Chapter. Barakat shot some of the film’s scenes and interviews during the July 2004 fact-finding trip by U.S. diplomats and Washington Report staffmembers (see October 2004 Washington Report, pp. 42-61). International Solidarity Movement volunteers provided much gripping footage as well. In an exclusive interview with this magazine before returning to Ramallah, Barakat explained why, when so many Palestinians had been killed in this intifada, he chose to document the death of an American. “I’m not a political man, I’m an artist,” Barakat explained. “I have to feel the subject. When Rachel Corrie was killed, no one in Palestine believed the Israeli line. It was not an accident. I knew there was a story there.” While Rachel’s own country never called for an investigation, or cared about her death, Barakat added, she is deeply revered and remembered by Palestinians. After 22 screenings of his film, Barakat said he has been encouraged by the reaction of audiences around the country. In San Francisco, a 25-year-old Arab-American said that after seeing his film, she felt Palestinian for the first time in her life. “If an American can give her life for Palestine, I can try to help, too,” she told him, and promised to go to Palestine this summer to work in a hospital. Another student stood up in tears after watching the film and apologized, saying, “My father works for Caterpillar.” This was the first Palestinian film shown to the U.N. General Assembly, Barakat said, and he has been promised it will be shown again on Nov. 29, the U.N.’s Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. Barakat said he hoped very much someone in the United States who sees his footage of the Caterpillar bulldozer that crushed Corrie to death will recognize the driver. Israel refuses to release his name and has protected him from murder charges. According to Barakat, however, he is rumored to be an American. “Rachel: An American Conscience” cost Barakat $45,000 to make, not including travel expenses. He had hoped to sell enough copies of the DVD on his tour to recoup his costs and buy a new camera, the filmmaker said, but that has not happened. He’s already thinking about his next film, Barakat said, which will focus on handicapped Palestinians and their unaddressed needs. There are 100,000 Palestinians who have been seriously injured in both intifadas, he said. For more information e-mail Barakat at <yahiabarakat@hotmail.com> or call his mobile 972-5936-7206. Both “Rachel: An American Conscience” and Barakat’s previous film, “The House of God,” which describes the Israeli siege of Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity, are now available in DVD format for $20 each from the AET Book Club. —Delinda C. Hanley King Faisal International Prize 2005Prince Khalid Al-Faisal, director of the King Faisal Foundation in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (<http://www.kff.com/>), announced the winners of the King Faisal International Prize for 2005. The recipients were honored in a ceremony on April 9. The Prize for Medicine was awarded to Professors Sir Richard Doll and Sir Richard Peto of the Clinical Trial Service Unit at Oxford University, UK, for their research that has unequivocally established the link between tobacco and various diseases, such as vascular diseases and cancers. Their studies have influenced national health policies and the World Health Organization (WHO). This year’s Science Prize, in the subcategory of physics, was shared by Professors Federico Capasso and Frank Wilczek of the U.S. and Anton Zeilinger of Austria. Wilczek was the co-winner of the 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics. The Prize for Service to Islam was awarded jointly to Dr. Ahmed Mohamed Ali, president of the Jeddah-based Islamic Development Bank, for his contributions to Islamic Banking, and to the Al-Hariri Foundation, a leading philanthropic institution in Lebanon, for its promotion of Islamic education and culture. The Prize for Islamic Studies has been awarded to Carole Hillenbrand, a professor of Islamic history at the University of Edinburgh, UK, for her clarification of misconceptions about the Crusades. The Prize for Arabic Language and Literature was withheld this year, as the nominations received were judged to be unqualified. The prizes, named after the third king of Saudi Arabia, consist of a certificate, hand-written in Diwani calligraphy, summarizing the laureate’s work; a commemorative 24 carat, 200 gram gold medal, uniquely cast for each prize; and a cash endowment of Saudi Riyal 750,000 (about U.S. $200,000) to be shared equally. This year’s awards bring the total number of laureates to 161 distinguished individuals from 37 countries. —Sameen Ahmed Khan, Muscat, Oman CIVITAS Project Gives Voice to Palestinian Refugees Worldwide
Karma Nabulsi, project director of Civic Structure for Palestinian Refugee Camps and Exile Communities (CIVITAS), visited Washington, DC May 14 and 15 to meet with Palestinian Americans in the national capital area. Her brief stopover was part of a whirlwind, worldwide tour to meet with Palestinian communities in over 25 countries throughout the Middle East, Latin America, Africa, Europe, Canada and the United States. Dr. Nabulsi has been busy since July 2004 gathering data that will be used to coordinate and facilitate activities designed to crystallize the voice of the Palestinian diaspora. The CIVITAS Project is based on the recommendations and findings of a March 2001 British Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry Report on Refugees, which found that Palestinian refugees have felt completely excluded from the peace process. Concluding that any solution that excludes the refugees from a final agreement will not bring peace, the report’s authors urged the European Union to ensure that the concerns and views of Palestinian refugees are included in any political settlement. Based at England’s Oxford University, the CIVITAS project is funded by the European Union and run entirely by volunteers. A database map has been established to gather information about the structure, size, and location of the Palestinian communities on every continent. With the help of Nabulsi and CIVITAS volunteers, Palestinian exile communities have been busy restoring vital links among all tiers and sectors of their civil society. “I came to Washington, DC for a preparatory meeting, to organize and set up debate models and transparent procedures.” Dr. Nabulsi explained. Her goal was to assess and aid Palestinian refugees living in the metropolitan area, build civic processes and mechanisms that will help the DC exile community, and, ultimately, establish a means of communication with Palestinian national representatives, institutions, and other organizations inside and outside Palestine. “The need for this project has been clear from the beginning” Nabulsi said. Some of her meetings with Palestinian exile communities have lasted “more than eight hours,” she said, fondly recalling, for example, a group of 31 disabled Palestinian children from Lebanon, who took part in one of her Beirut meetings. “They came to speak for themselves, and had much to say,” she told the Washington Report. “They want to connect with other disabled Palestinian refugees.” In Lebanon alone, Nabulsi held more than 17 meetings to ensure the inclusion of every Palestinian sector. “Regardless of party line, sectarian affiliation, sector, gender, class and profession,” she said, “Palestinians are coming together on this subject.” In Sweden Nabulsi met with a refugee community where 8,000 Palestinian exiles from Lebanon’s infamous Shatila Camp reside. Eighty percent of them are unemployed, she said, because Sweden considers them stateless and will not issue them any official identity cards. This has resulted in much hardship, curtailing their movement and ability to seek jobs. In her meetings with them, the refugees asked that the PA issue them identity cards, thus enabling them to travel and work. They also requested UNRWA ID cards, but declined any other UNRWA services. Upon completing her research, Nabulsi hopes to publish a complete report to include the rights, needs and recommendations of every Palestinian refugee community in the world. Meanwhile, however, following her meeting with members of the Palestinian community in Washington, DC, she rushed to catch a plane headed to Detroit, and then on to Chicago. For more information see the CIVITAS website <www.civitas-online.org>. —Mai Abdul Rahman The Pot Calling the Kettle Black?
Washington, DC-based Arab journalists organized an April 29 panel to address growing pressure from the Bush administration on the Arab media. The panel, sponsored by the Council for the National Interest Foundation and broadcast live on C-SPAN 3, was entitled “Who is to Blame for the U.S. Negative Image in the Arab World?” Emad Mekay, chief correspondent for the London-based pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, criticized the Bush administration for creating a bad climate for Arab journalists. Arab journalists were suspect to American institutions and organizations, he said, “as a result of the rhetoric coming from the administration,” which blames the Arab media for Washington’s negative image in the Arab world. Not only do Arab journalists face physical danger, Mekay said, but, as a result of significant U.S. pressure on the Arab editorial boards, “many Arab newspapers and media outlets did eventually give in to the pressure, turning themselves into, at times, mouthpieces for the [U.S.] administration.” “The serious result,” he argued, “is that we are suffering eroding credibility.” Claude Salhani, international editor for United Press International (UPI), described the “Al-Jazeeraphenomenon”—the rapid democratization of media in the Arab world, resulting in more than 150 satellite channels ranging “from 24 hour news to MTV look-a-likes to channels that broadcast nothing but Qur’anic verses.” This diversity of options, he said, means that “for the first time, the Arab world is looking at the Arab world through an Arab lens.” These new satellite channels have “taken away the monopoly from Arab governments.” The fact that Arabs now have the choice of 150 different channels, Salhani concluded, has “pushed ajar the door to democracy in the Middle East.” Said Arikat, Washington correspondent for Al-Quds daily newspaper, argued that “everything that you write that is critical of the administration is perceived by this administration to be incitement and to fan the flames of hatred against America.” The fact of the matter, he said, is that people are seeing Apache helicopters, high-tech soldiers straight from “The Empire Strikes Back,” Iraqis being killed and their country being destroyed. “It doesn’t matter who’s doing the killing,” Arikat noted, “people have an inclination, a propensity, to take a stand against that.” Panel moderator Khaled Dawoud, DC bureau chief of Al-Ahram newspaper, noted that some Americans adopt a very Orientalist view of the Arab world. He challenged the condition of “impartiality” placed on journalists and, in a very powerful human moment, confessed his feelings as an Arab correspondent covering the Bush administration: “I want development for my part of the world. I want peace,” he said. “I don’t want continuous scenarios of wars for the sake of spreading freedom later…we cannot justify the killing of 100,000 people for the sake of freedom. We don’t want any more wars…All this kind of talk about future instability is what’s really driving the anger and frustration in the Arab world.” After the panel concluded, Duncan MacInnes of the Department of State Foreign Press Centers attacked it, saying that “U.S. officials, like Iraqis themselves, blame the Arab media for promoting terrorism and ‘Binladenism’ in Iraq in ways that are counter to the public good that media is supposed to do.” Countered Mekay: “We try to be balanced—a little bit from what you say and maybe a little bit from what the other side is saying—and, frankly, blaming us all the time [is] an attempt for you guys to cover up your own reluctance to understand why things are so bad for you in the Arab world. “It’s your politics,” he told the American. “If you don’t want to understand it, it’s totally up to you, but you have bad policies in the Arab world.” “I really don’t think this charge is fair,” Dawoud responded. “Do Arab newspapers have to say: ‘The situation in Iraq is great? The situation in Iraq is wonderful progress? The bombs and stuff, that’s no big deal, forget about it?’…I can’t do this.” —Matt Horton |
||||||||||||||||||||
