 |
Washington Report, May/June 2006, pages 16-17 Special Report Muslim, Christian, Secular Arabs in Israel Unite in Face of Nazareth Church AttackBy Isabelle Humphries
OUTSIDE of Palestine/Israel few people heard that on March 3, during the first Friday prayers of the annual pre-Easter fast of Lent, a Jewish family entered Nazareth’s Basilica of the Annunciation and set off explosives hidden inside a pram. Nazareth is the largest Palestinian town remaining inside Israel, and the Basilica is believed by Christians to mark the site where Mary learned she was pregnant. For Christians this site is on a par with those in Jerusalem and Bethlehem. After frightened worshippers succeeded in pinning down the attackers, Israeli police entered the church to arrest the terrorists. Instead of immediately removing the Jewish man and his family, however, the police kept them inside the church as an increasingly large and angry crowd gathered outside. Although the original attack had occurred before 5 p.m., by 8 p.m. hundreds of Nazarenes were outside the church demanding answers as the number of Israeli riot police increased on the city streets. As police helicopters beamed searchlights from above, sound bombs tore through the air and tear gas choked throats, memories of recent Israeli police brutality were all too close. In October 2000, police killed three Israeli Arab citizens and injured dozens in the streets of Nazareth as the al-Aqsa intifada erupted in the West Bank and Gaza. This, no doubt, was in the minds of whoever set fire to the police car in their midst—as was the question of why the police had allowed the situation to escalate to this stage. The following day, to the sound of church bells, Latin Patriarch Michel Sabbah, with Muslim and secular leaders by his side, led thousands of Palestinians down Nazareth’s high street to the Basilica. On the platform from within the church precinct, Muslim leaders joined arm in arm with Christian bishops and patriarchs. The significance of Islamic movement leader Sheikh Ra’ed Salah appearing in solidarity with Christian leaders did not go unnoticed by a satisfied Nazareth crowd or an irritated Israeli leadership. Salah was recently imprisoned for two years, accused by the Israelis of supporting “terrorism” because of his outspoken and solid support of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Directly addressing the unanswered question about the timing of the incident, Sheikh Salah accused Israeli police of using the attack to try to exacerbate Muslim/Christian tensions. Why did it take them so many hours to get the attackers out, when the police are fully armed with all of Israel’s military technology, and the citizens of Nazareth have no history of armed attack on the police? The sheikh’s view was widely shared by Nazerenes of all faiths. Indeed, in a town used to having religious tensions stirred by outside forces (by, for example, Israel’s granting and then withdrawing a permit to build a mosque on church land), this seemed perfectly logical. Salah went on to make a direct connection with U.S. attempts to divide Christians and Muslims in Iraq who for centuries have lived alongside each other as brothers and sisters. More Than a Lone “Madman”Israeli government and media dismissed the attack as the work of a madman. The fact that the terrorist was not a “crazy nationalist” but a “madman with family problems,” however, does not mean that the incident should be set aside as irrelevant. To understand community concerns raised by the attack one must consider the wider context in which this person staged his act. Seven months earlier, in August 2005, Israeli soldier Eden Natan-Zada entered the Arab town of Shefa’amr, near Haifa, and gunned down four Palestinians. Israeli authorities described him as a madman—the implication being that, far from being a product of a racist society, this Jewish attacker was an anomaly to the “normal, well-balanced, non-racist Israeli.” On Feb. 25, 1994, Brooklyn-born Dr. Baruch Goldstein entered Hebron’s Ibrahimi mosque and massacred 29 Muslims as they prayed. He, too, was dismissed as a “madman”—one, however, whom Jewish settlers are allowed to celebrate at his tomb. Despite the fact that Haim Habibi, the Jewish Israeli who attacked the Nazareth church, seemed to have no links with Zionist groups, it is no wonder that Palestinians are skeptical of Israel labeling yet another terrorist as a “madman.” Acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert suggested that Palestinian leaders inside Israel were using the attack as an opportunity for electioneering prior to the country’s March 28 elections—as if all Palestinians inside Israel had to worry about was who was going to be their powerless representatives in the Israeli Knesset! In fact many Arabs, believing their “citizenship” is not worth the paper it’s written on, don’t even bother to vote. Olmert also accused the Islamic leadership of inciting an angry response—deliberately ignoring the fact that the demonstration was led by the Latin Patriarch to the sound of church bells. Trying to paint an image of fanatical Muslim masses in the heart of the Jewish state is integral to Israel’s wider rhetoric about Hamas in the West Bank and Gaza, in an attempt to justify oppression and the bypassing of even basic human rights. The last thing the Israeli government wants to do is acknowledge a united secular, Muslim and Christian response to the attack. “The attempt to drive a wedge into the Arab population is a dirty game, which is well known on the Arab street,” noted Muhammad Barakeh of the Communist party (Hadash) as reported in the Israeli daily Haaretz. Haaretz also quoted Olmert as telling his cabinet that “since its beginning, Israel has always upheld the freedom of religious practice, demonstrating patience toward all religions practicing in the state. That is our creed and way, and we will continue to act accordingly.” Try telling that to the families of those detained without trial for challenging the state of Israel, to the 300,000 Palestinian refugees who have Israeli citizenship but are not allowed to return to their homes, villages and lands, or to the refugees of Safad whose mosque is being used as the local headquarters for Olmert’s Kadima party. As a result of the Palestinian community’s united front, attempts to use this incident to foment divisions among Arabs living in Israel have backfired. In fact, the unified response to the attack on the basilica has even brought recognition from Palestinians living across the 1967 border, with support for the church leaders coming from the Hamas leadership as well as from a demonstration outside Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity. Not only were Palestinian flags seen on the street outside the Nazareth church for the first time in months, but many people who attended the demonstration were engaging in protest for the first time in their lives. As Muslim and Christian leaders shared a united platform from inside the holiest site for Christians inside 1948 Palestine, ties were strengthened in a beleaguered community that Israel is continually trying to wear down. According to Haaretz, a recent poll found that 68 percent of Israeli Jews would not live in the same apartment bloc as an Israeli Arab. Arab citizens may be able to vote for Israeli Knesset members, but their reaction to the events in Nazareth shows that the community feels far from secure living in a so-called “Jewish and democratic state.” Isabelle Humphries is a free-lance writer conducting Ph.D.
research regarding the Palestinian internal refugee community.
She may be contacted at <isabellebh2004@yahoo.co.uk>.
For literary reflection on the events in Nazareth visit |
|||||
