In Related News...

Turkey.

Pro-government Iran.

Military as a vehicle for Orientalism in Iraq?

Religion, veiling, Iraq.

Iraqi displacement and refugees (from 2007).

Iraqi refugee camp now.

Palestine.

Israel.

Paradise Now

Paradise Now was excellent. It was co-written and directed by Hany Abu-Assad (right in above picture) and co-written and produced by Bero Beyer (left). Abu-Assad was born in Nazareth, Israel, in 1961 and moved to the Netherlands (which is, I presume where he met Beyer) in 1980. Although he was born in Israel, all the information I found on him refers to him as a Palestinian. In this interview he seems particularly sympathetic to Palestine. Perhaps he is a Palestinian born in Israel. I found no biographical information on Beyer except that he is Dutch and has produced a couple movies.

I'm sure we were all struck by the humanization of Said and Khaled (the protagonists). It is truly rare (at least in the United States) to be given the opportunity to view a suicide bomber as a real person.

Paradise Now does not exist to justify suicide bombings, but rather to illustrate how it is that one chooses to become a suicide bomber (or just a bomber, or a terrorist in general). I've always found suicide bombings particularly interesting because they're not just about killing the other person. If that were the case there'd just be bombs, no suicide. But martyrdom is an important part of the action. Showing that you believe so much in something that you'll give your life for it and for the good of your people.

We begin to see why Said and Khaled feel that they will be martyrs while they are filming their goodbye videos. While we can recognize suicide bombing as something that's not O.K., these men make their cases seem almost rational. We can at least sympathize with them, with their need to try to make right what they feel is so wrong.

Khaled says that Palestine has tried other means of getting through to Israel, political and peaceful means. He says that he can no longer accept being treated as if Palestinians are inferior, can no longer accept ethnic cleansing, occupation, unfairness, lack of compromise. This unimaginable act is his way of fighting for his country. Khaled asks Jamal to protect his family from retribution by the Israelis.

In his video, Said says, "Our bodies are all we have left to fight with." A statement that is at once dreadful, determined, and ineffably sad.

Later, Suha, who is also exceptionally rational, tries to talk Khaled out of his "mission." She points out that these actions give the Israelis all the justification they need not to stop what they are doing. But what really gets to Khaled, I think, is when she says, "If you kill, there's no difference between victim and occupier." He is forced to see himself as the enemy.

Said, trying to reaffirm his commitment, is again the model of downtrodden determination and elicitor of sympathy. "And the world watches," he says, "cowardly, unjustly. . . . [The Israelis have] convinced the world and themselves that they are the victims. . . . How," he asks, "can the occupier be the victim?" Suha has answered this riddle.

Powerful in its raw emotion and near constant intensity, the film presents the perfect persuasion. Even if you don't agree with the act, you feel for the person.

This film could be beneficial in classrooms for a number of reasons. Most obviously, it touches deeply on current events. But it can lead teachers and students to discussions about right and wrong in any number of areas. (How do we determine what is just? Was dropping the atom bomb just? Was it just for George to kill Lennie? Is the U.S.'s current involvement with Iraq and Afghanistan just? Are there degrees of justness?) Also, the way in which each main character presents his (and her) case can be used to facilitate discussions of writing persuasively. Each side of the "to bomb or not to bomb" argument is presented clearly and rationally. While the film's authors acknowledge their bias against Israel, they never indicate that they think Israelis should be killed, especially innocent citizens. The arguments both for and against the suicide bombings are well thought out and logical. Students will see that a writer needn't agree with a point of view to present it respectfully.

And for all the film's talk of violence, we never - not even once, not even when Said carries out his bombing - see any violence.

The History Of Palestine

I've always been a little torn regarding the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I've also always had a much clearer view of Israel's side of the conflict than of Palestine's. While I have tried to keep in mind how the Palestinians must feel, how I know I, too, would still harbor resentment for a deal that forced me from my home, it's difficult to see both sides when your knowledge begins in the middle. This video, "The History Of Palestine," definitely gave me more perspective.

(Follow this link to the video if it doesn't work for you here.)

I thought of the Palestinian perspective as that of anger for loss of home and land. But they lost much, much more. If I had ever bothered to really think about how the state of Israel came about, I'm sure I would've figured out all the bloodshed. Maybe I didn't want to think about that aspect of the "transition." But I don't think I would have imagined quite this story. People forced from their land and homes by what amounts to a brutal regime. The parallels drawn between the jews establishing Israel and what they were trying to forever escape from seem as if they were pulled from some fiction.

And how can we not sympathize with people who can look at their homes but are told "These are no longer yours"? With people who can see their country but are told "This is no longer yours"? How can we sympathize so much with those who take up residence in another's home when that other's clothes, dishes, and blood still freshly stain the heavy air of the place? We are made to feel as if we must choose one group to support, but how can we when the jews have been on both sides of this literal fence within the past 60 years? Our government takes sides, but that's easy to do when you view one side as the victim and the other as the villain. That's easy to do when you don't talk about how the fighting is coming from both sides. And it's easy to garner the public's support, too, when they are told so much about the Israeli half of the conflict and left to figure the Palestinian half out for themselves. It's easier to choose the side for which you've been conditioned to feel sympathy.

Even in light of "The History Of Palestine," we must remember that we have been shown the disheartening beginning of the conflict, but that blame and compassion fall to both sides for the decades that have intervened between then and now.