Encounters between Israelis and Palestinians do not always go well. This past summer, for example, an angry Palestinian at the helm of a bulldozer in Jerusalem killed three people before himself being shot dead. Several days later and a few miles south in the West Bank village of Ni’lin, an Israeli Lieutenant Colonel held a bound and blindfolded Palestinian as another soldier standing approximately five feet away aimed his weapon and then fired a rubber-coated steel bullet into the captive’s leg. (The Palestinian had been part of a demonstration protesting the Israeli government’s illegal confiscation of the village’s land.)
These are the kinds of stories you’ll often find in the news. What follows is one you seldom will.
Zababdeh, West Bank (the view from the roof of my home)
It was May 27, 2003, my final day in Zababdeh. The village, situated in the rolling hills of the northern West Bank and beautifully surrounded by ploughed fields and olive groves, was home to more than 3,000 Christian and Muslim Palestinians. And in the previous ten weeks the village had also been my home. But at week’s end, after a short stay in Jerusalem, I would return to the States, a world so far away—and not just in distance—from here.
After breakfasts I packed up my few belonging so that later in the day I would be all set to depart for Jerusalem. At 11:00 a.m. I then walked to the center of the village. Here I hopped on a taxi bound for Jenin, a Palestinian town six miles tothe north. I had been there often in the past two months, visiting friends, delivering food to trapped residents during military curfew, drinking tea in the refugee camp as an Apache helicopter hovered lazily overhead, rattling nerves as people waited for it to possibly fire a rocket into a wanted man’s home or car. On this day I was simply going to say a quick goodbye to my friends there; my leaving the West Bank without saying farewell was hardly imaginable, for them or me.
But in militarily occupied territory it is the military that calls the shots, and as my taxi neared Jenin other vehicles on the two lane road (moving in the opposite direction) signaled that the Israeli military was in the process of surrounding the town—all roads were being cut. I felt my jaws clench. The frustrations of living under military occupation are myriad, not least when it prevents one from embracing his friends goodbye.
But Nidal, my driver, had even more to be concerned with since his wife and kids were inside Jenin. No husband feels at ease while a military operation is underway near his family, especially when all he can do is sit by on the edge of town until it’s over. “This happens all the time,” Nidal said with practiced calm, verbalizing what I already knew well.
As the military begins to cut off a town like Jenin, drivers like Nidal pick up their cell phones and look for gaps in the encirclement. I watched Nidal’s calm but intense face as someone on the other end of the line announced that a tank which had been blocking the dirt road leading into Jenin from Burqin (where Jesus is said to have healed ten lepers) had just vacated the road. Nidal gunned the engine and off we flew toward Burqin. “Sometimes the army will seal all the roads but one, or sometimes a tank is sent away to do something else for a moment but then returns. We must hurry.”
In two minutes we were in Burkin, passing one of the oldest churches in the Holy Land as we raced on toward our destination. Other cars had also learned about the opening; there was a caravan of maybe a dozen of us, a thick cloud of dust billowing up in our wake. With the edge of the city finally in sight—we were only 200 yards from being safely inside—we looked on in shock as a tank emerged seemingly out of nowhere—it had been in an adjacent olive grove. Moving at high speed, it crashed onto the dirt road not even 100 feet in front of us, swiveling its turret toward our windshield as Nidal brought us to a grinding halt. As the dust from both our car and the tank settled, I saw the car that had been immediately in front of us disappear into the city; it had made it. As for us, a soldier using a loudspeaker ordered us to turn around. The tone and weapons pointed at us left no room for talking. We turned around.
We turned around, but neither Nidal nor I were any less determined to find a way into Jenin. With adrenaline still pounding through our veins, we pulled off the road in Burqin and considered our options.
[This is the end of Part One. In two weeks the second installment will look at another failed attempt into the city later that hour, focusing on a frank and sincere conversation between Nidal and an Israeli soldier.]
A Palestinian boy in Jenin refugee camp
In Jenin, bullet holes and posters of "martyrs" on a storefront are among the reminders of conflict
A UN vehicle run over by an Israeli tank in Jenin in 2002
This story behind this photo will be in Part Two. The man in the red shirt is Nidal.
To continue to part two, CLICK HERE
 |  |  | ||
| Joel Carillet, Gather Travel Correspondent | ||||
His articles, based on extensive travels in Asia and the Middle East, seek to shed light on humanity, both our own and that of others. They aim not merely to entertain and inform but also to develop a sense of connection between the reader and the world. Joel's writing and photography have appeared in several publications, including the Kansas City Star, Christian Science Monitor, and The Best Travel Writing 2008. He is also the author of 30 Reasons to Travel: Photographs and Reflections from Southeast Asia. If interested in learning more about Joel or purchasing photographic prints, visit http://joelcarillet.com. When not on the road, he happily calls Tennessee home. Keep up with Joel's article series by joining his network, or subscribing to his content. | ||||
 | ||||
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 9
nearby, where he shot Danny execution style, making sure that her father's
death would be the last sight her little girl would ever see.
Kuntar then took the butt of his assault rifle and brought in down on
Einat's head, crushing it against a rock. Smadar Haran would later recall, "By the time we were rescued from the crawl space, hours later, Yael, too, was dead. In trying to save all our lives, I had smothered her."
First the Israeli soldiers who wouned a Palestinian in his big toe.
The Israeli High Court of Justice on Sunday gave the state 40 days to reconsider the Military Advocate General's decision to indict on the lightest possible criminal charge a battalion commander and a non-commissioned officer accused of shooting a bound and blindfolded Palestinian at point-blank range.
The incident occurred on July 7, during a protest against the construction of the separation barrier on land belonging to the Palestinian village of Ni'lin, near Modi'in Illit.
The soldier identified as First-Sgt. L., fired a rubber coated steel bullet towards the toe of Palestinian protester Ashraf Abu Rahme, saying he thought his commander, Lt.-Col. Omri Borberg, had ordered him to do so. Borberg maintained he had not given such an order and had not had any intention of shooting Abu Rahme.
After a military police investigation, Military Advocate-General Brig.-Gen. Avichai Mandelblit decided to court-martial both soldiers on charges of conduct unbecoming a soldier. The charge includes a maximum sentence of one year in jail. However, it does not include the opening a criminal file against any defendant convicted of the crime
Abu Rahme and four human rights organizations - B'Tselem, The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Yesh Din and The Public Committee against Torture in Israel petitioned the High Court - arguing that the charge did not reflect the gravity of the soldiers' actions.
They demanded that "the charges reflect the criminal actions carried out by [Borberg and L.] from an extremely close range against [Abu Rahme], who was under their guard, bound and blindfolded”
The justices - Ayala Procaccia, Elyakim - peppered the state's representative, Dep. State Attorney Shai Nitzan, head of the Special Tasks Section, with questions about why Mandelblit had decided to indict the soldiers on the light charge of conduct unbecoming a soldier when there were more serious ones he could have chosen, such as abuse or improper use of a firearm, both of which carry heavier punishments.
According to the charge sheet, Abu Rahme was handcuffed and blindfolded when Borberg first saw him. When the officer said something to him in Hebrew, Abu Rahme replied that he did not understand the language.
Borberg decided to make him acknowledge that he did. He therefore turned to L. and said, "What do you say that we go off to the side and shoot him with a rubber coated steel bullet." L. replied, "I don't have a problem with that." Borberg stood Abu Rahme up and started walking with him towards a jeep. He ordered L. to cock his gun. L. replied that there was already a bullet in the breech.
Borberg then stood with Abu Rahme in front of the jeep, while L. stood directly in front of the detainee and fired a bullet towards his foot. Abu Rahme was slightly wounded.
When Nitzan tried to explain to the court why the facts in the case did not add up to a charge of abuse, Procaccia interrupted him. "What are we supposed to understand from this dialogue: [between Borberg and L.] Cock your rifle. I already have a bullet in the breech. I find this hard to square with the indictment. This is not the way to talk when you want to frighten someone."
Later, Procaccia added, "This isn't acting cruelly? The detainee is meant to understand the exchange between the officer and the soldier about cocking the rifle. I don't see why this is not abuse."
She added that the fact that Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi had removed Borberg from his command and sent him to be an instructor did not constitute a demotion. "He was given a good job. In the end, it all depends on which way the wind is blowing." [In other words, it was clear that Borberg did not receive a severe disciplinary punishment and the army's message was that the shooting incident was not that grave.]
Rubinstein was also critical of the indictment for that reason. "Where does the vital factor of proper military norms, the message to the public at large, to the army, come into play?" asked Rubinstein. "What are soldiers to understand from the decision [to charge Borberg and L. with conduct unbecoming a soldier?] Where do we find efforts to restore proper norms to the army?"
Now the Arab reaction to the freedom fighter who shot a father in front of his daughter and then smashed the four year old girl’s head against a rock when he was recently released from an Israeli jail.
Celebrating in Gaza and Ramallah as well: Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday welcomed the execution of the prisoner exchange deal between Israel and Hizbullah. Abbas congratulated the family of released Lebanese murderer Samir Kuntar.
HAmas prime minister in the Gaza Strip, Ismail Haniyeh, congratulated Kuntar and Hizbullah for "the great victory of the resistance, which proved the rightness of our way."
Ziad abu al-Enain, director-general of the Ministry for Prisoner Affairs of the Salam Fayyad government and one of Fatah's senior members in the territories, said Wednesday morning, "The Palestinians congratulate Hizbullah and its leader and send their best wishes to all the Lebanese people and to all the Palestinians upon the completion of the deal and the release of heroes, headed by the prisoners' leader, Samir Kuntar."
He added that processions would be held in the territories Wednesday to express the Palestinians' solidarity following the completion of the deal.
Your following comment is difficult to discern how it is connected to my story. I understand your strong feelings toward Israel, but I sure wish you could allow a story that is about an ordinary Palestinian (e.g., this taxi driver, particularly in the part still to be published) to stand for what it is without ALWAYS having to throw out some article about the evils of Arabs, as you often do in your own postings (without ever, as far as I can tell, also telling/sharing blurbs about the other angle). So much of what you say/share not only indicates your lack of experience with real Palestinians in the occupied territories but is also intended to paint a picture of Palestinians as a whole which is often neither fair nor correct.
My interest is not to exchange a bad story for a bad story and see who, in the end, can outdo the other by showing who is the "baddest." But this is what you seem to prefer, as indicated by the long serious of posts on your own page which seem ONLY interested in showing how the one side is at fault for everything. Part Two of my story is going to revolve around a dialogue between the soldier and my taxi driver. The solider will apologize for some things his fellow soldiers have done to people like the taxi driver. I wish more of your own posts had something of the spirit -- and experience -- of this soldier (and the taxi driver).
I do thank you for rightly pointing out that the bound Palestinian was shot in the toe rather than the leg. I just wish the rest of your comment had been connected to this story. But it wasn't. It was connected instead to your unwillingness to allow a story about life in the West Bank to be heard without having to throw in some awful thing that some group of "Arabs" -- but not ANYONE in this story -- did. And that's a shame.
You have a point about my comment not being directly related to the "slice of life" aspect of your story. But neither is your introdution. You first pointed out that "Encounters between Israelis and Palestinians do not always go well." and then illustrated your point by citing one example of wrongdoing by each side - thus creating to the extent possible a picture of evenhandedness. It is the introduction to which I responded and I believe that my reponse was germane. The wrongdoing by both sides is not evenhanded.
If I had known the subject of your next post I probably would have saved my post until then. Will you paint the soldier's apology as a way of saying "see even a simple soldier recognizes the wrongs being inflicted by thee Israeli army on the Palestinians" or will it be slanted so as to show "the Israelis at least recognize the humiliations (or whatever) that they are inflicting on the Palestinias while the Palestinians have no regrets at the mayhem that they have sometimes inflicted on the Israelis"? Don't tell me that your post will not tend to evoke any sentiment at all. I doubt that even a writer such as yoursef could manage that - assuming that you wanted to.