Peace in the Middle East

Summary: the Palestinian Ranking Project

by Charles Lenchner

Published November 19, 2008 @ 08:46PM PST

For anyone showing up just now, this post is based on the three previous ones:

We are playing with three issues where a group can get a rank of 1-5. The middle - 3 - is based on what we know to be the majority opinion of Palestinians in Palestine, based on public opinion research. Then we stake out two positions more in each direction. The higher the number, the more that position is likely to be seen as hostile to Israel. The lower the number, the more likely that Israel should be willing to be accommodating to that group, maybe even help strengthen it.

Let's look at the major political forces operating among Palestinians (in Palestine) right now. V=Violence, A=Acceptance of Israel, and R=Right of Return:

  • Islamic Jihad V=5  , A=5  , R=5  Total:15

  • PFLP V=3  , A=4  , R=4  Total: 11

  • Hamas V=4  , A=3  , R=3  Total: 10

  • Fatah (Grassroots Militants)   V=3  , A=3  , R=3  Total:9

  • Balad (Israeli Palestinian Nationalists) V=2  , A=3  , R=3  Total:8

  • Palestinian People's Party V=2  , A=2  , R=3  Total:7

  • Hadash (Israeli Leftists - Mostly Arab) V=2  , A=3  , R=2  Total:7

  • Fatah (Abbas Gov.)   V=2  , A=2  , R=2  Total: 6

What strikes me about looking at it this way, is the degree to which Palestinian organizations have drifted, over time, more towards what the Palestinians with Israeli citizenship think politically, rather than the other way. But here is where it gets fun - let's compare the list above with the list below:

  • Al-Awda V=3  , A=4  , R=4  Total:11

  • International ANSWER V=3  , A=4  , R=4  Total: 11

  • US Campaign Against the Occupation V=2  , A=4  , R=4  Total: 10

  • American Jews for a Just Peace V=2  , A=4  , R=3  Total:9

  • Israeli Coalition Against House Demolitions V=2  , A=4  , R=3  Total:9

  • Sabeel V=1  , A=3  , R=3  Total:7

  • Jewish Voice for Peace V=2  , A=3  , R=2  Total:7

  • United for Peace and Justice V=2  , A=2  , R=2  Total:6

  • ADC V=2  , A=2  , R=2  Total:6

  • AFSC V=1  , A=2  , R=2  Total:5

  • American Task Force on Palestine V=1  , A=2  , R=2  Total: 5

  • CNI V=2  , A=1  , R=1  Total:4

  • Arab American Institute V=1  , A=1  , R=2  Total:4

Keep in mind, that the only way to have a V = 1 is if you are more or less pacifistic or very much an establishment figure (as is Jim Zogby of the AAI). Having a V=2, 3 or 4 doesn't make you violent, it reflects you understanding of how legitimate Palestinian violence is. Those who use phrases like 'we support the Palestinian resistance' are usually including armed fighters in that statement (V=3 or 4). Those who formally condemn terrorism get a 2 or 3. No one on this list has a V=5 because that group would be locked up by now, and hence, quite irrelevant!

Interpreting Ranking Scores for US Groups

11 or above: Congratulations! You a probably being watched by the FBI. And Hamas is nervous you might denounce them someday for going "soft."

9-10: Your politics faithfully represent the Palestinian "street." Remember: the street is fickle and could change on you. Remember how optimistic folks where during the Oslo years?

7-8: You probably can't run for political office with views like that. But while such view might be hard to promote among American liberals, they aren't anything special in Israel.

6 or less: Your views have Congressional representation. You have traction in the political world. You can play inside the beltway and get somewhere. These views represent the real mainstream in this country - just not what gets represented in the mainstream media.

Conclusions

The politics of some American leftists are indeed, at times, more pro-Palestinian than the Palestinians themselves. Holier than the pope, shall we say.

The pro-Palestinian camp is actually quite diverse - at least as diverse at the Palestinians are. For this reason, it often makes no sense to speak of a "pro-Palestinian" voice. The question will always be - which Palestinian voice? How can we better honor that diversity?

Groups (and individuals) that want to play in Washington DC will be more moderate than those trying to influence public opinion. There is a good chance some of them hold more radical views in private - after all, most of them came to Washington, from somewhere else.

How is it that some on the left have a score that is closer to Hamas than the Israeli or Palestinian Communist Parties? (People's Party and Hadash)

Why are there so many groups in the U.S. pushing for a one state solution and so few Palestinian groups formally endorsing it in Palestine?

For those who have been critical, I hope this exercise has some payoff. For those wondering why I was picking on the Palestinians - stay tuned. Next is Israel and pro-Israel groups!

Comments

  1. Gerry Hiles

    What on Earth are you on about!?

    OK, reading between the lines, you are a dyed-in-the-wool zionist and your blog is a sham.

    NO way do you promote peace in Palestine.

    Your consistent message, albeit couched in rhetoric, reduces to blaming Palestinians and absolving zionists, including yourself.

    You say that you will get around to having a shot at "Israel and pro-Israel groups!", but it will never happen.

    If you were seriously interested in even minimal rights for Palestinians, then you would have been, long-since, up in arms about the Israeli/Zionist strangulation of the Gaza Strip.

    But not a word of protest from you from Brooklyn.

    How come that you, and a myriad other jews, choose not to live where the action really is?

    Posted by Gerry Hiles on 11/20/2008 @ 01:38AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  2. Gerry Hiles

    BTW

    I really do try to keep an open mind about judaism/jews, but you do not help me in any way whatsoever.

    Posted by Gerry Hiles on 11/20/2008 @ 01:46AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  3. Gerry Hiles

    PS

    I have read your post again and it it is sheer nonsense.

    You try to reduce everything to some spurious math formula of your own creation.

    You have lost the plot completely.

    Posted by Gerry Hiles on 11/20/2008 @ 02:03AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  4. Aref Nammari

    First of all, this ranking system is completely arbitrary and does not reflect the complexity of the issues and the complexity and nuances of any given organization. For instance when you give Al-Awda 4 for violence that is based on what criteria? That they support armed struggle? But so does international law. Again I reiterate what I have previously said: what purpose does this serve. I suppose now you have answered the question. The purpose of this ranking is clear now: dissuade people from supporting or sympathasizing with leftist organizations such as ANSWER and Al Awda and US Campaign because they are being watched by the FBI. This is pathetic to say the least. I tend to agree with what Gerry wrote. I thought this was a place to explore possibilities of peace and ideas for a solution it turns out to be a zionist-light blog where it is the ideas of Peace Now which are firmly rooted in Zionist ideology that are being propagated. Jeff Halper one very decent and courageous human and his organization are up there close to those "watched by the FBI" because he is an advocate of a single secular and democratic state? Nice try Charles but you are not fooling anyone. Why don't you actually debate the solutions or ideas for a solution like I have proposed? If you are serious about opening the debate for peace let's work and explore those ideas instead of wasting time on stupid, useless and arbitrary ranking system which reeks of ideological bias and serious lack of any objective goal other than advocacy for those quislings of US hegemonic policies and submissive to Zionist policies of the Jewish State such as the government of Abbas which lacks any serious support among Palestinians not associated with Fatah.

    Posted by Aref Nammari on 11/20/2008 @ 04:18AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  5. Gerry Hiles

    Yes, let's explore real issues ... like Israel/Palestine becoming one secular state, in which everyone has equal rights.

    Or how about debating the fact that it has been worthwhile, for Washington, to fund Israel as the "unsinkable aircraft carrier" in the ME.

    Let's debate about how zionists - both judaic and christianistic - have been duped into supporting Washington global hegemony ... as an uptake on the London hegemony, which determined the arbitrary geo-political map of the ME in the first place.

    None of this current shit would exist, if London (and Paris, for instance) had not carved the region up into artificial states.

    Of course you have to have some grasp on history to know what I am writing about.

    Posted by Gerry Hiles on 11/20/2008 @ 04:48AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.

  6. Reducing people and organisations to numbers is part of what got Palesitine/Israel in this problem in the first place.

    You know the whole ideology that the land was empty before being colonised by Zionists - they use population figures and figures about land use to mislead people and push an agend? Or comparing the amount of israeli's vs amount of palestinians killed each year?

    All these numberings do is reduce the situation to nationalisms.  When the real issue at hand is oppression.  Fatah oppresses its own people just as Israel oppresses the Palestinians.  My point being is that the people themselves are screwed regardless of whether they are under Israeli control or under the control of one of the two palestinian political factions. 

    Nationalism is always a bad thing and thats why there is this demand for a two state solution. 

    The people (both palestinian and israeli) must decide. The people must control every aspect of change in this situation.  And this means something much more substantial than having to choose between: (a) Israeli control through apartheid means, (b) Fatah's undemocratic and corrupt solutions which prop up themselves and (c) Hamas as a barely more democratic and less corrupt verison of Fatah which doesnt make much difference because it is only opportunistically democratic (it wouldnt be so if their roles were reversed with Fatah).

    Posted by Jared S on 11/21/2008 @ 02:12PM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  7. Kay Swen

    Shouldn't the numbers be divided instead of added?  Then, of course, you should multiply by the square root of -13, and divide by 1/log(1).  The result will certainly express the value of this classification.

    Posted by Kay Swen on 11/23/2008 @ 10:19PM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  8. Shel Silver

    Jared,
    I don't for the most part disagree with your views of nationalism, but as (I understand) both peoples are heavily nationalist, I can't see why. let alone how, either people, especially the more priveleged (Jewish) Israelis, could or would fairly settle their dispute? 

    Posted by Shel Silver on 11/24/2008 @ 10:46AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  9. Mark Dimas

    I don't understand a lot of the negative reaction to this little project of Charles'.  It seems that recognizing that there isn't one "Palestinian" voice in the struggle is important when trying to understand the situation.

    For the most part Charles has refrained from assigning any judgement to the classifications, he has just laid out where he views several prominent groups fitting in along a few spectrums, and has asked for input on where other people view them fitting.  No one seems interested in providing feedback in that method though, just in ripping the whole thing.

    Obviously a simple 1-5 scale is an oversimplification, but as an introduction to the conflict and where several groups fit in, I find it helpful.  I don't think these posts are meant to "solve" anything, but to provide a 101 intro to the Palestinian groups.  When he does the equivalent rating on the Pro-Isreal groups I think that will be similarly helpful.

    Posted by Mark Dimas on 11/25/2008 @ 11:22AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  10. Charles Lenchner

    Mark, I suspect you are really me, pretending to be you! Thanks for the support. That's kind of how I meant this whole project - a way to be informative, especially for folks who are new to the issue, or who aren't used ot seeing mutliple views placed along side each other, without judgement.

    I'm disappointed that no one did any of these things:
    - accused me of ignoring some faction by not listing them
    - accused me of getting a score wrong
    - help me find a mistake in my system, but showing some quote that proves me wrong
    - flat out supported low scores against high, or high against low, or middle against high and low

    Maybe that will happen on the Israeli ranking series. (It's mostly written - stay tuned!)

    Posted by Charles Lenchner on 11/25/2008 @ 11:43AM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.
  11. Aref Nammari

    I was trying to refrain from responding to this thread anymore but obviously I can't.
    Mark, the objection was not due to refusal to recognize the multitude of Palestinian positions and approaches. I don't believe anyone who objected to this "classification" cited this as a reason. Please read what people wrote and you will find that the objection was
    1- in the language
    2- in the oversimplification
    As to being non-judgemental I think that a careful reading shows that there is quite a bit of judgement being projected. True that maybe a matter of sensitivity and opinion but that is certainly one of the reasons that some objected to the language because of the connotations and implications.
    I don't want to get into a sterile debate but as I recall I personally objected to some statement about the right of return and provided data to show that most Palestinians support the right of return as it is enshrined in international law--resolution 194. I clearly stated that this right is an individual right just as it is stated--implicitly so--in the text of the resolution. I also stated that any resolution regarding the the refugee issue needs to be referred to the wishes of those refugees through a referendum. This is what most Palestinians think, yet this is discounted because it does not fit this system of classification. I don't want to get into a debate here but I do think that oversimplifications of issues and pigeon-holing does not provide for a good understanding of what the issues are. Literally volumes could be written about those topics and the multitude of attitudes among the Palestinians regarding any one of them. It is this oversimplification and reductionist approach that lead to distorted understanding of Palestinian attitudes and classifies organizations into those who are pragmatic and willing to negotiate, the good guys that is, and those who are rigid, uncompromising and radical, the bad guys.
    Palestinian society, just like all other societies, is much more complex than any classification system can accomodate. That is why I personally abhor such classifications which seemingly are neutral and objective--numbers don't lie--but in reality could imply a whole variety of meaning--I am not saying that Charles intended this.
    In all cases, debating this is like beating a dead horse. Whatever is done is done and cannot be undone. There is no use debating this issue except to point out the problems that oversimplifications can cause. I am sorry to be rehashing what I have already said several times but it seems that careful reading is not one of the things that people do on blogs.

    Posted by Aref Nammari on 11/25/2008 @ 07:00PM PST

    • Report close

      You must be signed in to report content.

Add a Comment

For your comment to be published, you will need to confirm your email address after submitting your comment. In the process we will also create a Change.org account for you so you can track this and future conversations. Don't worry - we won't spam you. We just want to promote constructive dialogue and find that people are more respectful when they are not anonymous.

If you already have an account, click here to log in.

Check Spelling

Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.

Author

Subscribe to RSS Feed

Charles Lenchner Charles Lenchner
Brooklyn, NY

Charles is a nonprofit professional with 20 years of experience working with nonprofit organizations in Israel, Palestine and the U.S. For the past few years, he's been specializing in online organizing.

Related Blog Posts

close

This user's Profile page is not public. They have restricted it to only their friends.

Already a Member?

Create an Account

You must create a Change.org account to complete this action.
If you already have an account click here.