fbpx

December 15, 2011

On Israel’s demographic time bomb

I’m sitting in the lobby of a Jerusalem hotel as I read about “Israel’s other demographic time bomb”. Men in black all around me, enemy forces, according to Paul Pillar:

Israel has achieved a commanding position in confronting any perceived dangers from outside its borders, including overwhelming conventional military superiority over its neighbors and an arsenal of nuclear weapons that is vastly greater than any other state in the region could dream of acquiring. Its greatest dangers come from within. 

Pillar has the numbers to prove his point:

Less well known are some demographic trends within different segments of Israel’s Jewish population. A recent report compiled by Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics makes some projections looking out nearly fifty years, to 2059. The report separates out for the first time in any such official public reckoning the growth of the ultra-Orthodox population, which has a significantly higher birth rate than other Israeli Jews. The ultra-Orthodox currently make up about ten percent of Israeli society but by 2059 are projected to constitute over thirty percent.

And he’s worried about the possible implications of such numbers. He has good reasons to be worried. So why am I not worried, not to the extent that Pillar is worried? For three reasons:

1.

I don’t really believe in demographic projections. Demographers can barely agree on the present – and projecting future trends is something on which their record isn’t really great. In other words: the assumption that the ultra Orthodox will have the same number of children that they have now, and that they will be able to retain all these children in the Ultra Orthodox camp is far from trivial. If these assumptions fall, prediction falls short of a realistic description of the future Israel. 

2.

Many ultra Orthodox leaders would readily admit that the current state of affairs is unsustainable. Haredi society is going to change, it has to change. When it does, the “danger from within” might not be as dangerous.

3.

Israel`s majority is not as passive and as stupid as some people would like you to believe. It isn`t going to let the country become a “theocracy” (read all about it here). There will be a tipping point – we might be reaching it now – when the larger society says enough is enough.

So – maybe I am a little worried. But not much.

On Israel’s demographic time bomb Read More »

“How much is my sister’s kidney?” *

Banner with the inscription was being held by one of the Eritrean men during a demonstration at the Embassy of the United States last Friday of November in Tel Aviv. Other banners almost screamed:

“USA: The Victims need your help”,

“Eritrean lives are not for sale”,

“Rape in Sinai must be stopped”.

Some Israeli politicians have developed a habit of repeating that the asylum seekers in Israel are not threatened by anything or anyone in the countries they come in search of work, but absolutely do not take into account that over 50% of asylum seekers in Israel come from Eritrea, a small country situated in the Horn of Africa, which enjoys a well deserved bad reputation because of the lack of freedom of speech and brutal regime repeatedly violating human rights. Eritreans are the majority of victims of organized groups of Bedouin who smuggle the Israeli border in the count from $350 to $7,000 (following: “The Self-Perceived Needs of Homeless African Refugees in Tel Aviv’s Levinsky Park,” Suhail Stephen and Michael Schmautz.)  (depending on race, religion and other factors), and if you are not able to meet the financial requirements Bedouins are to withstand as hostages, who can be a source of ograns to be transplanted and the victims of the most abominable crimes to frighten the rest. Women are brutally raped and many of them give birth to their children in Israel after because they are kept in prison in the Negev desert Saharonim too long to be still able to make abortion ( Quotation “An open letter from ARDC,” written by Nicholas Schlagman.) Further 35% comes from the Sudan, in particular from the two zones of conflict: Darfur and Southern Sudan and they are often people who managed to escape a brutal slaughter. The rest are citizens of different countries, including African, but not only. It is true that the number of asylum seekers is growing almost exponentially and is now estimated for 45,000 people. Why, instead of writing “refugee” I use the term ‘asylum seeker’? Well, it turns out that in a country founded by Jewish refugees, survivors of the Shoah, the reception of such status is equal to being the victims of modern genocide. Israel has not ratified the Geneva Convention of 1951, according to which:

“A refugee is a person who as a result founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or does not want to because of these concerns enjoy the protection of that country, or who has no nationality and being the result of such events, outside the country of his former habitual residence is unable or unwilling to return because of these concerns to the state. “

Since the inception of the State of Israel, the refugee status was granted to 190 people , while according to UNHCR, more than a hundred of them already live in Israel. The Olmert government decided to give the temporary status to the first 500 refugees from Darfur, but most of them had left Israel, or are getting ready for departure. Therefore it is an abuse which is based on telling people that the greatest dream of asylum seekers in Israel, is to remain in this country forever. The exceptional uncertainty about the fate makes it impossible to build a normal future there and refugees above all need a sense of security, not speculations concerning any future prospects. The reality of refugees in Israel is not optimistic one because their status is a kind of limbo – the abyss without the possibility of change, or the situation, of which they are often well aware.

Refugees from Africa usually receive conditional release visa, which must be renewed every three months what in practice means the only protection against deportation. The basic problem is that the vast majority of refugees is deprived of the opportunity to find legal employment, thus they are forced to work on the black market without any guarantee of receiving compensation or they appeal to doomed to charity organizations which have limited possibilities and thus cannot meet the needs of the number of people who currently stay in the Israel limbo. Some of the refugees are highly educated people and if they can count on any kind of work in Israel, it is usually the worst sort of physical work. Lawyer washing dishes at Tel Aviv’s lovely restaurant may not complain about his fate, but I look at it in disbelief and I wish that people changed their residence to a country that will reward them for their work, not only providing the basic rights, but also opportunities for development, according to their qualifications. Not only stalemate situation in the labor market is degrading for them – hundreds of refugees are becoming homeless, what can be seen around the Tel Aviv Central Bus Station . Every day late in the evening I pass people sleeping on playgrounds for children, the station building, in almost every available shelter. No one knows the number of women and children who live on the streets of Tel Aviv, and yet I know that most women in shelters, were taken there straight from the street. Refugees left to themselves are not able to meet the high cost of living. Sometimes I wonder if tourists and residents of the “white” and “bauhaus” Tel Aviv, know this. Perhaps living in the center or north of the city makes you unaware of the seriousness of the situation and labeling the refugees as economic migrants does not help them.

With all this discussion in the Knesset the law allowing to put in the prison all those who cross the Israeli border illegally in search of a safer piece of land, sounds like a gloomy joke. The people helping the opressed – often the ones that avoided being the victims of genocide – may also land in prison. How is it possible that in a democratic country such solutions are being discussed?

During my first visit in Israel I took part in the meeting for the new olim and one sentence is still in my memory:

“Israel is a country where everyone can make phone call to the Prime Minister”.

And I thought how it was amazing and quite comparable to Poland, the country where I was born. Now I think about – everyone or who? Maybe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, instead of going to Africa, could explore neglected southern neighborhoods of Tel Aviv? Maybe the politicians instead of repeating the data, could meet real people and ask them who are they and why they are in Israel? And finally, whether the scars remaining after excision of the kidneys are convincing?

“How much is my sister’s kidney?” * Read More »

L.A. screenwriter tackles film on 6-Day War

The Six-Day War in 1967 was a brilliant military victory, a turning point in Israel’s history and if the U.S. had scored a similar triumph, there would have been half a dozen movies with John Wayne single-handedly wiping out the Arab armies.
Yet, the Israeli film industry has never made a feature movie on this dramatic event, but now two American producers have come forward to remedy the omission.
Their film, tentatively titled “Jerusalem ’67.” Is based on the authoritative book “The Battle for Jerusalem, June 5-7” by veteran Jerusalem Post reporter Abraham Rabinovich, who left the United States to cover the war.
Two New York lawyers are the driving force behind the project. One is Joseph Schick, an ardent history buff, who started the ball rolling 18 months ago after devouring Rabinovich’s eyewitness account, anchored in interviews with 300 participants.
Schick enlisted fellow Columbia Law School graduate Jacob Septimus, who has produced and directed a number of TV shows and documentaries for national networks.
Together, Schick and Septimus flew to Israel, arrived at a deal to buy the film rights to the book, and visited some of the main sites of the 1967 war.
After interviewing a number of scriptwriters, they chose the English and Hebrew bilingual Lior Geller, 32, raised in New Jersey and a graduate of the Tel Aviv University film school.
For his graduate project, Geller wrote and directed “Roads,” set in a drug-infested Arab neighborhood of Lod. The short student film has won 24 international awards, including an Oscar nomination.
He recently completed a screenplay about Israeli spy Eli Cohen for the upcoming movie “Alone in Damascus,” and has also finished the script for the action-thriller “Run from the Devil,” to be produced by Oasis Media Group.
During a visit to my home, Septimus and Geller discussed the “Jerusalem ‘67” movie, with Schick adding his observations in a phone call from New York.
Schick noted that in a sense the city of Jerusalem itself will be the protagonist, with the capital’s mood chronicled from one month before the outbreak of fighting to its aftermath until the end of the year.
The film will be in English, with an international cast. Although leading historical figures, like Generals Moshe Dayan and Yitzhak Rabin, Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, and Jerusalem Mayor Teddy Kollek will be portrayed, the emphasis will on the action and attitudes of ordinary soldiers and citizens, Septimus said.
“Our characters will be based on real people – including an attractive female ambulance driver,” Geller added.
At this point in time, Geller has finished his first draft of the screenplay. No director or actors have been selected, but the film will be shot entirely in Israel.
The anticipated budget of the movie is around $5 million, a hefty sum in Israel though modest by Hollywood standards.
The two producers expect to raise one-third of the sum from Jewish individuals and organizations in the United States, one-third from Israel sources, and one-third from production companies.
Actor Mel Gibson, not otherwise noted for his philo-Semitism but who is reportedly interested on helming a film on the ancient Maccabees, may want to invest in the project, Septimus suggested.
If all goes well, “Jerusalem ‘67” will be released for public viewing in 2013, or possibly 2014.
“We will not make a hasbara, or propaganda, film,” Schick emphasized, “but it will favor the Israeli perspective.”

 

L.A. screenwriter tackles film on 6-Day War Read More »

Angelina Jolie and genocide beyond the Holocaust

Even the title of Angelina Jolie’s film, “In the Land of Blood and Honey” suggests parallels to the Jewish story.

It bespeaks the location of one genocide, where the ethnic cleansing of Bosnian Muslims by Christian Serbs took place, while doubling as a reference to the land of milk and honey, which was not host but haven for Jewish victims of a different genocide.

But Jolie’s film also proves that genocide is not exclusive to the Holocaust. According to Anne Applebaum, writing in The New York Review of Books, the actual word “genocide” was coined in 1943 when Polish-Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin needed a way to describe “the crime of barbarity” that Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime were imposing throughout Europe. Though history has proven the word contains multitudes, and encompasses a horror more prodigious than a singular event.

Though I have not yet seen the film, Jewish Journal executive editor Susan Freudenheim did, and came away with a poignant message about a powerful film: That the xenophobia and tribalism that impels one group to brutalize another is evident across cultures and a more pervasive evil than any single conflict.

Freudenheim writes:

I left this film thinking of its similarities to the Holocaust. And then I immediately ran into a friend, Samuel Chu, an activist born in China, who told me he’d come to see “Blood and Honey” just after watching “City of Life and Death,” by the Chinese director Lu Chuan. That film is about the 1937 Nanjing Massacre — also known as the Rape of Nanjing — when the invading Japanese brutalized the Chinese. Chu said he was deeply moved by the parallels between “Blood and Honey” and China’s story.

And then there are the parallels to the current situation in Darfur, where women continue to be brutalized just for leaving their camps to gather firewood.

And there were yet other parallels, as “Blood and Honey” lead actor Goran Kostic pointed out: As the conflict in Bosnia-Herzegovina played out, Steven Spielberg was in Poland shooting “Schindler’s List,” a recreated ethnic cleansing only a short distance away from an existing one.

Even beyond ethnic annihilation, Jolie’s film also addresses the tyranny of men over women, and the barbaric savagery that ensues when men are powerful and women are vulnerable.

Read Freudenheim’s rave report here

Angelina Jolie and genocide beyond the Holocaust Read More »