Righteous non-Palestinians show the moral war is won
Comment: Thousands on non-Palestinians work to show the injustice of Israel's slaughter of Palestinians. That there are only a handful of non-Jews supporting Israel says everything, says Karl Sabbagh.
3 min read
17 Jun, 2015
People like Mads Gilbert search for a moral peace for Palestinians [Getty]
This week sees a visit to the UK by Mads Gilbert, a Norwegian doctor who has spent time in Gaza helping to train Palestinian doctors and deal with the effects of Israel's assaults on the territory.
He is one of a number of senior medical figures who, from a position of no connection with Palestine at all, have been so horrified by the injustices of the conflict that they have felt moved to help in some way.
Others include Sir Terence English and Sir Iain Chalmers, and I should declare an interest to say that they are friends of mine. I am also publishing Gilbert's latest book, Night in Gaza, about his time working at Shifa Hospital during last summer's Israeli assault.
Israel this week called its onslaught a "moral war" in a report published to pre-empt the charges that will be presented to the International Criminal Court. Gilbert describes this report as 'internal medicine', aimed at Israel's supporters in desperate need of ammunition to counter the rising tide of revulsion at its actions.
What strikes me about the people who supply such valuable aid to the Palestinians is their motivation. They don't need to risk their own lives and reputations in this task, but they do it anyway, driven by some higher moral motive of their own, an urge towards a "moral peace", to turn Israel's phrase on its head.
During the second world war, there were a number of non-Jews who felt moved - I would say from the same altruistic motivation - to save Jews from the horrors of the Holocaust. Jews have called them "Righteous Gentiles" and honoured them in various ways.
Perhaps we need a new phrase - "Righteous Non-Palestinians" - to draw attention to these unselfish supporters of the Palestinians.
But these individuals are the tip of the iceberg. There are many thousands of uncommitted people, with no previous connection to, or interest in, the Middle East who have at some point come across the plight of the Palestinians and decided to do something about it. I am unaware of the opposite phenomenon.
Where are the thousands of non-Jewish Britons or Americans who have suddenly realised that tiny little Israel's security is threatened by massed hordes of enemies on its borders and have formed 'Israel Solidarity Movements' with branches in major cities and universities?
There are such organisations, of course, but almost invariably formed and run by Jews. The only significant non-Jewish supporters of Israel's anti-Palestinianism are evangelical Christians in the US, motivated by belief that Israel's existence is a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy and a proof of the existence of God.
Hardly a rational argument based on a belief in human rights and self-determination.
It is also difficult to imagine non-Jewish doctors flying out to work in hospitals in Sderot and Ashkelon, to deal with casualties caused by Hamas rockets. I suspect that if any did, they would have plenty of leisure time while they were there, in contrast to dealing day and night with the ceaseless stream of maimed and dead Palestinians as Gilbert describes in his book.
There have been a few prominent Gentile supporters of Zionism in the past. Orde Wingate during the 1930s, Conor Cruise O'Brien during the 1970s and 1980s, Colonel Richard Kemp more recently, but they are few and far between.
There is a huge disparity between the numbers of uncommitted people who have arrived for themselves at pro-Palestinian conclusions about the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the handful who have been influenced in the opposite direction, in spite of the mass of Israeli propaganda.
Surely this says something about the relative merits of the cases for and against Zionism's right to take over the land of Palestine.
He is one of a number of senior medical figures who, from a position of no connection with Palestine at all, have been so horrified by the injustices of the conflict that they have felt moved to help in some way.
Others include Sir Terence English and Sir Iain Chalmers, and I should declare an interest to say that they are friends of mine. I am also publishing Gilbert's latest book, Night in Gaza, about his time working at Shifa Hospital during last summer's Israeli assault.
Israel this week called its onslaught a "moral war" in a report published to pre-empt the charges that will be presented to the International Criminal Court. Gilbert describes this report as 'internal medicine', aimed at Israel's supporters in desperate need of ammunition to counter the rising tide of revulsion at its actions.
What strikes me about the people who supply such valuable aid to the Palestinians is their motivation. They don't need to risk their own lives and reputations in this task, but they do it anyway, driven by some higher moral motive of their own, an urge towards a "moral peace", to turn Israel's phrase on its head.
During the second world war, there were a number of non-Jews who felt moved - I would say from the same altruistic motivation - to save Jews from the horrors of the Holocaust. Jews have called them "Righteous Gentiles" and honoured them in various ways.
Perhaps we need a new phrase - "Righteous Non-Palestinians" - to draw attention to these unselfish supporters of the Palestinians.
But these individuals are the tip of the iceberg. There are many thousands of uncommitted people, with no previous connection to, or interest in, the Middle East who have at some point come across the plight of the Palestinians and decided to do something about it. I am unaware of the opposite phenomenon.
 |
Perhaps we need a new phrase - "Righteous Non-Palestinians" - to draw attention to these unselfish supporters of the Palestinians. |
Where are the thousands of non-Jewish Britons or Americans who have suddenly realised that tiny little Israel's security is threatened by massed hordes of enemies on its borders and have formed 'Israel Solidarity Movements' with branches in major cities and universities?
There are such organisations, of course, but almost invariably formed and run by Jews. The only significant non-Jewish supporters of Israel's anti-Palestinianism are evangelical Christians in the US, motivated by belief that Israel's existence is a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy and a proof of the existence of God.
Hardly a rational argument based on a belief in human rights and self-determination.
It is also difficult to imagine non-Jewish doctors flying out to work in hospitals in Sderot and Ashkelon, to deal with casualties caused by Hamas rockets. I suspect that if any did, they would have plenty of leisure time while they were there, in contrast to dealing day and night with the ceaseless stream of maimed and dead Palestinians as Gilbert describes in his book.
There have been a few prominent Gentile supporters of Zionism in the past. Orde Wingate during the 1930s, Conor Cruise O'Brien during the 1970s and 1980s, Colonel Richard Kemp more recently, but they are few and far between.
There is a huge disparity between the numbers of uncommitted people who have arrived for themselves at pro-Palestinian conclusions about the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the handful who have been influenced in the opposite direction, in spite of the mass of Israeli propaganda.
Surely this says something about the relative merits of the cases for and against Zionism's right to take over the land of Palestine.
Follow the Middle East's top stories in English at The New Arab on Google News
More in Opinion
21 November, 2024
