A new wave of violence broke out in Jerusalem, at the beginning of October. Soon, it was nicknamed the ‘knife intifada’. This article does not seek to retrace the events nor count the casualties. Rather, it seeks to assess the comments from within Israel. In particular, it will examine two commentaries that, following different paths, come to the same, bleak conclusion.
The first is Daniel ‘Danny’ Seidemann’s commentary. He gave this speech on October 6, at the Foundation for Middle East Peace in Washington DC. Max Fischer’s transcript of the speech was then published on ‘Vox’. Seidemann is considered a Jerusalem expert. A lawyer, he is the executive director of Israeli NGO Terrestrial Jerusalem.
The second is David Shulman’s article published on November 4 on ‘The New York Review of Books’. Shulman is a Professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is an activist and the founder of Ta’ayush, Arab-Jewish Partnership.
SEIDEMANN: REQUIEM FOR THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION
Seidemann starts saying that Jerusalem, despite cyclical violence, is more stable than one may think. However, he adds that this round of violence is different from the previous ones. «Since July of last year, we have been already in the throes of a popular uprising in East Jerusalem, widespread in a way that we have not witnessed since 1967… That they shut down the Old City to the Palestinians is unprecedented. Never happened before since 1967. I really think I know Jerusalem well. I think I know my government‘s policies well. I am never surprised. They’re so predictable. But I was surprised now, because never in my worst imagination could I think that we would say “off limits” to Palestinians, and we did, or that we would turn Palestinian neighborhoods into physical enclaves». Nevertheless, remarks Seidemann, no politician asks why Jerusalem is burning.
L’informazione che non paghi per avere, qualcuno paga perché Ti venga data.
Pagare il costo di produzione dell’informazione è un Tuo diritto.
"L’Indro" vuole che il Lettore si riappropri del diritto di conoscere, del diritto all’informazione, del diritto di pagare l’informazione che consuma.
In molti ti chiedono di donare per sostenerli.