Nearly three years ago, I underwent an operation in a Jerusalem hospital. The surgeon was Jewish, the anaesthetist was Arab. The doctors and nurses who looked after me were Jews and Arabs. I lay in bed for a month and watched as they gave the same skilled care to other patients — half of whom were Arabs and half of whom were Jewish — all sharing the same wards, operating theatres and bathrooms.
What I saw in the Hadassah Mt Scopus hospital was inconceivable in the South Africa where I grew up. Blacks and whites were strictly separated and blacks got the least and the worst. And this is only one slice of life. Buses, post offices, park benches, cinemas were segregated by law. No equation is possible.
That is what came to my mind as I read The Guardian‘s report about Israel and apartheid. The writer, Chris McGreal, has been unable to untangle the confusion and complexities of group relations in Israel. He is muddled in distinguishing between the situations of Israeli Arabs and West Bank Arabs and Jerusalem Arabs.
It is not that he is wholly wrong. Arabs suffer severe discrimination. Israel is in occupation of the West Bank and is responsible for oppressive and ugly actions. But he fails to explain the why and the wherefore.
Here is a tiny country that came into being, in the shadow of the Holocaust, less than 58 years ago. It has been under continual attack since the start and is still beset by enemies sworn to its destruction. That induces a siege mentality among Israel’s Jews. They fight to live and do not always do it pleasantly. It is not secret: newspapers publish the details in profusion, provoking discussion and action.
Yes, racism does exist in Israel — directed against Arabs, and also among Jews. But is Israel so different from other countries that struggle to come to terms with their minority groups? Why depict this country as a chamber of horrors like no other in the world?
In South Africa, change for the better was simply not possible: the apartheid system had to be eradicated. In contrast, change is possible in Israel. An accusation by a member of the Knesset, Ahmed Tibi, who is Arab, that the Central Bank of Israel had a discriminatory employment policy with no Arabs among its 800 staffers, drew the assurance from the bank’s then governor that tenders would be advertised in the Arab-language press. Tibi also complained that the state monopoly Israel Electric did not employ Arabs; a start has since been made with the hiring of six Arabs. There is continual progress. The first Arab was appointed to the high court of justice two years ago. Last year, an Arab was appointed director general of a government ministry.
On education, McGreal states that separate and unequal education systems were a central part of the apartheid regime’s strategy to limit black children to manual and service jobs — something I observed firsthand. But I have to question his reference to what he says is the belief among Arab parents that their children’s schools are deliberately starved of state resources so that Arabs will be doomed to lesser jobs. Every government school, whether Jewish or Arab, gets identical funding; differences arise through what parents pay and what local authorities pay.
Here in Jerusalem last month, I watched the BBC’s Auschwitz. The episode dealt with French collaboration in delivering Jews to the Nazis for destruction. It was a reminder of why Israel exists: to fulfil the centuries-old dream of a homeland for Jews and as a sanctuary for Jews. It’s not a perfect society. It struggles to find itself as a Jewish state, and it struggles to evolve as a democratic society with full rights for minorities. It deserves criticism for its flaws and mistakes. It also merits sympathy and support in facing unfounded attack. — Â