Khelil sent me this: "Look at this lousy article on Arab Jews in the Wall Street Journal. My
Tunisian mother fondly remembers the Tunisian Jews (including those who lived in
France but came back during the summers) and laments their exile. And I, of
course, support the right of Arab Jews to recognition, compensation and, if they
so choose, right of return. But look at the perfidious nature in which the
article is written: "Some
[Arab Jews] faced expulsion, while others suffered such economic and social
hardships they had no choice but to go." But in the very next paragraph:
"Many
of the Palestinians who fled Israel wound up stranded in refugee camps." Why is
it that some Jews faced expulsions while apparently all Palestinians "fled" as
opposed to also facing expulsion and "no choice but to go"?
Then:
"The
Palestinians, she says, "have nothing to do with the plight of the Jews or other
minorities who left the Arab world." Still, Dr. Ashrawi recently proposed that
Arab Jews should also have a "right of return" to the countries they left." Why
is this at odds? One can recognize that fact and still support Arab
Jews.
Lastly:
""There
are refugees on both sides, so that evens the scales, and I think that it will
be helpful to the process," he says. "It shows that both sides suffered the same
fate."" Both
sides suffered the same fate, but if we are going to speak about the
contemporary animosity and broken history between Arabs and Jews we need to
situate it within the context of what European Zionism has done to relations
between both communities."
