As the results of the American election are now a certain fact, my French friend Chloé and I ventured out this morning to the media outlets of Ramallah in search of the Palestinian reaction to this momentous event. While I’m sure that back in the United States, a joyous sense of celebration fills the streets with the highly anticipated end to a long and tumultuous Bush dynasty, here in Palestine the air is much calmer. In fact, this day is just like any other under the American-backed Israeli occupation.
We started with the offices of the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation, a state-run television station. The director of the center told us that he expects most Palestinians to be happy with Obama’s victory as it signals a possible return to Bill Clinton’s efforts to broker an agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. In July, Obama visited the de-facto Palestinian capital of Ramallah in a heavily guarded convoy; people were not even allowed to be in out in the streets of the city. I’ve also talked to several students from Birzeit University who claim that the roads leading to the city were all blocked for security reasons as well.
When we asked the director about the reaction of Hamas, the Islamic paramilitary organization and political party that the United States currently categorizes as a terrorist group, he pulled out his cell phone and dialed the number of Fawzi Barhoum, one of the party’s spokesmen in the Gaza Strip. After a brief conversation, we were able to get an official statement translated from Arabic to English. Barhoum said that Hamas was not sorry for the end of Bush’s reign, as he was “the worst American president for the Palestinians.”
On the topic of Obama, he said that the organization would not judge him on the basis of his personality or his election promises, but in his political actions and what he will achieve for the Palestinian state. His concluding sentiment was that that Hamas hopes that Obama will remain resolute towards Israel and, “if he is really a Democrat,” try to broker a “democratic peace” in the Middle East while showing respect for the choices of the Palestinian people.
Later in the morning we met with Nael Mousa, a writer for local newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadida. He told us that as a journalist, he thinks that the American involvement in the peace process is not dependent on any single leader’s personality, but rather on overarching American foreign policy. As all of the American presidents have shown full support for the Israeli administrations, Nael said that Palestinians don’t expect a significant change in the nature of the United States’ involvement in the Occupied Territories.
However, he claimed that there is greater hope out in the streets of Palestine than there is shown in the media. “As journalists,” he said, “we don’t want to give the people here too much hope because we know the limits of American foreign policy in this region.”
When we stepped out of the newspaper’s Ramallah office, I noticed a bitterly familiar sight on a nearby hilltop. Less than a five-minute drive away stood an illegal Israeli settlement, made recognizable by the sloping red rooftops of the houses and a looming radio tower. Apparently the paper’s office has had many problems with this particular settlement in the past. Two years ago, they had to pile sandbags high in front of the building’s entrance because of the constant shooting coming from the hilltop.
Everywhere in the West Bank, there are constant reminders that America’s role in the ongoing peace process has been lackluster at best, giving little hope to the Palestinian people that a change in leadership will mean a greater chance to live without the daily oppression of the occupation. Obama’s message of “change we can believe in” stops at the concrete wall surrounding this city.
UPDATE: An article that Chloé and I worked on for L’Express, a leading French newspaper, has been put online. Check it out here.



10 Comments
November 5, 2008 at 4:57 pm
thank you for making the effort to ask and not just observe.
[i think we've got a journalist on our hands....:) ]
November 5, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Have I ever told you how immensly proud I am of you? Well, I am. Keep up the amazing work Dan, seriously.
Love Ky
November 6, 2008 at 6:38 am
what a great post. thank you for this perspective.
November 6, 2008 at 8:10 am
hey dan,
just so you know i am using your blog for a school project.
-julia
November 6, 2008 at 9:21 am
Go to Israel, go to 2 malls in one week and get evacuated from both due to bomb scares. Israel isnt aimlessly shooting Palestine from hillsides. You make it sound like israel is terrorizing the middle east, ignoring peace treaties, hell bent on killing innocents. Do you really believe Hamas is not a terrorist group?
November 6, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Dear Anonymous,
Thank you for your comment; this is the type of dialogue that I like to encourage on this forum – although I’d prefer if you left a name or something to that effect.
I’ll respond to your comments in a separate post, as it brings up some of the most commonly heard rhetoric in this conflict.
Keep participating,
Dan
November 6, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Hi Dan,
Interesting thoughts and insight. I agree with some of what you said especially that the US administrations have a definite bias towards the government and people of Israel. (Which I have to admit I share to a certain degree – its just the way I am:)
I believe that the Palestinians and the people of Ramallah are right not to expect too much from President-Elect Obama, at least in the short term.
He has a LOT of issues on the domestic front which require his full attention and think he would be doing a disservice to his electorate if he didn’t deal with those first.
We are just back from a three week trip to South Africa. Fascinating. You’ll have to head there at some point.
November 6, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Dan,
You’re the man, good writing, and nice response – keeping it classy.
November 9, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Hey Dan,
Hope all is well with you in Ramallah. Your writing on the feelings of Palestinians about Obama’s win is humbling; it’s a reminder of how much, or rather how little, the U.S. has done to help the peace process and listen to both sides of the conflict. It’s very easy for us, especially here in the U.S., to get caught up in the excitement of Obama’s win and forget that all of the issues facing the U.S. will still be there when he steps into office. The past few days I’ve been reading and hearing about Obama’s supposed plan to appoint Bill Clinton as an envoy to Kashmir to help aid the peace process between India and Pakistan, and I can’t help but wonder if Obama’s incentive is diplomatic or militaristic. Does he really care about the people of Kashmir’s right to self-determination, or does he simply see Kashmir as a problem that is getting in the way of U.S. military involvement in Pakistan and Afghanistan? Right now Kashmiri separatist leaders are praising Obama, but I’m curious as to what they would have to say if they saw the transition of Indian soldiers occupying the streets of Kashmir to American ones. I guess the only thing we can do is wait and see…
November 9, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Hey Dan
I’ve been reading your blog the past few months and it has been really insightful. Keep up the good work.
James