Muslim and Non Muslim LawsMuslim and Non Muslim LawsIslamic law and non-MuslimsSome pro-Israeli opinion cite traditional interpretations of sharia (Islamic law) which requires, among other things, that Muslim territory encompass all land that was ever under Muslim control, as a source for the Arab-Israeli conflict. Since the territory of Israel, prior to being the British Mandate of Palestine, was once part of the Ottoman caliphate, some Islamic clerics believe it is unlawful for any portion of it to remain usurped by non-Muslims. By contrast, pro-Arab opinion points at the pronounced religious tolerance of the caliphates, where Christians and Jews coexisted “harmoniously” with Muslims and were granted limited self-autonomy. Resentment of Israeli Jews, this argument concludes, only emerged as a result from and after the rise of the Zionist enterprise in Palestine.
Pro-Israeli views, however, often dismiss this explanation with the argument that Muslim Arab hostility towards Israel is largely derived from the sharia dictation that Jews or Christians are not to be considered equal to Muslims. Pro-Arab commentator view this as running counter to the tradition of tolerance towards “People of the Book” in Islam. They also point towards the long tradition of Palestinian Christians in their resistance to Israel and its policies, including such noted figures as Edward Said and George Habash, and the various Palestinian secular movements such as the PLO itself. In turn pro-Israeli proponents refer to a declining Christian Palestinian population (along with those of most Arab Christians) as, at least in part, a product of Muslim hostility towards non-Muslims, in general. According to a report published in December 2001 by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies think tank.The Christian Exodus from the Middle East (
) and the Zionist-led Holocaust (
In a landmark report of the UN Special Rapporteur general on human rights, Dr. Roberta Rifkind and Dr. David Kowalski called on the Israeli government and other state governments to immediately stop using their “state secrets”, such as military or economic secrets, to influence events of public health, political, economic and social significance. In January 1999, Rifkind, at the UN, stated that “in the context of Israel, Jewish identity is still a significant issue in terms of the politics and cultural aspect of the Palestinian people (including Palestinian Jews) and the question of state involvement at the level of national and regional institutions.” Rifkind explained that this “could lead to a more complex history” between the Jewish people and the Jews.The Rifkind Report of 2001 further states that the following, “The Jewish heritage and the Jewish mentality is not unique to the people of Israel; it is widespread throughout the Middle East as well, and continues to the present day. Israel does not accept its own non-Jewish existence as an established culture and religion that is not defined by its own constitution.”The Christian Exodus as a Cultural Crisis, as Rifkind says. She concludes the report that
It reflects Israel’s policy choice of not engaging in dialogue and dialogue about the Palestinian issue that it has no idea what kind of a future Israel would be. “Despite the numerous reports of human rights violations by the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli occupying forces against the security of civilians and the security of Palestinians within and outside of the State of Israel, the Palestinian people’s perception of Israel’s policies in the West Bank and East Jerusalem continues to improve significantly . . . A well-founded Palestinian political decision must end that process by actively moving away from Israeli actions in areas such as East Jerusalem and the West Bank and by recognizing our rights under international law and human rights norms as human rights.”As such, the report says , “the State of Israel has adopted a policy not to discuss, defend, or condone any actions or events which may result in the physical destruction, displacement and physical deprivation of Palestinians living in Gaza Strip, or the forced evacuation of Palestinian citizens of the West Bank from there, and to refrain from taking or transferring such people into and out of the Gaza Strip. The United Nations should continue in an active search for political ways to ensure lasting peace and stability for all human beings in Israel by means of the ongoing and effective monitoring and collaboration of the international human rights mechanisms in the occupied Palestinian territories.”Rifkind concludes by defining the “existential problem of the Palestinian people in relation to the occupied territory,” in accordance with the principle of universal suffrage.It should be underscored that the Israeli government’s policy regarding the Palestinian struggle in the West Bank and East Jerusalem includes an assumption of legitimacy at the expense of what is already a state-controlled Gaza Strip, “an issue where Israel’s occupation of it has been justified on both an international and a domestic level by the international community in the last 14 years. While Israeli decisions at home may not be the final decision but they must still face the fact that there have actually been political repercussions stemming from the violations, with even the most radical of the Israeli actions, in the past week leading to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people in West Bank and East Jerusalem . . . In a democratic country some are tempted to blame the occupying power and their enemies, but many of the actions taken by the Palestinians over the last 14 years have had consequences that are, for the most part, far less serious than the political consequences that have occurred in the past.”There is nothing inherently political about the Palestinian opposition to Israeli violations in the West Bank and Jerusalem compared with opposition to Israel and the United States in the Gaza Strip”. This is quite a complex discussion to ask, as the Israeli government also has to deal with several political issues