Watching the videotape of the death of 12-year-old Mohammed Aldura provides the viewer with one of those unforgettably tragic images. Clutching his father's shirt while caught in a cross fire between Israeli Defense Forces and Palestinian protestors on Saturday, the look of sheer terror is unmistakable on the boy's face. As bullets ricochet off the wall above him, his father tries to shield him, but to no avail. The boy is hit in the abdomen and killed; his father critically wounded. Aldura is one of over 27 Palestinians killed, along with more than 700 wounded in the latest episode of Middle East violence. One Israeli soldier has also been killed and 11 have been wounded since the fighting began. The protests started after a visit on Thursday by Israel's right-wing Likud Party leader, Ariel Sharon, to Jerusalem's Temple Mount, the third holiest site for Muslims.
The images of violence are particularly difficult for Americans to understand. How can we possibly relate to a world in which ownership of buildings, land and historical sites are life and death issues? Our oldest cities and landmarks have barely reached the 400 year mark, while cities like Jerusalem have a 5,000 year history of violence. That is primarily why control over the small city whose religious, cultural and politcal significance is of unparalled importance for Jews and Muslims, is the one issue over which the two sides are at a complete impass. Israel wants to control the whole city, and Palestinians want the Eastern half of the city as their capital. Both sides have hundreds of years of bloodshed invested in the outcome. The violence this weekend merely adds to the difficulty of negotiating a settlement.
There are of course, some questions that need to be answered about this particular episode of violence. Was Ariel Sharon delibrately trying to incite this violence as a means of quieting Former Prime Minister Netanyahu's supporters within the Likud Party? Sharon, the Defense Minister during the bloody 1983 Israeli invasion of Lebanon would have known that his visit would cause a protest, although he might not have predicted the protests escalating or spreading as far as they did.
Were these protests truly spontaneous, or were they pre-meditated by Palestinian leaders? Israeli soldiers claim that some of the fights have been with well-armed Palestinian police and organized groups, armed with stones and slingshots. Although a Palestinian police officer was responsible for the death of the one Israeli soldier killed, it seems unlikely that the Israeli soldiers would have sustained so few casualties if they really had been clashing solely with armed police forces. The bigger issue is why in hundreds of other skirmishes with stone-throwing protestors, the Israelis soldiers have been employing snipers and rubber-coated metal bullets; bullets which can be lethal at close range.
Why was 12-year-old Mohammed Aldura close enough to the violence to be caught in the cross-fire? Perhaps it was purely accidental -- and he was killed senselessly in a fight he didn't start. Or perhaps his father had brought him to the protests as an act of pride, to show him that Palestinians were brave enough to stand up to Israeli soldiers, even when armed with nothing but stones. Regardless of the circumstances, both sides must be cold-hearted indeed if the killing of children isn't enough to bring them back to the negotiating table.
Sadly, there are no good answers to these questions. The violence this past weekend may have set back the peace process by six days, six months or possibly even six years. If one thing is for certain, it is that there is enough anger in the Middle East to keep this conflict going for another 5,000 years.
Perhaps our best hope in the wake of this latest round of violence is that the issue will receive greater attention from the two Presidential candidates. Governor Bush, who once stated that he would not allow Israel to be pushed into the Red Sea (The Kansas City Star, November 13, 1999), has proposed moving the American Embassy to Jerusalem even though such a move might escalate violence in the region. Vice President Gore hasn't offered any bright solutions either. His vague promises to encourage greater economic interdependence in the Middle East won't do anything to resolve tensions between the Palestinians and Israelis. It's likely that he would continue the Clinton strategy of negotiations, which so far has produced only temporary periods of peace and has failed to stop the mounting death toll. A wild-card with regard to the Presidential race is whether Senator Lieberman, as an Orthodox Jew, would be an asset or a liability in negotiating future peace agreements. Although he might be able to rest greater concessions from the Israelis, he might also be seen as biased by the Palestinians.
The best solution this column can offer is that the Palestinian people turn to non-violent methods of protest. Non-violence would put the court of public opinion solidly in their favor and should at least prevent any further killing. Three major wars haven't brought peace to the Middle East. Will the video-taped killing of a 12-year old have a different effect? The rest of the world can only hope.
