George Kerevan: Scotland must move beyond street protests in support of Palestine

It is over till the next time.

Of course, this iteration of the cycle was different in terms of the widespread Israeli Arab resistance and the intensity of the rocketing from Gaza. Plus, the politically embattled prime minister Netanyahu was only too willing to over-do the bombing of the Gaza ghetto in a vain bid to divert attention from his own career troubles.

But the ceasefire changes nothing. We are back where we started till the next round of oppression, resistance and repression begins. The obvious question arises: what kind of practical, permanent solution is possible? There is more in this for Scotland to discuss than meets the eye.

READ MORE: In pictures: Crowds march across Glasgow as part of pro-Palestine rally

We in Scotland are deeply implicated in the events in Palestine-Israel. For starters, Presbyterian Scotland has the Bible at the root of its culture. Folk of my generation were brought up reading the Old and New Testaments at school. When I first visited Israel, I knew its geography better than I did that of most small European countries. Almost subliminally, the Biblical history of the tiny Kingdoms of Israel and Judah became surrogates for the struggle of Scotland to maintain its distinct cultural and political identity. I still believe that the Scottish inclination to view politics through a moral lens (rather than personal gain) has a lot to do with reading Biblical stories about how the kings of Israel were held to account for their failings by the various prophets.

Yet there is a more concrete relationship between Scotland and latter-day Zionism. Between the two world wars, the new Scottish independence movement saw parallels with the Zionist cause. Supposedly, here were two nascent nations struggling to be born – the other peoples of land, in particular its Arab majority, were left out of consideration.

The first important point of contact between Scotland and Zionism was when the globally influential Scottish sociologist, biologist and town planner Patrick Geddes was invited by the World Zionist Federation to draw up plans for the proposed Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 1919.

The creation of the Hebrew University on Mount Scopus was bound up not only with the Zionist project but with then prevalent visions of rebuilding a (third) Jewish Temple. Geddes’ architectural vision of the university campus was seen as a first step towards rebuilding the Temple on what is now one of the most venerated Muslim holy sites. The original Geddes’ plan foundered, but in contemporary Palestinian eyes, he is seen as a tool of both British colonialism and Zionist cultural appropriation.

After the creation of the state of Israel in 1948, there were contacts between leading SNP figures and Israeli politicians. Perhaps the closest link was between Winnie Ewing and Menachem Begin, a former leader of the Irgun terrorist group and later prime minister of Israel. Ewing first visited Israel in 1969, when she was a new SNP MP. She discussed Scottish independence with the founder of the Israeli state, David Ben-Gurion.

READ MORE: Humza Yousaf shares heartbreaking messages from family in Gaza

But Ewing’s big thrill was meeting Begin, the man responsible for ordering the murder of more than 100 Palestinian Arabs in the village of Deir Yassin in April 1948. Her interest in Begin was originally sparked (according to her autobiography) by taking to heart his catchphrase “when the enemy think there is no retaliation, they grow bolder” after being persecuted by Labour MPs at Westminster. Of course, what Menachem Begin meant by “retaliation” was a good deal bloodier than Winnie comprehended. Begin was founder of the Likud Party, now headed by a certain Benjamin Netanyahu.

I MENTION this background because I think it is too easy for Scots to grandstand on the matter of the oppression of the Palestinian population. The issue now is to see if we can make a real difference to the situation in Palestine by helping to end the cycle of Israeli state “retaliation”. After much reflection, I think we need to start by rejecting the concept of a “two state” solution.

This is not to suggest for one second that the Jewish citizens of Palestine should be ejected from the land they were born in or emigrated to. But it is to reject the original partition of Palestine in 1948 which has led only to the systematic and ultimately unsustainable oppression of the local Arab population. This political partition lies at the root of the endless cycle of violence and repression which holds the entire population of the area in its vice-like, depressing and degrading grip. Unless we go back to political square one, this cycle will repeat until the inevitable nuclear Armageddon ensues.

The so-called “two state” solution has become a barrier to a peaceful solution to the Arab-Israeli conundrum – a mere liberal platitude that prevents the brain engaging. This was not always the case. Before the Six Day War back in 1967, pragmatic elements of the Israeli political class contemplated the idea of a federation (or confederation) of the Jewish and Palestinian areas, possibly extending to include Jordan and Lebanon, with their Hashemite, Druze and Christian populations. Even the concept of Jerusalem as an autonomous zone was not considered beyond the pale if it underwrote a viable internal peace.

READ MORE: My family is being bombed in Palestine – and yet the West does nothing

Unfortunately, Israel itself ended the 1948 partition (de facto) when it annexed the West Bank and Gaza, after the accidental Seven Day War. Holding on to the Palestinian territories by force since then has only engendered the rejection of an independent Israel by the local Arab population. Western liberals such as Nicola Sturgeon can prattle on about a “two-state” approach but that is now a political dead duck.

To salvage anything out of the wreckage we need to posit a unified political entity, albeit a federal one that satisfies the security needs of each community. Is that actually feasible? Very possibly not. But the only alternative is endless cycles of violence until the Middle East is covered in nuclear dust. Reviving the notion of a federated Palestine at least gives the secular political forces in the region something to build on. It’s not much to counterpose to Zionist intransigence and Jihadist millennialism, I agree. But it offers the prospect – very long-term – that an alternative is out there.

Here in Scotland, we need to move beyond street demos in support of the Palestinian cause. The next step has to be an effective boycott of Israeli goods and academic links, led by the Scottish Government. Not as a stunt but wedded to initiating a serious, global diplomatic effort to get everyone to the negotiating table.