Rethinking language and memory as part of the Palestinian struggle

The Israeli annual tirade over Palestinian textbooks has once again materialised – this time by Gal Berger, correspondent of Palestinian Affairs on Israel Radio, who complained that the absence of Israel in education material pertaining to history, geography and Islamic studies indicated “a systematic blurring out of Israel’s existence.”

According to Berger, Palestinian Authority textbooks do not advocate for a two-state paradigm and fail to include the Holocaust as part of the subjects studied in history. Cities such as Jaffa are portrayed as Palestinian and the map depicts the entire territory as Palestine, thus obliterating Israel’s existence. Such instances were cited as providing fodder for alleged “incitement” against Israel – a statement rejected by former Palestinian minister for prisoner affairs Ashraf Al-Ajami , who insisted that EU representatives are involved in the education process and “look for any signs of incitement” in material handed to students.

Quoted in the Times of Israel, Al-Ajami also said: “If you ask any kid in the West Bank what Palestine is, he will say the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.” Coming from a former minister, such rhetoric is predictable yet ignites a high level of debate. PA officials have hardly ever veered from official rhetoric even in their personal capacity – a prime example would be Saeb Erekat and his spurious statements which are reversed immediately after utterance and consolidated by explicit remarks asserting Israel’s recognition. It seems as if the PA has divested itself of reality and created illusions upon which its flimsy existence can thrive. One might question how, after years of anti-colonial struggle thwarted by collaboration, would Palestinians suddenly descend into oblivion. Or whether there is any other imaginary phenomenon that can explain the Jerusalem Intifada by the post-Oslo generation, which is also suffering the trappings of dissociation from history but is clearly a raw return to Palestinian struggle, history and memory.

While Al-Ajami’s statements are clearly an assessment of compliance with colonial endeavours, Israeli complaints regarding Palestinian textbooks and impositions upon what the curriculum should teach are repulsive. Speaking to an anthropologist from Chile a few years ago regarding the Mapuche indigenous people, an assertion was made: “We study our own history before that of others.” Such an attitude reveals why the struggle for memory in Chile can be sensed within the entire social spectrum. It also explains why, despite colonial and neoliberal violence, the Mapuche people are organised in their struggle for land reclamation, despite Augusto Pinochet’s denial of their existence in 1979 and the application of anti-terror laws to Mapuche resistance by subsequent Chilean governments.

Colonialism may seek to determine educational trajectories; however, knowledge and awareness are far more complex than systematic, institutional manipulation. Palestinians have the right to determine their own trajectory and are under no obligation to prioritise any fragment of what Israel calls its own history to the detriment of Palestinian resistance. The right to repudiate any imposition or recognition of Israel’s narrations are part of the anti-colonial struggle which necessitates only awareness, not acceptance.

If Palestinian textbooks depict the entire territory as Palestine, it is an assertion that should not be tampered with. Such obsession of behalf of Israel depict a fragile existence bolstered only by military superiority and international complicity, rather that the structural foundations that define a nation. Israel’s presence as a colonial entity is not tantamount to legitimacy hence the labelling of territory as Israel is a consequence of colonialism and a manipulation of the fact that Palestine is prevalent. If anything can be added, it would be worthwhile exploring the linguistic and political possibilities that would allow for an expression to be universally and consistently used, to aid Palestinians in their reclamation of territory through language and memory. Such expression should embark upon isolating the concept of Israel’s existence from the swathes of land it has usurped, thus defining the struggle and reality of Palestinian liberation from an internationalist perspective.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.