Ilhan Omar… Anti-Semitism or Islamophobia?

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s recent remarks about Israel’s involvement in US affairs has sparked outrage in our government. In one of her statements to Congress, she said, “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.” Without ever attacking Jews or Judaism itself, she has been labelled as “anti-Semitic.” Pro-Israel lobbying groups quickly went up in arms to attack her, and multiple people have called for her to be removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee. President Trump even tweeted a response in which he called her comments reflective of a “dark day for Israel.” A picture of Omar has gone viral that depicts her in front of the burning buildings from 9/11.

Despite receiving an inordinate amount of criticism, Omar has not retracted her comments or stepped down from her position on the Foreign Affairs Committee. Plenty of Democrats have voiced their opinions against her, despite belonging to the same party. Several days after Omar’s remarks, a resolution was passed to denounce anti-Semitism and overall hate, which includes anti-Muslim rhetoric as well.

I recently spoke to someone who highlighted something I had never thought of before. When someone says something against Jews or Judaism, they are labelled as anti-Semitic. The use of the prefix “anti” indicates that the person who is committing the action is in the wrong. They are against something that they should not be against. When there is anti-Muslim rhetoric; however, it is most often labelled as Islamophobic. The suffix “phobia” implies that it is not necessarily wrong for someone to be against Islam. In fact, the use of this term categorizes Islam as something to be afraid of, like the dark or spiders. A person who is Islamophobic is seen as a good person who is rightly afraid of something, whereas an anti-Semite is a bad person who is against something good. The usage of these terms are not an accident, and it is clear that there are political associations with both words.

Ilhan Omar brought to light an important matter concerning our country’s undying loyalty to a foreign nation, yet she was attacked for doing so. The U.N. recently found that Israel intentionally shot children, journalists, and the disabled during protests in Gaza; yet, we see more outrage when someone questions our national loyalty than the murder of innocent people. It is clear that there is a major issue with the way that the US blindly supports Israel and its policies, and I hope that Ilhan Omar will not be the last one to call attention to this problem.

Similar Read: Ideas Make This Country Great

Al-Aqsa Crisis… Israeli Palestinian Fighting Continues

On July 14th the Israeli government made the decision to shut down Al Aqsa Mosque, the 3rd holiest site in Islam, after a clash that left three Palestinians and two Israeli officers dead. For the first time in nearly 50 years, the Friday prayers were canceled. The Israeli government then proceeded to install security cameras and metal detectors at the mosque before reopening it. Palestinians rejected these measures as violations of their rights and of the status quo, and refused to pray in the mosque, opting to pray in the streets instead.

Amid continued protests, the Israeli government continued to add restrictions – preventing men under the age of 50 from entering the compound. Palestinians organized demonstrations in “a day of anger” and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas froze contact with his Israeli counterparts. The Israelis were worried about an escalating security situation and elected to install new security cameras to replace the metal detectors – a measure also rejected by the Palestinians as a move that expanded Israeli control over the holy site.

As of July 27th, Israel removed all the security measures and Palestinians planned to resume prayer in the mosque. The conflict seemed to have temporarily subsided – until minutes after worshippers returned to the mosque Israeli police wounded dozens with stun grenades and rubber bullets. The official Israeli reports states that they were attacked with stones but Amnesty International reports that Israeli actions were unprovoked. Palestinian Muslims have now returned to the mosque and services have resumed as usual but tensions are still simmering.

To Palestinians, this is about much more than just metal detectors and security cameras. This is a system that devalues Palestinians and enforces a systemic repression of a people who have been denied even the fundamental right to have a state. They are fighting to retain a status quo that disadvantages them to begin with because they fear what would happen to them if the status quo was done away with entirely. The Palestinians already face a lack of sovereignty and they see this as a further undermining of their identities. In case you think all this status quos talk is ridiculous, consider this fact: there is a ladder in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem that has not been moved in centuries because to move it would be to undermine the status quo, and that would cause a conflict between the different churches that reside there.

It’s not as if the response was strange or unexpected by the Israelis. It’s a known fact that any interference with Al Aqsa inflames tensions and escalates the conflict. The second intifada (the second Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation) was in part spurred by Ariel Sharon’s visit to the compound after the failure of peace negotiations and is called the Al-Aqsa intifada for that very reason. Jerusalem has always been and continues to be the line in the sand that cannot be crossed without inciting a violent reaction on both sides.

One important takeaway: Palestinian leadership had very little to do with the mass mobilization of the last two weeks. In fact, Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority struggled to make themselves relevant regarding this tense situation. This is in part because the Palestinian citizens of East Jerusalem are relatively isolated from the Palestinian Authority, separated by an Israeli checkpoint from the West Bank. This may, however, also be a sign of Mahmoud Abbas’s shrinking support, and the resulting weakness of the Palestinian Authority, with two-thirds of Palestinians calling for the octogenarian leader to resign. Abbas’s decision to cut off ties with Israeli government pending resolution of the conflict seemed reactionary and an attempt to satisfy his quickly shrinking base.

Long term, this further underscores the importance and the tensions surrounding Jerusalem and final status negotiations. Both sides claim the city as their capital, although the majority of the international community officially recognizes neither. The Palestinian capital, East Jerusalem, is under Israeli occupation and effectively cut off from the Palestinian Authority, and the Israeli government will not allow them to fund projects within the city. If there is to be any hope of a final settlement to the conflict, Jerusalem must be addressed and the status of its religious institutions, holy to the worlds three Abrahamic faiths, must be taken into account.