Shawki Khatib
Photo: Hagai Aharon
Israelis not colonialists after all
Translation error caused radical presentation of Arab-Israeli future vision for both people, says Higher Arab Monitoring Committee chairman. Strong debate between document's authors published in Yedioth Ahronot's weekend magazine
Last December, the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee published its "future vision for Israeli Arabs" manifest, the content of which was harshly criticized. Shawki Khatib, the committee chairman, issued a statement Thursday clarifying some essential errors found in the Hebrew translation of the document.
"We know this issue is volatile, and any error might take a heavy toll," wrote Khatib.
One of the main examples shows the original document saying "the State of Israel came as a result of settlement action," while the translation said "the State of Israel came as a result of colonialist action."
Original Document
Sharon Roffe-Ofir
Palestinian Arab researchers publish vision of co-existence in booklet circulated throughout Arab sector. Booklet suggests basic law acknowledging Israel a common homeland for both Arab, Jewish sectors
Ranem is known for having more rigid opinions on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict than most of his colleagues. The chapter in question states that the State of Israel came as a result of "isti'mar" – colonialism, yet his colleagues instructed writing Israel being a result of "istintan" – a process of settlement.
Ranem changed only the Arab version of the document. "I'm not sure it's up to me to check the translation," he said.
Participants at the last piloting team meeting called the error "fatal," saying it made the dialogue with the Jewish public even more difficult.
'We tried to express the complexities'
Eight intellectuals worded the document, which was later co-signed by 38 activists. Participants in the making of the document spoke for the first time in Yedioth Ahronot's weekend magazine, on the difficulties between them, put aside by the desire to reach a consensus of sorts within the Arab public.The writers explain why even while most of them agree grave historical errors were made by the Arab side, such as refusing to accept the UN Partition Plan (of 1947 - for the partition of Israel into Arab and Jewish states, and the internationalization of Jerusalem), and the decision by the Arab states to attack the new state – the document place blame for the Middle East conflict on Israel alone.
"We tried to express the complexities," said one of the writers, "but we had our disagreements. This is what we were able to write together".
Recognizing Israel as a state defining the Jewish people is not mentioned in the document. It is clear to all those involved, said Dr. Joseph Jabarin, but "did not come through in the document."
"This is not perfect work", said Jabarin. "The writers were concerned with the standings of the Arab public more so than that of the Israeli one. We should probably discuss this now. No one must conclude that there is any resistance to recognizing Israel as a Jewish state as well", he added. "That, in any case, is how I clearly see it, minus the discrimination"
