In Defence of Libby Davies

The MP's controversial statements about Israel's occupation of Palestine were historical truth, and reaction to them has been appalling.

While some folks are shovelling earth into the pit that Libby Davies has been lured into, I would like to say a word in her defence.

Davies stated that Israel had been "occupied" since 1948. Ask any of the countless tens of thousands of Arabs driven out of the territory at that time and they would agree. It's a fact of history. They call it the nakba (catastrophe).

Canada, the U.S. and Spain have occupied Indian land in the Americas since 1492. The Māori of Aotearoa (now New Zealand) were displaced by European settlers from the late 18th century on; the Aborigines of Australia by transportees from England; the Zulu and Xhosa and San of present-day South Africa by Dutch voortrekkers. More historical facts.

Does Israel have a "right to exist”? Does Canada? The U.S.? New Zealand? Australia? South Africa?

Let's re-frame the discussion.

Arguably, most modern states have origins that some might consider, with reason, to be illegitimate. But no one is suggesting that they cease to exist, whether they have a "right" to exist or not.

First Nations and Inuit in Canada have negotiated land claims and even, in some cases, limited forms of self-government. In many other countries, various accommodations have been or are being made. In some, like Colombia, the indigenous people are still being murdered and displaced (with the recent blessing of Liberal and Conservative members of Parliament, for whom the blood of brown people seems to be an inconvenient distraction). With respect to Israel, memories and folk memories of dispossession are a dominant narrative among non-Jewish populations, inside and outside the 1967 borders.

Someday there may, with luck, be peace in the Middle East. Vast accommodations will have to be made on all sides. But one cannot simply wish away the hard feelings that presently exist or the events that caused them. One cannot pretend that Arabs were not routed in 1948 or dispossessed within the state of Israel in 1976. If and when there is a lasting settlement among the parties, this dispossession will be salient: if the solution is not a (likely unworkable) return of Palestinian refugees – here at home, Ottawa is not going to be returned to the Algonkian people – then suitable compensation will be part of the deal. Within Israel, Arab and Bedouin citizens will in turn have to be accommodated, their lands returned or appropriate compensation offered.

Davies spoke a historical truth, one that will have to be taken into account if there is to be a stable peace in the Middle East. But others have maliciously drawn a conclusion for Davies that she herself has not. The reality of Israeli occupation does not imply that Israel must cease to exist in order to put things right. She has always favoured a two-state solution. Nothing has changed.

The reaction, however, has been appalling. One might expect pro-Israel lobby groups to pounce on any remark by a public figure that isn't uncritically pro-Israel. But these organizations, which appear to have authority far beyond the numbers of constituents that they speak for, have once again brought Canadian politicians to their knees. Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his fellow Liberals have called for punitive sanctions against Davies. And Jack Layton has, absurdly, apologized to the Israeli ambassador.

For what? Again, Davies simply stated a fact. Yes, Jews have lived in the Middle East for millennia. Arabs, too: Muslim since the seventh century. But the establishment of the state of Israel displaced large numbers of people from their ancestral lands. An inconvenient truth, but one that will have to be addressed if peace is to be achieved.

The truth, they say, will set you free. But sometimes, as Libby Davies has discovered, you don't get much of a head start. Shame on Jack Layton, Thomas Mulcair, and the other trucklers joining the baying mobs.