On Peter Jennings 4000-Year History of Jerusalem and Roots of Conflict in Holy Land - Assignment Example

On Peter Jennings’ 4000-year history of Jerusalem and Roots of Conflict in Holy Land In specific, does the video give the viewer a brief and accurate historical feedback on the significance of Jerusalem to Jews, Christian and Muslims? In order words, does the video report a balanced view for all three Abrahamic faiths or not? For about 45 minutes, the “Jerusalem Stories” by Peter Jennings did attempt to provide a balanced view for all three faiths. Jennings succeeded in presenting that Jews, Christians, and Muslims have common roots. It attempted to present a brief and accurate historical narration of the significance of Jerusalem to all of the three faiths. However, in my view, the video has stressed on the subjective rather than the objective. Yet, this is understandable because the training of a journalist is more on presenting a journal of events based on testimonies or claims and not on validating a claim. Journalists are trained on how to present the facts from the point of view of actors in the event. They have less training on the use of historical documents or how history can be used to analyze an issue. Of course, it does not require a historian to be able to analyze historical data but Jennings’ approach on the matter is more of a journal writer or video documentary presenter rather than a person oriented in analyzing the problem of Jerusalem, Israel, and Palestine. One of the most interesting and important significance of the Peter Jennings video documentary is that that issue of Jerusalem, Israel and Palestine is reported from the perspective of contending interest groups in the Palestine: Muslims, Jews, and Christians (especially from the perspective of Christian Catholics). That the video documentary was able to present at least three sides of the issue is by itself is an important achievement because both documentaries and news in the western world tend to report from the perspective of the Jews in the Palestinian conflict and history. News and documentaries in the western world tend to report from the perspective of the Jews because they align themselves with Israel in the Palestinian conflict. Of course, it is also likely that the Muslim world has a bias of their own. We must remember that, using the data of the Israel Foreign Ministry itself, the state of Israel was non-existent prior to its creation in 1947 (see the rest of my discussion for this number for additional details). Only 33 countries of the world out of a total of about 100 plus countries voted for the creation of the State of Israel in 1947. Those who voted for United Nations Resolution 181 the State of Israel in 1947 were Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussian S.S.R., Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxemburg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukrainian S.S.R., Union of South Africa, U.S.A., U.S.S.R., Uruguay, Venezuela. Even if we use the “facts” or data adopted by the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, prior to 1947, the State of Israel probably existed only from 1077 to 997 Before Common Era or BCE (“Israel’s Story in Maps”). The data or facts have been adopted by the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs documented or enumerated in http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/History/Facts+about+Israel-+History.htm support the view the State of Israel had a short life before the creation by the United Nation of the State of Israel in 1947 (again, please note that the United Nation Resolution of 1947 was formulated by only 33 countries of around 100 plus countries of the world at that time). The data source for the following enumeration can be found in “Facts About Israel: History” of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In 722 to 720, the Assyrians crushed Israel. In 586 BCE, Judah was conquered by Babylonia. In 63 BCE to 313 Common Era or CE, Israel was under Roman rule. Even in time of Jesus Christ, Israel was under the Roman Empire. In the year 70 of the Common Era, Jerusalem was destroyed. The Jews had a last stand in Masada in 73 CE. The current State of Israel was part of Byzantine rule roughly in 313-636 CE or AD. In 636 up to 1099 CE, the current area occupied by Israel was under Arab rule. In 1291 to 1516, the area was under the Mamluk rule or Christians subjugated by Muslims. Finally, it was under Ottoman Rule from 1517 to 1917 before it was occupied by the British from 1918 to 1948. In sum, there has been no State of Israel for roughly around more than 1,700 years from the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The conclusion should be unmistakable: the State of Israel was an unjust imposition. It cannot be legitimate. On the contrary, it was the dominion of Muslims of the area occupied by Israel that marked the most part of the 2,000 years since the birth of Christ. In my opinion, these are the facts, even accepted by the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, that must be highlighted in order for any reportage on Jerusalem and Israel to be accurate. Yes, there may be belligerents on the issue of Jerusalem and Israel that can be classified by the West and a number of nations as terrorists. However, at the same time, the presence of extremists or terrorists in causes does not diminish the validity that the State of Israel was an unjust imposition. It is an artificial state sponsored earlier primarily by the British and then the United States of America. It is important to recognize this fact for a more accurate reportage on the Jerusalem, Israel, and Palestinian questions. In my opinion, the Jennings video documentary failed to stress this fact. Yet, at the same time, it is wrong to say that the Jennings video documentary was unbalanced. It merely failed to be more accurate. 2. Briefly, do you think religion plays a certain role in Middle East politics? Like it or not, religion has been playing an important role in Middle East politics. At the same time, what is more likely is that Middle East politics are more than religious issues. First of all, it is highly likely that the British invasion of Palestine was likely motivated by the Britain’s search for vassal states that can be the source of an important resource----oil. It is also likely that this is one important motivation of the United States in supporting Israel. Oil is an important resource for the developed world and there are several forecasts that say that the demand for oil will likely outstrip the supply of oil within the 21st century. It is difficult to gather evidence for this assertion but it is also unlikely that the US assistance to Israel was motivated by altruistic motives. If this is not so, then why is the United States has not history of assistance to the Muslim world? Instead, what seems to be happening is that the US has been supporting Israel in Palestine even if there are countless reports of Israeli atrocities on Palestinians. Unfortunately, both the Jew/Christian holy texts and the Koran be used to justify the extermination and annihilation of those they consider infidels to their religion and this provides. For instance, Muslims have the concept of a holy war or jihad. The Jews in their holy books narrate several instances in which it is justified to annihilate/exterminate their religious enemies because blasphemy is punishable by death. These provide for the creation of what can be labeled as “terrorists” and “war criminals” on both side of the fence or both armies. Both the Israel Jews and the Palestinians Muslims have a record of killing each other. I wish to claim the Israeli Jews have been committed more atrocities but, for now, I would leave that for future resolution of how the history of Palestine can be best be interpreted. It is very important to use authoritative or substantiated facts for analysis, both of which are not immediately available to me. The second reason why the Palestinian issue is more than religious issue is that even if we remove religious believes among Muslims and Jews (not possible, of course), there is the issue of justice and just cause on the Palestinian question. For instance, is it just to create an artificial state if that state has not been existing for several hundred years? In the case of Israel and Palestine, there was no real state of Israel since about the time of Jesus Christ (the Romans dominated the Jews during that time) and it was only in 1947 that the state of Israel was created. It even took several Aliya or large transfers of Jews from several countries into Israel in the creation of Israel. In modern times, this is almost equivalent to the exodus of several Black Americans into Africa to create a nation or even the exodus of millions of Chinese around the world to create a new State in the People’s Republic of China or Taiwan. Thus, regardless of religion, Muslims have a just cause against the imposition of an Israel in the Middle East. Thinking in the abstract, it is possible to see that the cause of Muslims is just even without the religious dimension (minus “terrorism”, of course). This is because the Jerusalem is also important to Muslims as a religious site and this goes the same for the Jews. At the same time, however, the Middle East issues, have a religious dimension. Zionism that was used to create the Israel State may or may not be secular. From what I know, Zionism has stressed on the secular side of nationalism. However, in justifying the Israel State, Israelites have not other option to refer to their religious books in justifying the Israel State. Earlier, we have pointed out that an Israeli State has not existed for most of the 2,000 years since the birth of Jesus Christ. The only period in which Israelites can make an unequivocal claim on the existence of an Israeli State is the period during the rule of King David and his son King Solomon. The existence of the two can only be justified by the Jewish and Christian bibles. On the otherhand, many Muslims are thinking of creating an Islamic State. Although the Palestinian Liberation Organization under Yasser Arafat tended to be secular, the Hamas, one of the leading opposition to the Israeli State has declared in Article Two of the 1988 Hamas Charter that “The Islamic Resistance Movement” or Hamas draws its “guidelines from Islam.” In sum, unfortunately, religions have been providing the ideology to both Israelite and Islamic militants. 3. In general, do you think the American media, the ABC, has helped us in understanding the causes of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict? The American media, the ABC, will not really adequately help us in providing a deep understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli causes. For one, media draw their existence from advertiser support that may have specific interests in the Palestinian area. As a commercial or business entity, it tends to report what is sensational and exaggerated. Individual media persons may have the sincerest intent or motives but they are only a part of the whole system. A commercial media can have two faces in the same way that a trader manages his or her portfolio in times of crisis: a trader can invest on the dollar and invest on the Euro at the same time. They can put their investments in several baskets. In the same way, media business has to invest in both pro-Muslim and pro-Israeli thinking on the Palestinian question. As a business, this is a wise strategy for media to take given the political risks. As I have pointed out earlier, this does not mean that all media persons are bad or commercial. However, to be realistic, media persons are only bits and pieces of one big machine. The way forward in issues related with the Middle East is to continue what Peter Jennings had done: continue to report several sides of the issue, the several perspectives on the issue, and most important, it must exert efforts to have an accurate presentation of history that are based on documents, first hand testimonies, and evidence. The way forward is difficult given the likely attempts of businesses to influence the outcome of issues related in the Middle East. However, taking the right road is also not impossible to do. 4. Do you think the video has presented a biased outlook against certain group? If yes, explain such specific reported stories, if not explain why? Several critiques on the Jennings documentary are available in the internet. For instance, Jewish groups have complained that the Jennings report did not interview “terrorists”. However, I sincerely believe that Jennings tried to be fair even if his portrayal of events have not been very accurate. 5. Briefly, do you recommend this video? If yes or no why? I recommend this video to Jews, Muslims, and Christians. The Jennings documentary contributes to a better understanding of issues in the Middle East. Work Cited ICZC Compilation of Hamas Charter. “ICZC Compilation of Hamas Charter,” 2006. Web. 25 October 2010 . Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “Israel’s Story in Maps,” 2008. Web. 24 October 2010 . Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “Facts About Israel: History,” 2008. Web. 24 October 2010 Read More