EXODUS AND FREEDOM FROM OPPRESSION
sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians. (Exod. 3:7-8) Pharaoh rebuked Moses and Aaron when they demanded the freedom of the Israelite nation. 'Why do you take the people away from their work?' he asked. 'Get to your burdens' (Exod. 5:4). Pharaoh's response to the people's request was to intensify their suffering. The same day, Pharaoh commanded the taskmasters of the people and their foremen: 'You shall no longer give the people straw to make bricks, as heretofore; let them go and gather straw for themselves. But the number of bricks which they made heretofore you shall lay upon them, you shall by no means lessen it'. (Exod. 5:6-8) The intensified affliction, however, did not accomplish Pharaoh's aims, and to defuse the impending conflict he granted various concessions. The Israelites refused all his offers, and the dialogue broke off. The confrontation intensified and led finally to the liberation of the enslaved people. If the Hebrews had accepted Pharaoh's concessions, the struggle would not have become increasingly radical and the ancient Israelites would not have gained their freedom. In the biblical account, God is on the side of the oppressed. If their is a single passage that encapsulates the liberation themes of Scripture, it is the Exodus describing God who takes sides, intervening to free the poor and oppressed. The Book of Exodus declares that God heard the groaning of the people and remembered the covenant with them (Exod. 2:23-25). God took sides with his chosen people, stating that they would be liberated from their oppressors: Moses was to lead them out of bondage (Ex. 3:7-10). From this act of deliverance Jews have constantly derived a message of hope: if God was on the side of the poor in ancient times, surely he will continue to take sides with the downtrodden in all ages. Repeatedly, as Jews faced persecution, suffering and murder, they derived hope from this account of divine deliverance. Yet, the biblical narrative is not confined to the destiny of the Jewish nation. 25
A JEWISH THEOLOGY OF LIBERATION
The profundity of the Exodus consists in its significance for all- the past holds a promise for those who understand its relevance. Its message applies to all peoples in economic, political, social and cultural bondage. In this context, Moses plays a crucial role in the process of liberation. He fled to the desert because he had killed an Eg y ptian. He lived comfortably as a herdsman with his wife, his father-in-law and his flocks. But one day he heard God speak to him out of a bush. 'Moses, Moses,' God cried, I have seen the affliction of my people who are in Eg y pt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters; I know their sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians . . . Come I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring forth my people, the sons of Israel, out of Eg y pt. (Exod. 3:7-10) Here, God - the other - is revealed to Moses. Moses heard God's command: 'Liberate my people out of Egypt.' Established in the totality of daily life, he responded by becoming the liberator of his people. Arguably we too are being summoned by the plea of those who are oppressed in modern society. Like Moses, we must awaken ourselves to God's command. As in ancient times, if we do not listen to those in bondage, we are not hearkening to the divine call. In the flight from Egypt, the Bible stressed that it was God who led the people. He did not take them out by way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near, but led the people through the wilderness towards the Red Sea 'Lest the people repent when they see war, and return to Egypt' (Exod. 13:17-18). When the Egyptian army attempted to capture the Israelites, God intervened and they were saved (Exod. 14:24-28). Once Israel had crossed the Red Sea, God sustained the people in their wanderings: God gave them sweet water at Marah (Exod. 15: 22, 25), sent them manna and quail in the desert (Exod. 16:4-36), gave them safe passage through the Transjordan (Num. 21:21-24, Deut. 2:26-37), and delivered the Amorite kings into the hands of the Israelites (Deut. 3:12-17). Not only did God deliver and protect the people, God also led them to their own land where they were no 26
THE PALESTINIAN ARGUMENT
of all Palestinians: this ultimately became the Palestine Liberation Organization. Later, an assembly of Palestinians from throughout the world met at an assembly in Jerusalem. At this time the leadership of Fatah wanted to exhibit its strength. One group proposed launching attacks on Israeli targets. Egypt wanted restraint, but Syria encouraged the idea of immediate assault and opened training camps. Later, Fatah launched several operations, but they were not effective. By the end of October 1966 Syria had given full support to Fatah, but Egypt was not involved. On 4 November, however, Egypt signed a new defence alliance with Syria, thereby committing itself to the liberation of Palestine. By early 1967 both Eg y pt and Israel were accusing one another of troop build-up on the Syrian front. As we noted previously, the Six-Day War began on 5 June 1967, ending with a massive Arab defeat. Israel thereby became the dominant power in the Middle East. Israeli troops were stationed in the Suez Canal, the Red Sea and the River Jordan and held a line on Syria only thirty miles from Damascus. They controlled the whole of the country, including the banks of the Jordan and Jerusalem, along with one million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Further, they occupied the Sinai Peninsula and a thousand square miles of Syrian territory on the Golan Heights. Approximately one million Arabs had been displaced. Some 350,000 Palestinians fled from the West Bank to the East Bank of the Jordan. For at least 150,000 Palestinians, this was the second time they had been made refugees. A further 160,000 people were refugees in Syria from the· villages and farms of the Golan Heights. Following Israel's victory, Egypt continued to launch a campaign of attacks, aimed at bolstering Arab morale and at the same time disrupting Israeli life. At a Fatah meeting in Damascus after the war, Palestinians representatives discussed what their next step should be. Yasser Arafat was convinced the struggle should continue. Trips were made to the West Bank to encourage fellow Palestinians. Yet Fatah's attempt to create an armed revolution in the West Bank was ineffective. Despite these obstacles, the leaders of Fatah continued to launch attacks on Israel. At this stage the various Palestinian movements failed to unite under one main group and the PLO was discredited in the eyes of many Palestinians and Arabs. Eventually
85
SOLVING THE 'UNSOLVABLE'
on 3 February 1969 Arafat was elected Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO. In the same year the American administration proposed a peace settlement. The Secretary of State, William Rogers, put forward a plan for an agreement between Israel on one side, and Egypt and Jordan on the other. The proposal included Israeli withdrawal as part of a package settlement, cessation of the state of war, secure and recognized borders, demilitarized zones and special arrangements in Gaza and Sharm al-Sheikh, freedom of navigation through the Straits of Tiran, Israel's use of the Suez Canal, and settlement of the refugee problem. When the Egyptians agreed in principle to a modified revised peace agreement, the Palestinians unleashed a storm of protest among the resistance organizations in Jordan. Arafat and Fatah attacked Nasser; Nasser's response was to close down PLO broadcasting stations in Cairo and expel radical Palestinians from the country. During August and September, the situation in Jordan worsened. At this stage Arab mediators urged the PLO to compromise with Hussein. However, on 16 September 1970 martial law was declared and Hussein announced that he was setting up a military government to restore law and order as well as security. Within twenty-four hours fighting ensued in Amman as the army closed in on the Palestinian military personnel. Arafat attempted to speak to the king, but this proved impossible. Fighting intensified between the Palestinians and the Jordanian army. The Arab League sent a delegation to end the conflict. Eventually there was a fourteen-point agreement including a ceasefire and the withdrawal of all forces from Amman and their regrouping in agreed areas suitable for guerrilla attacks on Israel. Arafat maintained that Palestinian causalities numbered approximately 20,000, but according to the Red Cross the figure was probably around 3,000. On 28 September 1970 Nasser died, and neither Hussein nor the Palestinians wished to carry out the agreement signed in Cairo. Hussein wanted all PLO fighters to leave Jordan. The Black September movement which was formed shortly afterwards was a Palestinian response to the shelling of the refugee camps in Amman which resulted in the death of men, women and children. The Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish expressed the feelings of desperation that drove subsequent acts of terrorism:
86
