Heh, okay, now let's clear up the timeline a bit because I'm noticing it's a little muddled. But it doesn't have to be! When Al mentions the ACP protesting MLK Day, they were actually protesting the first official celebration of the holiday on January 16, 1984. Bold and terrible, I know, but then provocation is the point. So that means the Al and Hashim section of Post 31 takes place several months after the other two sections, that's all. We can therefore determine that Al and Hashim went on vacation some time between January 16 and February 9, 1984, for all you A&H superfans out there.
Playing with Mirrors
- Thread starter Expat
- Start date
Oh, wouldn't that be nice?
We're certainly headed to reform due to the simple unworkability of the current system. But what form it'll take is unclear. Have to look at circumstances on the ground when the Overton Window opens.
Voting rights for DC! Marvin Gaye lives! Al and Hashim become road trip buddies! This was possibly the best update ever.
Question about DC: IOTL of course DC doesn't have Congressional representation largely because all our votes would go to the Dems. ITTL, did the Republican party split and everything else play a role in making it a reality? (i.e., is there a chance DC might elect a non-Democratic rep ever?)
Question about DC: IOTL of course DC doesn't have Congressional representation largely because all our votes would go to the Dems. ITTL, did the Republican party split and everything else play a role in making it a reality? (i.e., is there a chance DC might elect a non-Democratic rep ever?)
Yeah, the butterflies are flapping pretty hard here with several convergent consequences. You've got a more moderate GOP that's less likely to play politics with voting rights. You've got a curious black community that's leading to increased numbers of African Americans voting for Republicans. And you've got a Democratic Party that just pushed to the left in the '82 elections. That push was more pronounced at the local and state levels than nationally, so grassroots Dems are feeling more motivated to push out against a more cautious national leadership.
As for how DC will vote, the Democrats still definitely have the advantage. Leaving aside race for the moment, it is still an urban center, and there's a strong correlation between population density and progressive politics. But even IOTL liberal cities have been known to elect the "right kind" of Republicans or independents. Democrats won't be winning the 90% or above that they usually get these days IOTL, and even weak Republicans will probably be able to count on something like a third of the vote. And if, for example, someone like activist Republican Attorney General Samuel Pierce were to resign and run for the senate in DC, he'd be hard to beat (he's not going to do this).
Diving deeper, DC's black community ITTL is really going through a period of profound political activism right now. The split I mentioned previously in Maryland is, if anything, more pronounced in DC. It's like if PG County and Baltimore were interlaced in the same urban neighborhoods, so you might find diverging opinions by just going one street over, or even one house over. Fault lines are especially apparent from congregation to congregation. This is all a matter of philosophy, debate, and the prioritization of resources so don't get the impression violence is involved. (In fact with mass incarceration failing to arrive and fairer policing pouncing on the crack epidemic before it becomes an epidemic, individual outcomes for the black community in DC are sky-high compared to OTL.)
Long story not so short, there's a rising independent streak in parts of DC's black community, especially among the middle class in the upper wards. Not so much Republican, certainly not on the level of PG County, but divorced from party.
The city's current mayor is former Democrat and current independent, Patricia Roberts Harris, who served as HHS Secretary under both Carter and Anderson. Which reminds me, I should probably write up a list of changes to the cabinet at some point...
PS: Thanks for seconding the best character nomination and getting Hashim on the Turtledoves ballot!
The laws of political physics would certainly be in your favor here. Basically you'd end up with a similar dynamic to what we have now: a fairly unhappy union of centrists and progressives on one side and conservatives on the other. The differences in the birth of the parties would be interesting to explore- the Conservatives have pushed right harder somewhat sooner than OTL and have absolutely no moderate tail whatsoever; the Dem/Reps would probably find it hard to rationalize leadership and party structure. But on the whole, you'd have a right-wing party and another party, just like OTL.
So in other words, for the sake of the story, it's probably not gonna happen.
You know it occurs to me there's another person mentioned in this post who died IOTL and survives here. I wrote the first draft of this months ago and had forgotten about the little Easter egg until just now. Unlike Gaye, I can't say for certain that Jessica Savitch's life will be less troubled than it was before her OTL death. It's certainly a good sign that she's working ITTL in 1984. A move from hard news to co-host of a morning show would probably piss her off. But the change could be temporary, and we can hope she gets the help she needs, owns her sexuality, and contributes her vibrancy to the medium of television journalism for decades to come.
I don't know why this became the post referencing two terrible premature deaths of people with incidental drug problems. There's literally nothing about the main topic under discussion that would cause it.
(Incidentally if you're looking for an explicit downside to this post, Wikipedia tells us that without her gruesome death there would be no Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy, so that is officially not happening ITTL.)
Just read Wikipedia, it doesn't say THAT specifically, though having grown up with Mort Crim as our news dude here in Detroit, it blew my mind that he helped shape Burgundy's character.
Story Post XXXIV: Palestine
#34
Late 1983
CBS Nightly News
“Scenes of celebrations in Tel Aviv tonight, as Shimon Peres of the Labor Party wins a commanding majority in Knesset. The result is seen by experts largely as a reprisal against the outgoing Likud Party for allowing Syria to achieve a dominant position in Lebanon.”
----
Three weeks later
Sandy and Lou are college roommates, ethnically Jewish and Italian, respectively. Sandy often explains Middle Eastern politics to Lou. Now they’re talking about this morning’s headline: the meeting between Shimon Peres and King Hussein.
“It’s never gonna happen.”
“It’s happening.”
“They’d never agree to it.”
“They’re meeting as we speak.”
“Didn’t you tell me there were thousands of Jews in the West Bank?”
“twenty...twenty-five thousand, last I heard.”
“So what happens to them?”
“If they’re near the border, maybe the border will start just to the east of them. If they’re inland, they’ll have to move. Or become Jordanians.”
“None of them are going to want to become Jordanians.”
“This is probably true.”
“Didn’t you tell me they were fanatics?”
“Some of them are pretty fanatical, yes.”
“They’re not going to go peacefully.”
“That could be the case.”
“Jews attacking other Jews to kick them out of their homes? It’ll never happen!”
“You build up enough pressure and almost anything can happen.”
“So what’s the pressure? Jordan suddenly wants more territory?”
“No! Not at all. In fact I doubt Jordan holds onto it for long.”
“Jordan doesn’t even want the West Bank?”
“Of course Jordan doesn’t want the West Bank. Would you want the West Bank? Nobody in their right mind…”
“So what are we doing here?”
“We’re making a deal. We’re normalizing relations with Jordan in exchange for territory and financial support for a viable Palestinian state.”
“Independent?”
“Well...you know how it is.”
“What’s that supposed to mean?”
“It means, you know. Sure. All the i’s are crossed, all the t’s are dotted when it comes to the place looking like an independent country…”
“But…?”
“But, there’s no way Israel OR Jordan is going to let a rogue state suddenly pop up on their doorstep. There’ll be a thorough agreement, mutual peace treaties, something written into the national constitution about affirming the right of Israel to exist within her current borders, etc. etc. etc. And...you know, they may find a way to influence who's in charge over there.”
“Just a small fib, then.”
“Exactly. Otherwise, indistinguishable from any other nation. They’ll be sending Palestinian backstrokers to the Olympics in no time.”
“And why this sudden change of heart about all this mess?”
“You know what’s going on in Syria?”
“Is it likely I know what’s going on in Syria if I haven’t heard it from you?”
“The PLA is in Syria. Well, Syria and Lebanon, but it’s all basically Syria now. Syria has the entire Palestinian power structure there campaigning for this idea of a Greater Syria. That means Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, all under the control of Damascus.”
“Jesus!”
“Yeah, I guess he’d be Syrian, too, under this scheme.”
“So they’re going to invade or something?”
“That’s the fear. Put it this way: the way that Syria won in Lebanon? It guaranteed Jordan and Israel were going to move closer together for mutual protection, especially with Egypt still a mess. And it means they have to come up with a viable alternative path for Palestinian nationalism other than this Greater Syria nonsense.”
“So they give them their own country.”
“Right.”
“Undercut the Syrians.”
“Exactly.”
“And Israel will agree to this? I mean the whole country, not just Labor?”
“Well…I guess we’ll find out.”
----
October 3rd, 2014, 12:35 a.m. ET
The nighttime presenter for the Silver Screen Channel walks towards the camera across a well-appointed set.
“Good evening, I’m Ben Mankiewicz, thank you for joining us here on our International Showcase. All month long, in the lead-up to Halloween, we’ll be featuring the work of horror masters from around the globe. Tonight we’ll be passing the hours with three films from the great Palestinian director, Salim Al-Khadar. Kicking things off will be what most experts agree is the seminal Palestinian zombie film, 1989’s Welcome Home.
“The plot of Welcome Home revolves around a small town in the West Bank that sees the arrival of a large number of Palestinian refugees formerly living in the camps of Jordan. The villagers and former refugees are immediately suspicious of each other and a number of comic squabbles pepper the first act as the two communities attempt to integrate. A series of random, brutal murders escalates the tension in the second act with accusations flying and both sides begin to arm themselves. But by the third act, it is revealed that a strange radio station broadcasting gibberish is capable of brainwashing anyone who listens to it for long enough, turning them into mindless killing machines. Welcome Home culminates in a full-on zombie invasion. But it is an invasion from within, as residents old and new find themselves in the ranks of both the possessed and those who keep their free will.
“Salim Al-Khadar is known as the godfather of the Palestinian zombie movie, and is easily the most well-known master of horror in the entire Arabic world. We were fortunate enough to sit down with him in the studio a few weeks ago; take a look.”
Cut to Mankiewicz and Al-Khadar, a man in his early 50s with piercing eyes, jet-black hair, and a pair of beautiful silver mustaches.
“There’s been a lot of debate over the years as to whether your early films should even be considered a part of the zombie subgenre, what’s your take on that?”
“Well they may have a point. I honestly didn’t set out thinking of my antagonists the same way you think of, say, Romero’s zombies. These people are not mindless so much as they’ve had their intellect used against them. They’re brainwashed, or perhaps possessed is a better word. But from a filmmaking perspective, I look back on my first four films, which are usually the ones people call my zombie films, and I see why that happened; why they were placed in this box.”
“They’re filmed very much like classic zombie movies.”
“Exactly. I loved Romero, and as one does with the things one loves, I drained the source dry. I stole so much from him in terms of lighting and camera setups and editing.”
“You were there right at the start of the organized Palestinian film industry. What do you think drew you and the producers at the time to horror stories?”
“Well if there was ever a more natural progression from experience to expression...it was a devastating half century for my country, you know. And I think it’s crucial to point out the humor in these early films. Not just mine, but all of us coming out of Hebron at the time really venerated the Palestinian sense of humor: very dark, very dry. I’m perfectly contented when people read the zombie films as comedies.”
“Well Dark Rhythms especially, where the murderous trance of the zombies is triggered any time Fleetwood Mac is played-”
“Yes, we had some fun, you see. It wasn’t all trauma and death. Satire is sometimes the best therapy.”
“So this idea that the enemy could be anyone around you, a family member, a stranger on the bus-”
“-And they could turn insane at any second, yes, this was the expression of a national trauma. It really goes back to the Syrian Intervention in Lebanon. Before that Palestinians had enemies everywhere- Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and of course plenty of factionalism amongst ourselves. But after Syria gained firm control of our political structures in their territory and converted the cause of liberation to the cause of the Greater Syria Movement? This was a turning point. All of a sudden our other differences weren’t so pressing. The Israelis were scared, the Jordanians were scared, we were scared.”
“And terrorism was on the rise, correct?”
“Terrorism was on the rise and more frighteningly of Palestinians attacking Palestinians. The PLA were clearly trying to take over. The camps were never safe, but it just got worse and worse. The UN was insufficient...it was a terrifying time. Anyone could turn out to be the enemy. Yes, it’s something that progressed quite naturally into a horror movie.”
Cut back to Mankiewicz in the studio.
“And you can watch the rest of that interview on our website. But for now let’s kick things off with where it all started. From 1989 directed by Salim Al-Khadar and starring Kamel El Basha and Juliano Mer-Khamis, here is Welcome Home. Enjoy.
----
Late 1983
Prime Minister Shimon Peres is giving an interview to Michael, a reporter for Time Magazine. There will be a big profile built around this conference, of course, but for tonight they’ve agreed that everything is off the record.
“So how do we even begin?”
“We begin by thinking about what the world would look like if we gave something up.”
“Gave what up?”
“Anything. Maybe everything. What if we gave them everything on the table? What would the world look like? What would it look like if they gave us everything on the table? Would one extreme or another make us neighbors? Better people? More stable countries? Worse people? Less stable?”
“And the answer?”
“The answer will almost certainly be a matter of degrees.
“How do you do this?
“What?”
“How do you make a deal with them and expect to hold power?”
He laughs.
“Oh, Michael. I’m not expecting to hold power. That was something I had to let go of the moment we started this.”
“But that’s...how can...all this could be for nothing!”
“Listen, the people are still mad at Likud. I can spin this conference as a result of them bungling the Syria situation- say that we wouldn’t be reduced to this option if not for them. It’s not a bad line. It might save me for a few months, a year, who knows? If we’re lucky, we hold onto the reins long enough that the peace becomes a settled issue.”
“And if we’re not lucky?”
“If we’re very unlucky? The Palestinian struggle becomes a Syrian struggle. The whole region is drawn in and we likely do not survive without drawing in the Superpowers and from there...the whole world could be in trouble. If we’re only moderately unlucky? We get three more generations of terrorism, at least, while we Israelis lease our souls out by the centimeter in exchange for land, not even noticing when they’re gone, becoming...becoming what, I don’t even know. Whatever it is, it’s not Jewish.”
“...Wow.”
“So for that. To prevent that. I would risk my station. What a bargain, no?”
----
2010
Complutense University of Madrid (Go Swans). This term features an occasional lecture series on the modern treaty-making process.
"Against all expectations, the Labor government did not crumble as the peace process proceeded. It ended up lasting long enough to see the Athens Accords implemented.
"Initially, negotiations proceeded more smoothly than anticipated, largely thanks to the delegitimization of most of the more radical Palestinian politicians. The old PLO was mostly wiped out in southern Lebanon, and the powers that replaced it were obvious puppets of the Syrian regime. This allowed for a new generation of younger and more moderate voices to make themselves known during the negotiations. Yasser Abbed Rabbo and Nayef Hawatmeh managed to hold together a coalition that ranged from moderate conservatives to out-and-out communists, all through shear terror of what might happen if Syrian influence continued to spread in the camps and the West Bank. The Israelis and Jordanians were no less frightened of this outcome, which helped to speed their agreements. Not only could the Palestinians be further radicalized, but the legitimacy of Jordan and Israel were thrown into question in a future with no alternative answer to Greater Syria.
"Several broad points were agreed upon quickly as the negotiations took shape, from basic water and air rights to mutually acceptable borders- a point considered previously to be intractable. Palestine would regain East Jerusalem, while Israel would pay a significant price to retain the Ring Neighborhoods and a few other tracts.
"The Old City quarters of Jerusalem would be jointly administered by a council made up of civil officials from both countries, with some participation from representatives of all religious congregations within the territory. The council would be chaired by a representative appointed by the UN. The exact role the UN would play in the zone would be determined by the council and the residents of the zone in a later referendum.
"Some additional West Bank tracts, occupied by Jewish settlers and near the western border, were also purchased by Israel, with more internal settlements requiring evacuation. The Gaza Strip would also be evacuated by the Jews. No Palestinians would be asked to move.
"They also agreed that the Israelis would pay for a “Peace Road” connecting Gaza to the West Bank, and serving as integral Palestinian territory. The road would be elevated on a berm, with frequent Israeli-controlled crossings under it.
"Very much on purpose, no mention was made of the Golan Heights. While most at the conference were opposed to Syria, they were not ready to sanction a territorial annexation against another nation in absentia. Even the Soviets, who like all members of the Security Council were invited to the conference, recognized that it could serve no purpose to antagonize on this point. (Rumors abounded that they were being bribed by the US with tacit acceptance of their growing interests in Iran.)
"Despite these many successes, there was still one sticking point as the first session of the conference entered its final days: the Right of Return. Many nations made clear- particularly the Arab League observers- that they would not consider any treaty legitimate if it did not include this provision. Neither the Israeli nor the Palestinian/Jordanian delegations would budge. It looked as if the conference would end in failure.
"The compromise came from US diplomat Philip Habib. It was a tenuous, almost dangerous compromise that would force the delegations to stay poised and waiting for the better part of a year. Many people thought it should have won him a part in the Nobel Peace Prize that eventually went to Shimon Peres, Yasser Abed Rabbo, and King Hussein. One day in an open session of the negotiations, Habib asked a simple question: 'Exactly how many Palestinians actually want to return?'
"Over the next several months, a census was conducted by the UN among the Palestinian diaspora, collecting data on their attitudes towards returning to Israel. The census was not perfect. There were time pressures involved, and a policy of non-participation was propagated by As-Saiqa and the PLA in Syria. The flaws were significant enough that the Arab League registered an official inquiry with the UN over its conduct.
"Still, the results were clear: vanishingly few Palestinians were interested in living under an Israeli government when a valid Palestinian state was on the verge of existence. Israel would agree to grant the right for the few thousand interested in returning, and would set up a commission to provide compensation for those who were, 'unsettled as a result of the establishment of the state of Israel.'
"In this second session of the Athens Conference, the Right of Return question was put to rest. Further citizenship issues were ironed out, with provisions for Palestine to accept any Arab-Israeli citizens wishing to move to the new state (about 100,000 would ultimately do so).
"Assured of the financial backing of the United States, Israel agreed to a compensation plan for the Palestinian people affected by 40 years of displacement. Court claims could be filed on the subject of compensation in Israel, Jordan, or the new Palestinian courts, with a special international appeals court established in the Jerusalem international zone to deal with the thornier claims.
"The ultimate price tag for all of this- the territorial concessions, the Peace Road, the compensation claims- would rest in the billions of dollars. The vast majority of this would be paid for internationally. While the US government initially offered to foot the bill (before the extent of the bill was known), ultimately private citizens would provide the lion’s share of the needed resources.
"The Fund for Peace, established jointly in Los Angeles and Frankfurt mere days after the Athens Conference’s successful conclusion, was committed to the financial well-being and ultimate settlement of the Palestinian people in an effort to see Israel finally at peace with her neighbors. The fund would balloon rapidly thanks to many generous contributions, and by decade’s end measured its assets in the billions. To this day it makes payments on Palestinian claims, though many of those have died down as the Right of Return reaches its sundown period- any Palestinian born before 1990 can apply for funds or to return until 2020. Today the Fund for Peace has switched its focus mostly to education and environmental projects that promote Jewish/Palestinian collaboration.
"Back in 1984, the lead up to the treaty was marked with a dramatic increase in violence. Most notable were the Syrian rocket attacks in the Golan and from Lebanon into Israel's North District. This most likely in an effort to provoke a response from the IDF and derail the peace process. Moscow could only do so much to curb these incidents.
"But beyond that, there was violence on all sides, with terrorist incidents in the camps, in Amman, and across Israel. There were protests in Israel as well, with police clashing with conservative citizens opposed to the peace process. But, with Peres in the forefront, all sides kept their resolve, maintaining control over military, police, and clandestine responses with an iron grip, knowing their careers and possibly their lives depended on it.
"The Implementation of the treaty was also far from smooth. It saw the IDF arresting hundreds of settlers who refused to move, with multiple casualties on both sides. A mosque was firebombed in East Jerusalem before the handover, and construction on the Peace Road was repeatedly sabotaged- the beginnings of the Jewish terrorism that would, in years to come, become almost as much of a problem to the two states as Syrian-backed Palestinian terrorism. Additional protests were held; accusations of corruption in the claims process were leveled; countless tears were shed on both sides.
"But at the end of it all, two nations would emerge. Their parliaments were in sight of each other, given a clear day. The papers were signed. The agreements in force. It was trust that would take time."
Late 1983
CBS Nightly News
“Scenes of celebrations in Tel Aviv tonight, as Shimon Peres of the Labor Party wins a commanding majority in Knesset. The result is seen by experts largely as a reprisal against the outgoing Likud Party for allowing Syria to achieve a dominant position in Lebanon.”
----
Three weeks later
Sandy and Lou are college roommates, ethnically Jewish and Italian, respectively. Sandy often explains Middle Eastern politics to Lou. Now they’re talking about this morning’s headline: the meeting between Shimon Peres and King Hussein.
“It’s never gonna happen.”
“It’s happening.”
“They’d never agree to it.”
“They’re meeting as we speak.”
“Didn’t you tell me there were thousands of Jews in the West Bank?”
“twenty...twenty-five thousand, last I heard.”
“So what happens to them?”
“If they’re near the border, maybe the border will start just to the east of them. If they’re inland, they’ll have to move. Or become Jordanians.”
“None of them are going to want to become Jordanians.”
“This is probably true.”
“Didn’t you tell me they were fanatics?”
“Some of them are pretty fanatical, yes.”
“They’re not going to go peacefully.”
“That could be the case.”
“Jews attacking other Jews to kick them out of their homes? It’ll never happen!”
“You build up enough pressure and almost anything can happen.”
“So what’s the pressure? Jordan suddenly wants more territory?”
“No! Not at all. In fact I doubt Jordan holds onto it for long.”
“Jordan doesn’t even want the West Bank?”
“Of course Jordan doesn’t want the West Bank. Would you want the West Bank? Nobody in their right mind…”
“So what are we doing here?”
“We’re making a deal. We’re normalizing relations with Jordan in exchange for territory and financial support for a viable Palestinian state.”
“Independent?”
“Well...you know how it is.”
“What’s that supposed to mean?”
“It means, you know. Sure. All the i’s are crossed, all the t’s are dotted when it comes to the place looking like an independent country…”
“But…?”
“But, there’s no way Israel OR Jordan is going to let a rogue state suddenly pop up on their doorstep. There’ll be a thorough agreement, mutual peace treaties, something written into the national constitution about affirming the right of Israel to exist within her current borders, etc. etc. etc. And...you know, they may find a way to influence who's in charge over there.”
“Just a small fib, then.”
“Exactly. Otherwise, indistinguishable from any other nation. They’ll be sending Palestinian backstrokers to the Olympics in no time.”
“And why this sudden change of heart about all this mess?”
“You know what’s going on in Syria?”
“Is it likely I know what’s going on in Syria if I haven’t heard it from you?”
“The PLA is in Syria. Well, Syria and Lebanon, but it’s all basically Syria now. Syria has the entire Palestinian power structure there campaigning for this idea of a Greater Syria. That means Lebanon, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, all under the control of Damascus.”
“Jesus!”
“Yeah, I guess he’d be Syrian, too, under this scheme.”
“So they’re going to invade or something?”
“That’s the fear. Put it this way: the way that Syria won in Lebanon? It guaranteed Jordan and Israel were going to move closer together for mutual protection, especially with Egypt still a mess. And it means they have to come up with a viable alternative path for Palestinian nationalism other than this Greater Syria nonsense.”
“So they give them their own country.”
“Right.”
“Undercut the Syrians.”
“Exactly.”
“And Israel will agree to this? I mean the whole country, not just Labor?”
“Well…I guess we’ll find out.”
----
October 3rd, 2014, 12:35 a.m. ET
The nighttime presenter for the Silver Screen Channel walks towards the camera across a well-appointed set.
“Good evening, I’m Ben Mankiewicz, thank you for joining us here on our International Showcase. All month long, in the lead-up to Halloween, we’ll be featuring the work of horror masters from around the globe. Tonight we’ll be passing the hours with three films from the great Palestinian director, Salim Al-Khadar. Kicking things off will be what most experts agree is the seminal Palestinian zombie film, 1989’s Welcome Home.
“The plot of Welcome Home revolves around a small town in the West Bank that sees the arrival of a large number of Palestinian refugees formerly living in the camps of Jordan. The villagers and former refugees are immediately suspicious of each other and a number of comic squabbles pepper the first act as the two communities attempt to integrate. A series of random, brutal murders escalates the tension in the second act with accusations flying and both sides begin to arm themselves. But by the third act, it is revealed that a strange radio station broadcasting gibberish is capable of brainwashing anyone who listens to it for long enough, turning them into mindless killing machines. Welcome Home culminates in a full-on zombie invasion. But it is an invasion from within, as residents old and new find themselves in the ranks of both the possessed and those who keep their free will.
“Salim Al-Khadar is known as the godfather of the Palestinian zombie movie, and is easily the most well-known master of horror in the entire Arabic world. We were fortunate enough to sit down with him in the studio a few weeks ago; take a look.”
Cut to Mankiewicz and Al-Khadar, a man in his early 50s with piercing eyes, jet-black hair, and a pair of beautiful silver mustaches.
“There’s been a lot of debate over the years as to whether your early films should even be considered a part of the zombie subgenre, what’s your take on that?”
“Well they may have a point. I honestly didn’t set out thinking of my antagonists the same way you think of, say, Romero’s zombies. These people are not mindless so much as they’ve had their intellect used against them. They’re brainwashed, or perhaps possessed is a better word. But from a filmmaking perspective, I look back on my first four films, which are usually the ones people call my zombie films, and I see why that happened; why they were placed in this box.”
“They’re filmed very much like classic zombie movies.”
“Exactly. I loved Romero, and as one does with the things one loves, I drained the source dry. I stole so much from him in terms of lighting and camera setups and editing.”
“You were there right at the start of the organized Palestinian film industry. What do you think drew you and the producers at the time to horror stories?”
“Well if there was ever a more natural progression from experience to expression...it was a devastating half century for my country, you know. And I think it’s crucial to point out the humor in these early films. Not just mine, but all of us coming out of Hebron at the time really venerated the Palestinian sense of humor: very dark, very dry. I’m perfectly contented when people read the zombie films as comedies.”
“Well Dark Rhythms especially, where the murderous trance of the zombies is triggered any time Fleetwood Mac is played-”
“Yes, we had some fun, you see. It wasn’t all trauma and death. Satire is sometimes the best therapy.”
“So this idea that the enemy could be anyone around you, a family member, a stranger on the bus-”
“-And they could turn insane at any second, yes, this was the expression of a national trauma. It really goes back to the Syrian Intervention in Lebanon. Before that Palestinians had enemies everywhere- Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and of course plenty of factionalism amongst ourselves. But after Syria gained firm control of our political structures in their territory and converted the cause of liberation to the cause of the Greater Syria Movement? This was a turning point. All of a sudden our other differences weren’t so pressing. The Israelis were scared, the Jordanians were scared, we were scared.”
“And terrorism was on the rise, correct?”
“Terrorism was on the rise and more frighteningly of Palestinians attacking Palestinians. The PLA were clearly trying to take over. The camps were never safe, but it just got worse and worse. The UN was insufficient...it was a terrifying time. Anyone could turn out to be the enemy. Yes, it’s something that progressed quite naturally into a horror movie.”
Cut back to Mankiewicz in the studio.
“And you can watch the rest of that interview on our website. But for now let’s kick things off with where it all started. From 1989 directed by Salim Al-Khadar and starring Kamel El Basha and Juliano Mer-Khamis, here is Welcome Home. Enjoy.
----
Late 1983
Prime Minister Shimon Peres is giving an interview to Michael, a reporter for Time Magazine. There will be a big profile built around this conference, of course, but for tonight they’ve agreed that everything is off the record.
“So how do we even begin?”
“We begin by thinking about what the world would look like if we gave something up.”
“Gave what up?”
“Anything. Maybe everything. What if we gave them everything on the table? What would the world look like? What would it look like if they gave us everything on the table? Would one extreme or another make us neighbors? Better people? More stable countries? Worse people? Less stable?”
“And the answer?”
“The answer will almost certainly be a matter of degrees.
“How do you do this?
“What?”
“How do you make a deal with them and expect to hold power?”
He laughs.
“Oh, Michael. I’m not expecting to hold power. That was something I had to let go of the moment we started this.”
“But that’s...how can...all this could be for nothing!”
“Listen, the people are still mad at Likud. I can spin this conference as a result of them bungling the Syria situation- say that we wouldn’t be reduced to this option if not for them. It’s not a bad line. It might save me for a few months, a year, who knows? If we’re lucky, we hold onto the reins long enough that the peace becomes a settled issue.”
“And if we’re not lucky?”
“If we’re very unlucky? The Palestinian struggle becomes a Syrian struggle. The whole region is drawn in and we likely do not survive without drawing in the Superpowers and from there...the whole world could be in trouble. If we’re only moderately unlucky? We get three more generations of terrorism, at least, while we Israelis lease our souls out by the centimeter in exchange for land, not even noticing when they’re gone, becoming...becoming what, I don’t even know. Whatever it is, it’s not Jewish.”
“...Wow.”
“So for that. To prevent that. I would risk my station. What a bargain, no?”
----
2010
Complutense University of Madrid (Go Swans). This term features an occasional lecture series on the modern treaty-making process.
"Against all expectations, the Labor government did not crumble as the peace process proceeded. It ended up lasting long enough to see the Athens Accords implemented.
"Initially, negotiations proceeded more smoothly than anticipated, largely thanks to the delegitimization of most of the more radical Palestinian politicians. The old PLO was mostly wiped out in southern Lebanon, and the powers that replaced it were obvious puppets of the Syrian regime. This allowed for a new generation of younger and more moderate voices to make themselves known during the negotiations. Yasser Abbed Rabbo and Nayef Hawatmeh managed to hold together a coalition that ranged from moderate conservatives to out-and-out communists, all through shear terror of what might happen if Syrian influence continued to spread in the camps and the West Bank. The Israelis and Jordanians were no less frightened of this outcome, which helped to speed their agreements. Not only could the Palestinians be further radicalized, but the legitimacy of Jordan and Israel were thrown into question in a future with no alternative answer to Greater Syria.
"Several broad points were agreed upon quickly as the negotiations took shape, from basic water and air rights to mutually acceptable borders- a point considered previously to be intractable. Palestine would regain East Jerusalem, while Israel would pay a significant price to retain the Ring Neighborhoods and a few other tracts.
"The Old City quarters of Jerusalem would be jointly administered by a council made up of civil officials from both countries, with some participation from representatives of all religious congregations within the territory. The council would be chaired by a representative appointed by the UN. The exact role the UN would play in the zone would be determined by the council and the residents of the zone in a later referendum.
"Some additional West Bank tracts, occupied by Jewish settlers and near the western border, were also purchased by Israel, with more internal settlements requiring evacuation. The Gaza Strip would also be evacuated by the Jews. No Palestinians would be asked to move.
"They also agreed that the Israelis would pay for a “Peace Road” connecting Gaza to the West Bank, and serving as integral Palestinian territory. The road would be elevated on a berm, with frequent Israeli-controlled crossings under it.
"Very much on purpose, no mention was made of the Golan Heights. While most at the conference were opposed to Syria, they were not ready to sanction a territorial annexation against another nation in absentia. Even the Soviets, who like all members of the Security Council were invited to the conference, recognized that it could serve no purpose to antagonize on this point. (Rumors abounded that they were being bribed by the US with tacit acceptance of their growing interests in Iran.)
"Despite these many successes, there was still one sticking point as the first session of the conference entered its final days: the Right of Return. Many nations made clear- particularly the Arab League observers- that they would not consider any treaty legitimate if it did not include this provision. Neither the Israeli nor the Palestinian/Jordanian delegations would budge. It looked as if the conference would end in failure.
"The compromise came from US diplomat Philip Habib. It was a tenuous, almost dangerous compromise that would force the delegations to stay poised and waiting for the better part of a year. Many people thought it should have won him a part in the Nobel Peace Prize that eventually went to Shimon Peres, Yasser Abed Rabbo, and King Hussein. One day in an open session of the negotiations, Habib asked a simple question: 'Exactly how many Palestinians actually want to return?'
"Over the next several months, a census was conducted by the UN among the Palestinian diaspora, collecting data on their attitudes towards returning to Israel. The census was not perfect. There were time pressures involved, and a policy of non-participation was propagated by As-Saiqa and the PLA in Syria. The flaws were significant enough that the Arab League registered an official inquiry with the UN over its conduct.
"Still, the results were clear: vanishingly few Palestinians were interested in living under an Israeli government when a valid Palestinian state was on the verge of existence. Israel would agree to grant the right for the few thousand interested in returning, and would set up a commission to provide compensation for those who were, 'unsettled as a result of the establishment of the state of Israel.'
"In this second session of the Athens Conference, the Right of Return question was put to rest. Further citizenship issues were ironed out, with provisions for Palestine to accept any Arab-Israeli citizens wishing to move to the new state (about 100,000 would ultimately do so).
"Assured of the financial backing of the United States, Israel agreed to a compensation plan for the Palestinian people affected by 40 years of displacement. Court claims could be filed on the subject of compensation in Israel, Jordan, or the new Palestinian courts, with a special international appeals court established in the Jerusalem international zone to deal with the thornier claims.
"The ultimate price tag for all of this- the territorial concessions, the Peace Road, the compensation claims- would rest in the billions of dollars. The vast majority of this would be paid for internationally. While the US government initially offered to foot the bill (before the extent of the bill was known), ultimately private citizens would provide the lion’s share of the needed resources.
"The Fund for Peace, established jointly in Los Angeles and Frankfurt mere days after the Athens Conference’s successful conclusion, was committed to the financial well-being and ultimate settlement of the Palestinian people in an effort to see Israel finally at peace with her neighbors. The fund would balloon rapidly thanks to many generous contributions, and by decade’s end measured its assets in the billions. To this day it makes payments on Palestinian claims, though many of those have died down as the Right of Return reaches its sundown period- any Palestinian born before 1990 can apply for funds or to return until 2020. Today the Fund for Peace has switched its focus mostly to education and environmental projects that promote Jewish/Palestinian collaboration.
"Back in 1984, the lead up to the treaty was marked with a dramatic increase in violence. Most notable were the Syrian rocket attacks in the Golan and from Lebanon into Israel's North District. This most likely in an effort to provoke a response from the IDF and derail the peace process. Moscow could only do so much to curb these incidents.
"But beyond that, there was violence on all sides, with terrorist incidents in the camps, in Amman, and across Israel. There were protests in Israel as well, with police clashing with conservative citizens opposed to the peace process. But, with Peres in the forefront, all sides kept their resolve, maintaining control over military, police, and clandestine responses with an iron grip, knowing their careers and possibly their lives depended on it.
"The Implementation of the treaty was also far from smooth. It saw the IDF arresting hundreds of settlers who refused to move, with multiple casualties on both sides. A mosque was firebombed in East Jerusalem before the handover, and construction on the Peace Road was repeatedly sabotaged- the beginnings of the Jewish terrorism that would, in years to come, become almost as much of a problem to the two states as Syrian-backed Palestinian terrorism. Additional protests were held; accusations of corruption in the claims process were leveled; countless tears were shed on both sides.
"But at the end of it all, two nations would emerge. Their parliaments were in sight of each other, given a clear day. The papers were signed. The agreements in force. It was trust that would take time."
Last edited:
Before anyone takes a plunge down a fruitless google search, the actors are real (and great), the director is not real as such. I took his name from Little Drummer Girl. If you haven't seen the recent adaptation, I highly recommend it. Should be streaming in the US before too long; aired on AMC back in November. Park Chan Wook directs a John Le Carre? Fucking amazing.
Anyway, there are real Palestinian directors I could have used, mostly working internationally. But I wanted to highlight how even a very flawed peace is preferable to the status quo. After all, the reason there's not much of a native Palestinian film industry IOTL isn't the result of a lack of creativity or drive among the Palestinians. It's very much the fault of something else. And out there IOTL there could be a "real" Salim who's currently doing something very different from making one of the greatest midnight matinee zombie movies of a generation.
Anyway, there are real Palestinian directors I could have used, mostly working internationally. But I wanted to highlight how even a very flawed peace is preferable to the status quo. After all, the reason there's not much of a native Palestinian film industry IOTL isn't the result of a lack of creativity or drive among the Palestinians. It's very much the fault of something else. And out there IOTL there could be a "real" Salim who's currently doing something very different from making one of the greatest midnight matinee zombie movies of a generation.
Your line from Peres about taking land by the centimeter until their souls were no longer Jewish seems to be an incredibly apt metaphor for current Israeli policy.
Thank you, I wish it didn’t feel so apt. While it very clearly is me looking at OTL Peres interviews from later decades and putting a spin on his comments, I don’t think this is an unreasonable glimpse into the future. Expansion of the settlements was always the alternative to all other actions, and it’s not hard to extrapolate the result.
My thoughts on trying for any kind of solution, even in AH, were pretty jaded. Then I started reading Uri Avnery and my spirits picked up. His attitude on the Right of Return is what I ended up including in here. Every other issue can really a very granular thing- and in the cramped, complicated, resource-poor Levant sorting out utilities and practicalities really is its own Gordian knot. But these are problems for engineers and surveyors. Getting people to agree to let the engineers do what they do is the hard part. And the heart of that emotionality rests in the Right of Return.
Avnery’s take- to make the Right aquestion of practicality as well- is such a simple opening. It had the potential to be the sword cutting the knot; that thing that makes you think, “wait a minute...is it really possible no one has asked this before?”
In fact, feel free to consider it canon that Habib had an off-the-books conversation with Avnery. The idea would play so much better from a senior diplomat-though Peres himself probably couldn’t suggest it for political reasons- and Avnery would forego credit to make it happen.
I also love his style. It reminds me of being young and in the home of my best friend (who was Jewish), watching his father and his father’s friends square off on any issue you can imagine. Their cadence was Avnery’s, their inclination to compliments both fore- and back-handed, to parable, to appeals to a kind of centered practicality that elevated such a state to divinity.
I hope it’s not a turnoff that I really wanted impulses like this to be what helps Israel turn the corner. AH can be too escapist sometimes, you risk ignoring the world to go off and make better ones. But I’m learning through this writing process that there can be a very necessary therapy in it, and self-care. And if we take what we love from the world and elevate it here, that can key us to promote it back in the world. There’s a way to do it.
Truly, the zombie discourse will be even more robust ITTL than ours.
I do want to include more pop culture in the timeline, but I'm purposefully pushing that to the side for now to stay focused. It might be a matter of going back in and adding contour later on in like a "decade in review" segment.
I'd definitely love to see that. Though as an aside, one of the things I really like about this timeline is how you often use pop culture as a tool of exposition (like your explanation of the new constitutional amendments with a clip from Antiques Roadshow, or the old early-80s PSA method of explaining housing loans a few entries back). It's a very creative way of providing necessary background material.
I guess you have a point...glad you like it! Just trying to make it fun to write, nice to hear the tactic is serving its purpose on the reading end as well.
"National cinemas" are one of my favorite things to study. From the little I know about Israeli cinema it's got some unique characteristics but also serves as a pretty solid example of how smaller countries tend to operate in the shadow of larger, more dominant countries. There's three broad categories of films a smaller country will produce:
1) Films for its citizens. Usually meant to promote desired values, make people feel better about being "Israeli" (or whatever) and also give them an idea of what that means. Explores social problems in a localized context that usually isn't going to be interesting to international audiences.
2) Films for international prestige. Art films, Cannes competitors, etc. Our nation produces geniuses and the whole world thinks so. Kind of an intellectual soft diplomacy.
3) Cracking the international market. Usually moonshots, always very difficult to predict. Usually in the past these were the cheaper kind of genre pictures, though that's not always the case today. These were all about trying to get that paper, though they also came with their own type of prestige.
Your example of Lemon Popsicle is a perfect example of that third type.
And the PalZos (which as of two seconds ago is what we're calling Palestinian zombie films) would fit into the same mold. Horror films have a lot of leeway on production values- you under-light that's atmosphere, not cost-saving; shaky camera means gritty, not unprofessional. We all understand the grammar of a horror film. We all know what zombies are (just like with Lemon Popsicle we all know what horny teenagers are). Any cultural specifics are really just flavor and incidental to the forward march of the zombie narrative. And a lot of screaming and blood don't require translation. It's a good place to look to bottle lightning.