Barrier: the Seam of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
by Isabel Kershner, 2005. Palgrave Macmillan.

Reviewed by Peter Ryan

The barrier that now separates ordinary Palestinians and Israelis is no longer symbolic-it is physical. In densely populated areas, the barrier takes the form of a giant "wall," composed of concrete slabs 8 meters high and 45 centimeters thick. Outside of cities, the barrier takes the form of a "fence," which in reality includes a 45 meter wide "buffer zone" composed of ditches, mounds of razor barbed-wire, security cameras and non-civilian roads patrolled by Israeli military jeeps. Absurdly, the primary debate in the U.S. media over the barrier has been whether to call it a "wall" or a "fence" even though it is clearly both. Ironically, though the word itself seems to indicate something innocent and benign, the "fence" portions of the barrier are arguably an even worse affront to Palestinian sovereignty because these sections tend to seize control over an even larger slice of Palestinian land.

The two words conjure up sharply dissimilar images. A "fence" is something you build to decorate your yard. A "wall" is something you build to separate-or imprison-human beings. On a symbolic level "wall" is clearly a more appropriate term since the barrier divides communities (and, in some cases, even families), separating both Israelis from Palestinians and Palestinians from other Palestinians. On the other hand, since only about 6% of the barrier, when completed, will be made up of concrete walls, "fence," though deceivingly innocuous, is perhaps a more technically appropriate term.

Israeli Journalist Isabel Kershner has chosen the somewhat more neutral term "Barrier" as the title of her book covering this complex and divisive topic. She is careful throughout to never stray from the tone of neutrality that her title implies, never fully denouncing or endorsing the project.

The mainstream Israeli view that the "fence" is primarily a means to secure their country against Palestinian suicide bombers and the Palestinian view that the "wall" is primarily a means to seize control over even more Palestinian land and suffocate the Palestinian economy are presented on more or less equal terms. Again just as the barrier is both a "wall" and a "fence" it should be obvious to any truly objective observer will understand the barrier as an Israeli strategy both to secure itself against terrorist attacks and as a method of solidifying permanent control over the largest Israeli settlements within the Palestinian Territories. Most internationals will obviously find themselves in favor of the first goal but deeply troubled by the implications of the second.

"If this barrier promises Israelis as sense of security," Kershner explains, "to the Palestinians it feels more like a noose closing in, cutting into the territory of their future state and creating what they fear will become a series of barely connected 'Bantustans' in the West Bank."

Some Israelis interviewed in Kershner's book also see the wall as a tool for putting at least some limits on Israel's territorial ambitions. She notes the story of Ruthi Gillis a settler whose husband was killed by Palestinian militants. Their home in the settlement of Karmei Tzur is now on the "wrong side" of the barrier. "The message that Sharon's fence drove home," Kershner explains, "was that Karmei Tzur, Tzur Shalem, and dozens more settlements throughout the land of Israel were no longer worth preserving." Because of this, and also due in part for his support of the Gaza withdrawal, Sharon lost the backing of many in the Israeli settler movement.

"We need a fence," another Israeli explains to Kershner, "to put limits on the occupation in the Jewish mind."

But the implication that the barrier is as much a revolt against the settlement project as it is a solidification of its territorial claims may be mere wishful thinking. According to the Stop the Wall campaign, Israel's wall de facto annexes 50% of the West Bank, leaving less than 12% of historic Palestine under the control of the indigenous Palestinian population. If the wall is meant to draw a border, the "state" it creates for Palestinians is meager. Furthermore, the barrier is not a guarantee that settlements on the Palestinian side of the fence will be evacuated or even that they will stop expanding. In fact, in 2003 Ariel Sharon told his cabinet that the barrier would completely surround any future Palestinian state and that there would be a wall on the Eastern boundary of the West Bank. This option has lost momentum but has not been taken off the table.

Security Fence/Apartheid Wall

In order to help readers understand the security argument for the barrier, Kershner highlights the case of Sirhan Sirhan. The story becomes the focal point of the entire narrative. The second chapter relates the story of Sirhan Sirhan's terrorist attack. The fourth chapter focuses on interviews with Sirhan Sirhan's parents. The final chapter is centered around Kershner's interview with the father of two of the victims.

In November 2002, Sirhan Sirhan infiltrated Metzer, an Israeli Kibbutz and killed five Israelis, including two children-Noam, a 5-year-old, and his brother Matzan, who was 4. Before the attack, many Metzer kibbutz members had been campaigning to move the direction of the wall to help reduce the negative impact it would have on a neighboring Palestinian village. After the attack, as one would expect, support for the wall rose among Metzer's residents. No one wants to leave their family members vulnerable to attack or harm.

If the barrier helps block the efforts of some terrorists, it is even more effective in keeping Israeli customers out of the West Bank and Palestinian workers out of Israel. Because of limited economic opportunities in Palestine, many Palestinians historically have taken jobs in Israel. This has become all but impossible for many due to the wall, leaving even more Palestinians out-of-work. To add insult to injury, the wall divides many Palestinians from their agricultural land which, for many, is there only other potential source of income. Without agriculture, tourism and, now, with the looming threat that the U.S. will withdraw international aid, the Palestinian economic outlook seems dire.

Having a wall to bar access to terrorists that also heightens poverty and political tensions is not necessarily a compelling strategy even from a security standpoint.

Gaza, for example, has already been locked in with a system of security barriers, making it almost impossible for Palestinians to travel in or out. At the same time, it has also helped cripple Gaza's economy, making trade and commerce almost impossible. Though it may keep Palestinian Gazans out of Israel, the policy has been a nightmare for ordinary Gazans, which, in turn, has created wider support among Gazans for militant groups like Hamas.. Palestinians, Kershner points out, "rare certain that in the long term, national claustrophobia will hardly contribute to peace."

If the wall is effective against preventing suicide bombings in Israel, it is likely that Palestinian militants in the West Bank will begin imitating the methods used by Gazan militants, which is to use Qassam rockets to attack Israeli civilian areas. But Major General Uzi Dayan, one of the most influential proponents of the wall, tells Kershner "that to stop building the barrier because of the Qassams would be like refusing to take antibiotics for an infection because it wll not wipe out all disease."

Too Many Threads

Kershner's "Barrier" is mostly a collection of vignettes-the individual stories of Israelis and Palestinians, including Israeli settlers and the families of Palestinian militants. The wall/fence is the glue that holds the book together, without it "Barrier" would just be a collection of semi-related interviews and stories. The narrative lack of focus causes Kershner to miss an opportunity to examine the consequences of the wall in greater depth. In the end, Kershner spends far more time speaking with relatives of terrorists like Sirhan Sirhan and Israeli settlers than she does, for example, with Palestinian civilians whose lands and homes are being destroyed or compromised due to the walls construction.

Kershner's final conclusions also feel too easy and obvious: that a chasm exists between the views of Palestinians and Israelis and that the wall is a struggle between 'right vs. right'-the legitimate need of Palestinians for sovereignty, on the one hand, and legitimate need of Israelis for security on the other. There is moral uncertainty in the conflict to be sure, but to neatly avoid criticism of the colonization project that the wall partially represents, seems to me to miss the obvious.

Barrier is not a bad book, it's just a bit unfocused. Any serious researcher or student of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will find some value and insight in Kershner's conversations with Israelis and Palestinians but, if you are only going to read one book this year about Israel and Palestine, this probably shouldn't be it.