Television has been both a blessing and a curse for Palestinians. During the first Intifada, one can argue that it was a blessing. It raised the profile of a people refusing to accept living indefinitely under occupation.



This Palestinian popular resistance was beamed all over the world and won sympathy and support from people. What was projected then was the image of a people wishing to be free and willing to protest military occupation without using arms. Many credit the success at Oslo and the historic agreement signed at the White House to the popular nature of the Intifada and the enormous television coverage it attracted.



The second Intifada has not produced similar results. In fact, television has been a curse for Palestinians. The image of a militarized resistance was restricted almost exclusively to suicide bombings and the killings of innocent Israeli civilians. In addition to these images, Palestinians were also got to be seen as victims whose houses were destroyed, trees uprooted and lands confiscated for building five-meter-high concrete walls.



The image on Western televisions of Palestinians as terrorists and victims was seen differently in Arab homes. The growth of the Arab satellite landscape ensured that the day-to-day life of the Palestinians filled the screens. But Arab television coverage produced another stereotype of Palestinians. While the image of Palestinians as victims prevails in the Arab mind, the widespread television coverage has created the image of the supernatural hero. In the minds of many Arabs, Palestinians can go through fire without getting burned.



Politically, this feeling among Arabs that Palestinians can do anything without paying a price has hurt some of the chances for real progress at the peace talks. If you somehow believe that political problems can be solved militarily, then it is easy to see why peace talks have stumbled. This image has raised the ante to a degree that it has become difficult for politicians to be able to make any compromises. Similarly, the people in the West have been blinded to the humanity of Palestinians as the terrorist image has been overriding on their screens.



While having strong stereotypical views of Palestinians, few in the West, or East, had an idea of how average Palestinians lived. Whether negative or positive, the image of Palestinians is badly in need of a humanizing effort. The dynamic nature of television means that the same medium that created this stereotype is also capable of reversing it.

A unique television series is now being broadcast on the Dubai-based Middle East Broadcasting Corporation (MBC), triggering a lot of interest among Palestinians and Arabs alike.



The series, titled “Eye on Palestine”, chronicles in real time the lives of six ordinary Palestinians and shows a nightly excerpt from the filmed material shortly after the midnight news. Saed Andoni, the producer/director of the program from the Ramallah-based Dar Productions, says that the program reflects the entire rainbow of Palestinian society. “We have a divorced, unveiled woman from Gaza, a children’s puppeteer from Hebron, a university professor from Beit Sahour, a pregnant tour guide in Jerusalem, an orphan refugee camp teenage girl and a woman radio announcer from Nablus.”



Every night, shortly after the midnight news on MBC, the camera spans the normal lives of these ordinary Palestinians, reflecting a rich life, different from that which normally fills the television screens.



Seeing people teaching, studying, eating, buying groceries, shopping and traveling in their day-to-day lives enables one to get a peek at their lives as they struggle to make ends meet or just pass time.



Despite attempting to avoid politicians and militants, the new reality TV heroes have their share of troubles with the occupation. The Hebron puppeteer, Nidal Khatib, is tear gassed as he tries to buy some material, and is forced to ride a donkey in order to get to the village children awaiting his puppet show. Jerusalemite Abeer Rizeq is constantly seen passing the newly erected walls. In Gaza, Aza Qassem, goes to pay her respect to the families she knows in the Shijai neighborhood who were among 15 Palestinians killed on a football field. In Al Amari refugee camp, 14-year-old Mayada Faraj witnesses the killing of a neighbor by the Israelis and the event reminds her of her deceased mother, prompting her to visit her grave.



“Eye on Palestine” began broadcasting on MBC in late August and will run for six weeks. Certainly one television program is not capable of reversing a trend that has been going on for some time, but it is a step in the right direction.

Television has been both a blessing and a curse for Palestinians. During the first Intifada, one can argue that it was a blessing. It raised the profile of a people refusing to accept living indefinitely under occupation.



This Palestinian popular resistance was beamed all over the world and won sympathy and support from people. What was projected then was the image of a people wishing to be free and willing to protest military occupation without using arms. Many credit the success at Oslo and the historic agreement signed at the White House to the popular nature of the Intifada and the enormous television coverage it attracted.



The second Intifada has not produced similar results. In fact, television has been a curse for Palestinians. The image of a militarized resistance was restricted almost exclusively to suicide bombings and the killings of innocent Israeli civilians. In addition to these images, Palestinians were also got to be seen as victims whose houses were destroyed, trees uprooted and lands confiscated for building five-meter-high concrete walls.



The image on Western televisions of Palestinians as terrorists and victims was seen differently in Arab homes. The growth of the Arab satellite landscape ensured that the day-to-day life of the Palestinians filled the screens. But Arab television coverage produced another stereotype of Palestinians. While the image of Palestinians as victims prevails in the Arab mind, the widespread television coverage has created the image of the supernatural hero. In the minds of many Arabs, Palestinians can go through fire without getting burned.



Politically, this feeling among Arabs that Palestinians can do anything without paying a price has hurt some of the chances for real progress at the peace talks. If you somehow believe that political problems can be solved militarily, then it is easy to see why peace talks have stumbled. This image has raised the ante to a degree that it has become difficult for politicians to be able to make any compromises. Similarly, the people in the West have been blinded to the humanity of Palestinians as the terrorist image has been overriding on their screens.



While having strong stereotypical views of Palestinians, few in the West, or East, had an idea of how average Palestinians lived. Whether negative or positive, the image of Palestinians is badly in need of a humanizing effort. The dynamic nature of television means that the same medium that created this stereotype is also capable of reversing it.

A unique television series is now being broadcast on the Dubai-based Middle East Broadcasting Corporation (MBC), triggering a lot of interest among Palestinians and Arabs alike.



The series, titled “Eye on Palestine”, chronicles in real time the lives of six ordinary Palestinians and shows a nightly excerpt from the filmed material shortly after the midnight news. Saed Andoni, the producer/director of the program from the Ramallah-based Dar Productions, says that the program reflects the entire rainbow of Palestinian society. “We have a divorced, unveiled woman from Gaza, a children’s puppeteer from Hebron, a university professor from Beit Sahour, a pregnant tour guide in Jerusalem, an orphan refugee camp teenage girl and a woman radio announcer from Nablus.”



Every night, shortly after the midnight news on MBC, the camera spans the normal lives of these ordinary Palestinians, reflecting a rich life, different from that which normally fills the television screens.



Seeing people teaching, studying, eating, buying groceries, shopping and traveling in their day-to-day lives enables one to get a peek at their lives as they struggle to make ends meet or just pass time.



Despite attempting to avoid politicians and militants, the new reality TV heroes have their share of troubles with the occupation. The Hebron puppeteer, Nidal Khatib, is tear gassed as he tries to buy some material, and is forced to ride a donkey in order to get to the village children awaiting his puppet show. Jerusalemite Abeer Rizeq is constantly seen passing the newly erected walls. In Gaza, Aza Qassem, goes to pay her respect to the families she knows in the Shijai neighborhood who were among 15 Palestinians killed on a football field. In Al Amari refugee camp, 14-year-old Mayada Faraj witnesses the killing of a neighbor by the Israelis and the event reminds her of her deceased mother, prompting her to visit her grave.



“Eye on Palestine” began broadcasting on MBC in late August and will run for six weeks. Certainly one television program is not capable of reversing a trend that has been going on for some time, but it is a step in the right direction.

We all prefer shortcuts. None of us likes to do things that require time and patience. Whether it is a visit to the dentist or world peace, shortcuts might be desirable, but they rarely produce the required results.

I thought of this yesterday as I was having a pleasant breakfast at the Amman Intercontinental. The discussion was with Eason Jordan, the head of the news department at CNN, and the topic was Palestine and independent media in the Arab world. Eason Jordan, along with many CNN staff members from the region and the world are in Jordan for the wedding of former CNN reporter Rym Brahimi to HRH Prince Ali.

It seems that in the areas of peace and democracy we are all impatient, and maybe we should be so, but things just take a long time.

Investigative journalism is a rare specie in the Arabic media, and local news is given low priority. There are tens of daily and weekly publications in Amman, but none in any other city. The Arab world is full of satellite television stations that cost millions of dollars, but hardly any money is spent on real production. They all put the money in the hardware of nice studios and satellite time, but barely any money in professional media practitioners or costly production costs. No wonder we rarely have entries in international media contests or documentary festivals.

When the issue of the Arab public image in the West came up, again the issue of a shortcut came up. Instead of spending real time and effort on understanding the West and the Western media, we either blame it all on a Zionist conspiracy or try to create our own English language television station. Again, all these shortcuts can’t replace hard work that would change our actions; neither can they replace some real effort towards promoting our own genuine narrative.

The hope of many of us for an open and independent Arab media is not satisfied. There have been changes, by the introduction of an audio-visual law, but it is taking a long time for government officials to accept the idea that someone other than a government official can run a local radio or television station. 

If a free media in the region seems long to materialize, the chance for peace are equally lacking and the attempts at shortcuts increase. Many say that the chance to attain a real and lasting peace is next to impossible with leaders such as Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat. Some think that blowing up busses or having Apache planes shell people in soccer fields can be a shortcut. Do walls act as a shortcut? Can the Intifada bring peace or can the attempts to crush the Intifada do the trick?

The grandson of Mahatma Gandhi was in the region recently, preaching non-violence. Everyone knows that this method is not a shortcut, but takes a long, long time and requires the two sides to have a change of heart and to refrain from taking revenge, a plague that has caused numerous deaths on both sides. After 15 Palestinians were mercilessly killed in revenge for the Beir Al Sabe’ suicide attack, even Colin Powell criticized Israel and started preaching against revenge. But like many before him, and no doubt many after him, these are words that will have little effect unless they are supported by a long-term plan.

There is plenty of guilt in our region. No one is innocent, but as long as we allow the events on the ground to dictate policies, we are in trouble. A serious, well thought out, long-term plan that can become the unflinching focus of the world’s superpower is badly needed to get us out of the quagmire we find ourselves in.

A university professor once pointed out that despite the presence of many higher educational institutes in the Arab world, we have few serious research centers. It all falls back on whether we have the time and money to invest in long-term solutions to our problems and our dreams, rather than waste it all on futile shortcuts.

The past few weeks have shown that Palestinian president Yaser Arafat can’t be put into a predictable box. Just when it was thought that Arafat was on the ropes and going down, he emerged stronger than before. And just when people thought that the up and coming Mohammad Dahlan was down and out (some even predicted that he would be killed if he stepped foot in Ramallah’s Muqata’a) he gets invited to a one on one meeting with Arafat. The first meeting has been followed by a second meeting on Wednesday and the rumor now is that he is being considered again for the position of interior minister within the reform cabinet that Arafat and Abu Ala’a are under pressure to deliver.



It is clear that while Arafat has many cards up his sleeve, he also realizes the limitations that he has especially in the volatile Gaza strip which will undoubtedly benefit if he has someone as influential as Dahlan on his side. For his part Dahlan has also realized that alone he is unable to gain the power he wants.



But if the score between Arafat and Dahlan can be considered a draw, it is still unclear who has come out as the winner between Arafat on the one hand and Abu Maszan and Abu Ala’a on the other hand. The reconciliation between the latter two seems to be the beginning of a reconciliation between Arafat and Abu Mazen. For the same reasons as with Dahlan, Arafat has had to take some steps towards his current and his previous prime ministers. He has given in somewhat to Abu Ala’a in the form of moving around some senior security and police heads ( in consultation with Abu Ala’a). he also made a public appeal to Abu Mazen during his speech at the PLC last week, this appeal was followed up by Arafat appointing Abu Mazen to the inter Palestinian talks in Cairo.



Naturally all this discussion is underscored by the hidden struggle within the Fatah movement for the post Arafat era. At present Arafat seems to be keeping this issue away from the public eye and it is the most talked about issue in Palestinian internal circles. Below is a chart of key players and how they line up:



1. Arafat- still the key player has control over security and indirect control over money. Popular in the street and unpopular with the US and Israel.



2. Abu Al’aa- succeeded in staying in the office of prime minister and has good relations with all parties including the Israelis and Americans and people on the street. He is not on anyone’s veto list but is not the most exciting candidate. His long term membership in Fatah and his cunningness are among his strong points.



3. Abu Mazen has come out the cleanest among the possible replacements of Arafat, he has the support of Israel and the US and the Palestinian elite. His weakness is that he is not cunning enough and his relations with the security leaders (except for Dahlan) are not clear.



4. Dahlan – has strong support in Gaza and with Israelis and Americans (the latter can be both good and bad). His only chance for power is to work behind the scenes by backing one of the leading members of the Fatah central committee.



5. Rajoub- can be a dark horse. He has strong support among the Fatah local leadership especially in the security apparatus (the preventative security mostly which he established and nurtured) he has some support among the rank and file and is accepted by regional powers and the US. Has not been as tainted as Dahlan by his relations with Israel and the US (mostly after his headquarters were shelled by the Israelis in the beginning of the current intifada). His recent close relations with Arafat (he is the secretary of the National Security Council) could help him.



6. Marwan Barghouti another dark horse. His biggest problem is that he is in jail. The Europeans are pushing hard for the Israelis to release him. If that takes place (and how it takes place, possibly as part of the expected prisoner exchange deal with Hizbullah).



7. Abbas Zaki- another dark horse. His strength is that he is a member of the Fatah central committee and a PLC representative from a powerful Hebron family. His recent heading of the Reform Committee at the PLC and at the same time his refusal to be in a public confrontational mood with Arafat has got him some strong points. He is knows well in Arab circles, not so well known with the US or Israel.