MAY 5, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size

In April, the southern Israeli town of Sderot hosted its eighth annual French film festival, which was an achievement more impressive than it sounds. Sderot is a small town, and it is also a poor one; it has only 20,000 residents, many of them immigrants from former Soviet Asian republics.
But Sderot’s biggest challenge may be the missiles. For the past ten years, not long after the beginning of the Second Intifada in 2000, Hamas has launched thousands of Qassam missiles over the border from Gaza, barely a mile away. Qassams are typically homemade—70 pounds of steel inserted with nails and bolts, as in the bombs used in suicide attacks. When a strike is imminent, a calm female voice announces over loudspeakers, “Color Red, Color Red,” giving residents 15 seconds to run to one of the many shelters around town.
Some two-dozen residents of Sderot and the surrounding area have been killed in attacks over the past decade, and hundreds have been wounded. But the rockets’ true threat is their ability to terrorize. Much of Sderot’s middle class has left. Thousands of residents have been treated for trauma; a generation of children suffers from stuttering and bed-wetting. Sderot, then, is Israel’s nightmare—the anti-Tel Aviv. Here there is no pretending you can avoid the siege.
After the Gaza war of 2009, the assaults became less frequent, but missiles still fall intermittently. When that happens, the Sderot Cinematheque moves screenings to a smaller theater with thicker walls and a steel roof. Invariably, attendance declines, sometimes for days or even weeks. Still, Benny Cohen, the Cinematheque’s director, insists on running the theater as though it were in Tel Aviv. For him, the Cinematheque is part of Sderot’s battle for survival, and so he is constantly devising new projects and inviting foreign directors to town, such as the Coen brothers, who are coming to Israel for all of one day this month. His next big event is a film festival about peripheral areas around the world. “It’s the only free festival in Israel,” he says proudly. “You must come—it will be a real celebration.”
Sderot has long had a history of improbable cultural vitality. “It looks like a dump, but there’s so much creativity here,” says Laura Bialis, a documentary filmmaker from Los Angeles who moved to Sderot almost four years ago. “Every teenager I met seemed to want to be a rock singer or an actor.” She decided to make a film about Sderot’s rock musicians, and fell in love with one of them, Avi Vaknin, who proposed to her in an air raid shelter. “There wasn’t a Qassam attack,” she explains. “Avi was just being dramatic.”
The guiding spirit of Sderot’s rock scene is Chaim Uliel, whose band, Sfatayim (Lips), brought Moroccan music into the mainstream in the late 1980s and nurtured a generation of local musicians. They went on to found bands like Tipex (White Out) and Knesiyat Hasechel (Cathedral of the Mind), which created a fusion between Western rock and Sephardic ethnic music. Don’t just mimic Western trends, Uliel urged his protégés, take the music you know from the synagogue and the home.
Two years ago, however, Uliel left Sderot and moved to a town near Tel Aviv. The news was so shocking that the country’s largest newspaper, Yediot Aharonot, devoted the cover of its weekend magazine to an interview with Uliel, “the symbol of Sderot.” Uliel explained that he’d tried for years to turn Sderot into a center for Israeli music, but no one had offered help. He spoke bitterly of how Israeli society treated Sderot like a poor relation. Would the government, he asked, have allowed Tel Aviv to be under rocket assault for years before launching a military operation?
Living under constant threat of death is hardly Sderot’s fate alone, people in town remind me. The Galilee was hit by a month of rockets during the 2006 Lebanon war. Hamas’s reach now extends beyond Sderot; almost all the recent rockets from Gaza were directed at Beersheba and Ashkelon. The question of Sderot’s long-term viability on the Gaza border is also the question facing Israel: Can a modern Jewish state continue to thrive beside Hamas and Hezbollah, and, perhaps, Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood?
Nearly everywhere I went in Sderot, I saw signs of its vulnerability and of its resilience. The government is adding a fortified room to every apartment and house in town. Scaffolding covers squat apartment blocks, and cube-like structures are being affixed to red-roofed private homes. “The message to residents is, ‘Get used to it, Qassams are your future,’” says Bialis, who has since moved to Tel Aviv. Many shelters I saw were painted with cartoon murals—the work of New York graffiti artists who came to lift morale. In a playground, long concrete tubes painted to resemble caterpillars double as shelters.
In recent years, dozens of religious, Zionist families have moved here to strengthen Sderot. There’s also Migvan, an “urban kibbutz” of 20 families. Migvan’s founder, Nomika Zion, calls Hamas a “terrible regime,” but she opposes Israel’s siege of Gaza and believes that Israel must reconcile with Hamas. “There are pragmatists in Hamas,” she insists. If we were speaking in Tel Aviv, I would dismiss this as the kind of naïveté that has alienated so many Israelis from the left. But living on the Gaza border, Zion reminds me why the Israeli left is so moving: How else will we survive in the Middle East without hope?
After a year, Uliel returned to Sderot. The municipality offered to fund a center for Moroccan Jewish culture, and he is once again nurturing musicians. A new generation of aspiring stars rehearses in Sderock, a combined music center and air raid shelter.
I met Uliel recently in one of the town’s few decent cafés. With his black hair combed back in a wet wave, Uliel—now in his early fifties—still looks like a teenager. He remains pessimistic about Sderot’s chances for a cultural renaissance. When the Qassams stopped falling on a daily basis after the Gaza war, he notes, government subsidies and foreign donations declined.
One of his students, Ran, a guitarist, drops by. Ran began his singing career at age seven, in a choir started by Uliel. Now he plays in a band called Red Out, a play on the “Color Red” alert. “Why didn’t you choose a Hebrew name?” asks Chaim. “The name has a connection to Sderot,” Ran points out, a little defensively.
I ask Ran what it’s like to grow up in Sderot. “Some of my friends are a little crazy,” he admits. “It’s hard for me to write happy music.” But he insists that the siege has invigorated his generation. “Sderot has freed us in a way,” he says. “It’s much easier for my generation to talk about emotions, to write songs with intensity. And here you’re part of a musical tradition. I’ve grown up being taught and encouraged by some of the best musicians in Israel. It’s much better to be a young rock musician in Sderot than in Tel Aviv.”
Yossi Klein Halevi is a contributing editor for The New Republic. This article originally ran in the May 26, 2011, issue of the magazine.
Follow @tnr on Twitter.
16 comments
Very intriguing article about how Israeli are coping with missile attacks from Gaza yet trying to conduct their lives and carry on as best as they can. I sympathize with them. As a young man I served as a medical corpsman in Vietnam at a hospital. We were in the rear with the gear. But we were attacked three or four times during the Tet Offensive. So I have experienced rocket attacks. And even though the homemade rockets from Hamas are inaccurate and imprecise for a specific target, they are very effective weapons to terrorize civilians. Defenseless civilians, I may add. When Americans, who are critical of Israel and are leftist in their opinions, discuss the continuing war against the Israelis, because they have spent their entire lives as civilians, their perceptions about war are based upon their personal experiences. So they see this monolithic state, Israel, with a preponderance of its military arsenal versus a rag-tag group of militants firing their homemade missiles into Israel. But what they seem to miss in their criticism of Israel is exactly what you pointed out in your report. At least that's how I see it portrayed in the media. Whether or not civilians are injured is only one factor in Hamas's strategy. They have terrorized the Israeli civilians. And I assured you, based upon my tour of duty, you feel terror during a missile attack. I wish there could be a viable two-state solution for the civilians in Gaza and Israel. But I remain a pessimistic optimist at best. Perhaps I am frozen in time given my experiences as a young man. I saw the human face of war at the hospital. And I would not wish on my worst enemy. But I really enjoyed your article. You gave a human face to the Israeli civilians.
- rewiredhogdog
May 14, 2011 at 2:21pm
YKH neglects to mention that Hamas has (a) greatly improved the range and lethality of the Qassam rockets; and (b) has augmented its arsenal with other, imported rockets and missiles that meet military specifications. For example, about a month ago, Hamas or Islamic Jihad fired a Kornet anti-tank rocket (from inside Gaza) at a clearly marked yellow school bus outside a kibbutz near the Gaza border, killing the one passenger still on the bus (a 16 year old boy). The Kornet is a state-of-the-art Russian made anti-tank missile that is capable of penetrating the armor of a Merkava IV tank (Israel's newest & best tank). They are also quite expensive (according to my son, an ex-IDF tank commander). Although YKH quotes the one oddball lefty who organized the urban kibbutz in Sderot and remains there (to her credit), he should have also mentioned that the left-wing Meretz & Labor parties who in the passed received much electoral support from the far left wing kibbutzim scattered around the the Gaza envelope, took a shellacking and lost much of their support in favor of more center or right wing parties. The residents of those kibbutzim felt "mugged" by the reality of the rocket attacks etc. emanating from the Gaza Strip after the uprooting and destruction of the Israeli communities of Gush Katif and voted accordingly (prior to the destruction of Gush Katif, the Israeli left had always blamed the rocket attacks on Sderot & the kibbutzim on the existence of the settlements & if they were removed, all would be well). Shavu'a Tov -- שבוע טוב Hershel Ginsburg Efrata / Jerusalem
- ginzy
May 14, 2011 at 6:02pm
I am less optimistic than I was yesterday.
- Sophia
May 15, 2011 at 8:07pm
“I am less optimistic than I was yesterday.” You must be referring to the media reports of the so called “Palestinian demonstrations” (assaults really on Israel’s borders from Syria, Lebanon, Egypt (Gaza) and Jordan. The media will always resort to the use of descriptive terms which make the assaults on Israel seem merely a “civil rights” affair. Moreover, while some in the media are familiar with the notion that the observer always changes (influences) the nature of the event they seldom apply this maxim to themselves. Were these really civil demonstrations? Weren’t they organized by regimes whose tolerances for civil demonstrations in their own countries are barely tolerated? Hasn’t the Syrian government been shooting down hundreds if not thousands of peaceful demonstrators against their own regime? Yet, it was reported mostly without comment that when Israeli troops shot a number of “demonstrators” who acted less than peaceful by assaulting the border of another country the Syrian government called it a “grave crime.” The Palestinian demonstrations against the existence of the Jewish State are warfare by another name. Their aim is to first convince the media that Israel is the “aggressor” (by merely existing) and second to delegitimize whatever action Israel takes in self-defense. The media by not reporting the meaning of these assaults and by concentrating on only one side of the historical events (the refugees were for no reason “ejected” these Arab from Israel) are being complicit in this next phase of the war against the Jewish State. Those of us who care about Israel need to insist that the media expend their coverage by including in their narrative the Arab League’s rejection of the UN partition plan in 1948, by the Arabs, at that time, assault on the nascent Jewish State from within and without. They need to report on what has been called the Jewish Naqba the ejection of hundreds of thousands of Jews from Arab lands which the Israel took in while the Arab countries refused to take in the Arabs of Palestine who fled the war which they supported. The media also needs to remind its audience about the ongoing assaults on Arab citizens in many Arab countries whose only crime is to demand some say in how their country is being governed.
- arnon
May 15, 2011 at 9:03pm
It isn't just the media reports - it's the events themselves. Violent attacks and incursions on Israel's borders - The one good thing: "right of return" is no longer being hidden, part of a secret agenda. Nobody had been talking openly about that. Now, the idea that millions of Arabs should "return" to Israel is being discussed in mainstream media articles, where at least people can see what's truly intended. All along, the "two state solution" has been promoted as the solution to "violence in the Middle East," which is absurd on two levels. First, that "the Middle East" has been defined by the Arab/Israeli conflict instead of that conflict being seen as a symptom of far larger problems; secondly, that the two state solution is no solution until the "Palestinian right of return" is addressed and seen for what it is: a core principle to the Arabs and not just an aside. Also, it should now be impossible to ignore the fact that many people in the Arab world really do not want Israel to exist, period, despite protestations to the contrary. Of course this is what realists have been saying all along. But, we've led to believe that "the roadmap," rehabilitating Arafat, etc, would lead to peace, that land for peace would lead to peace also; when it appears increasingly obvious to me that this is nonsense. That being the case, what to do? It is useless to base further efforts at peacemaking on false assumptions. Maybe that is why Mitchell quit.
- Sophia
May 16, 2011 at 12:27am
Sophia "It isn't just the media reports - it's the events themselves." I agree, but I was discussing the media report on this week's events. All events are part of an historical continuum and the media is very poor on bringing up that history. "Violent attacks and incursions on "Israel's borders -" I suspect that this was a freak event in as much as Israel while prepared for military attacks was unprepared for civilians from Syria trying to cross en masse. I would be surprised if Israel doesn't reinforce its borders with higher barriers and other obstacles.
- arnon
May 16, 2011 at 1:07am
Well Sophia I must say that you have far greater intellectual honesty than many other liberals who comment on the I-P conflict and reflexively blame Israel when things just don't seem to work out as they predicted and promised (see Yossi Beilin for starters; and take Tom Friedman --- please). In short, welcome to the club of the mugged ones (Aaron David Miller is a recent addition to the club). So now the problem is one of how to best manage the situation and there, reasonable people can differ but discuss the issue. BTW, one other pooh-bah of punditry who may also be on the verged of joining the mugged-ones (if he has not already done so) is Jeff Goldberg of The Atlantic. See his recent blog post on the Syrian invasion of the Golan (here) and his obvious cognitive dissonance on the naive and / or distorted reporting of the story by his buddy, Ethan Bonner of the allegedly august and ostensibly omniscient NY Times. Also worth reading is Goldberg's cover story in The Atlantic on the Arab (maybe) Spring (here). As to what Israel is going to do about the borders, the other attempts at invasion, from Lebanon, Gaza, & Jordan were squelched. The only question is the Golan-Syria border which until yesterday was the quietest most peaceful of Israel's frontiers for around 37 years. The fence will obviously be greatly upgraded (currently its about the same quality of the fence you would have in your backyard) and more technology & troops will be deployed there at least in the near term (more reserve duty for my son). And if elections are held in the near future (nothing planned but if) what remains of the Israeli "peace camp" will likely lose even more electoral strength as the credibility of their premises, positions, and analyses disintegrates even further. hg
- ginzy
May 16, 2011 at 5:47am
Debunking (not deconstructing, which is a futile exercise) the nakba narrative: http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_3_nakba.html
- arnon
May 16, 2011 at 10:29pm
Here is the latest lie about the Nakba, by the President of the Nakba committee for the abolition of the Jewish State: Can a liar be also a hypocrite? Both the liar and the hypocrite deceive, but one deceives others while the other can be said also to deceive oneself. Is Mahmoud Abbas a liar or just a hypocrite? I would guess he is a bold faced liar: “It is important to note that the last time the question of Palestinian statehood took center stage at the General Assembly, the question posed to the international community was whether our homeland should be partitioned into two states. In November 1947, the General Assembly made its recommendation and answered in the affirmative. Shortly thereafter, Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs to ensure a decisive Jewish majority in the future state of Israel, and Arab armies intervened. War and further expulsions ensued.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/17/opinion/17abbas.html And what about the NY Times, why did it allow itself to be used in this way by Abbas the liar? Couldn’t they go through their archives and see that their own reporting at the time did not match this nonsense?
- arnon
May 17, 2011 at 12:37am
Arnon, Your surprise at the NY Times pre-supposes a belief that the Times is intellectually honest; such a belief is simply not warranted. First and foremost the Times is politically correct, and their unedited publication of abu Mazen's' rant is a good example of the law of nature that political correctness is inversely proportional to factual or historical correctness (a.k.a. ginzy's law), especially when it comes anything involving Israel. Abu Mazen has long since discovered that he could say whatever he wants and the progressobabbelians that dominate the media and culture will simply bow their heads to the "correct" narrative. It will be interesting to see if anyone calls the Times and / or abu Mazen on their Orwellian revisionism of history. Jeff Goldberg might at The Atlantic, assuming he can overcome the extreme cognitive dissonance of having to criticize the Times twice in one week (Goldberg worships at the altar of the Sulzbergers). I am sure the media watchdog groups like CAMERA and HonestReporting.com will call out the troops on this one. Hershel Ginsburg Jerusalem / Efrata
- ginzy
May 17, 2011 at 5:45am
Well Ginzi, I do think the do try to be intellectually honest. They have their biases, they don't cover some stories for political reason and they even published reporters who take liberties with the truth. But this is what what all papers do. But to publish an op ed piece with an obvious lie which their own records could unmask, this is new. There is something else going on here, the paper either decided to publish the piece lies and all because Abbas does argue for peace at the end and a two State solution, no matter how dishonestly the argument is framed, or perhaps it wanted to expose the kinds of lies leaders take for granted. The next few days will tell what is going on. The worst thing that can happen is for people to just shrug their shoulders and accept that the NY Times is a dishonest paper and the lies it tells are no big deal.
- arnon
May 17, 2011 at 9:00am
Don't get me wrong... I don't think that the NY Times' lies or inaccuracies or misrepresentations are no big deal. Quite the contrary. Because of its pretensions to be the "paper of record" it's a problem. And because many people (although the number seems to be shrinking) dogmatically buy into the Times being an accurate representation of reality and a paper of record it's a very big problem. The difference is that having followed the way it reports and distorts the Arab-Israeli conflict for many years, I have long since disabused myself of the notion that the Times is to journalism what the 10 Commandments are to Western ethics. So I am no longer surprised when the Times is caught with its pants down. It's not news to me. However I am surprised by others who are surprised. For the most part I have stopped reading the paper, preferring a balanced combo of The Washington Post and the WSJ, with occasional fill-ins elsewhere. And believe it or not, I have not been struck by lightning for abandoning the Times. hg
- ginzy
May 17, 2011 at 9:34am
Arnon, as I expected, The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg (here) has weighed-in (in part, with more to come maybe) on abu Mazen's distorted NY Times OpEd. Goldberg has an interesting quote from an earlier Abu Mazen piece contradicting what he wrote this time. Worth the read. hg
- ginzy
May 17, 2011 at 10:13am
Here is one for you, Ginzy. The Nakba Queen: http://www.memri.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/2934.htm From the interview: "Sara Jaber: “92 years. That’s 92. I lived through the British era, and I lived through the massacre of the Jews in Hebron. We, the people of Hebron, massacred the Jews. My father massacred them, and brought back some stuff…” Interviewer: “Thank you very much.”"
- arnon
May 17, 2011 at 10:55am
And thanks for the Golbergt piece, Ginzy.
- arnon
May 17, 2011 at 10:57am
"... political correctness is inversely proportional to factual or historical correctness (a.k.a. ginzy's law)" This is an interesting variation on Mick Hartley's law: "that ignorance expands to fill the space available.
- noga1
May 17, 2011 at 11:44am