오리엔탈리즘, 시오니즘, 테러리즘: 에드워드 사이드의『팔레스타인 문제』

Orientalism, Zionism, and Terrorism: Edward Said’s The Question of Palestine

&nbsp;&nbsp;Edward Said won his critical fame as the author of Orientalism that is held to have heralded the ‘beginning’ of postcolonial studies in Western academy. Since then Said has focused his critical attention on the questions of the Middle East and Palestine in particular. As a Palestinian Arab, Said launches an investigation into the long standing prejudices against Palestine espoused by Western media and ‘liberal’ intellectuals. Especially in The Question of Palestine, Said attempts to foreground the ‘real’ history of Palestine that has been silenced and distorted by dealing with it as an authentic and serious ‘question.’<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;The target of Said’s criticism is Zionism, a myth and ideology that has rationalized ‘the politics of dispossession.’ For Said, Zionism is a political, moral, and religious indulgence for all the violences inflicted on Palestinian people. In order to debunk the seemingly impregnable myth of Zionism, Said draws on the same analogy he used in Orientalism. As he stressed the huge gap between ‘the real Orient&quot; and Orientalism or between ‘place’ and ‘topos,’ Said here explains the relationship between Palestine and Zionism in terms of ‘reality’ and ‘interpretation’ or ‘presence’ and ‘representation.’ Then Said provides a series of historical and statistical documents to prove that Palestine is neither an empty space waiting for the arrival of the chosen people nor a waste land inviting the transplantation of an advanced civilization, but a country with real people and legitimate history.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;Another issue Said tackles in conjunction with Zionism is the problem of terrorism. Said’s attitude toward terrorism is quite ambivalent. While Said never endorses terrorism as such, he argues that Palestine is not the only party responsible for terrorism. For Said, Zionism is itself an ideological terrorism in that it justifies and mystifies the state terrorism of Israel. Moreover, the ultimate cause and leading actor of terrorism is rather Israel, not Palestine. In numerical terms, there is a remarkable asymmetry between what Israel has done to Palestine and what Palestine, in retaliation, has done to Israel.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;But Said is not a champion of Palestinian terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. As an in-between intellectual, Said tries to keep critical balance by directing his attention to the internal problems on Palestine&quot;s part. A conflict of interests both among Arabian countries and among Palestinian peoples is a hindrance to the amicable settlement of the Palestinian question. Especially the bureaucratic and clandestine leadership of PLO becomes a target of Said’s open attack and bitter cynicism. For Said, the only solution to ‘the question of Palestine’ is not self-rule or autonomy but self-determination and independence. And the first step to this solution is an attempt at mutual understanding that acknowledges each other as partner for rational talking.