Solidarity with the Palestinian people and their political organizations.

[rob9443]

Article by the Israeli historian Ilan Pappe

http://www.countercurrents.org/pappe030109.htm

The self-righteousness is a powerful act of self-denial and justification. It explains why the Israeli Jewish society would not be moved by words of wisdom, logical persuasion or diplomatic dialogue. And if one does not want to endorse violence as the means of opposing it, there is only one way forward: challenging head-on this righteousness as an evil ideology meant to cover human atrocities. Another name for this ideology is Zionism and an international rebuke for Zionism, not just for particular Israeli policies, is the only way of countering this self-righteousness. We have to try and explain not only to the world, but also to the Israelis themselves, that Zionism is an ideology that endorses ethnic cleansing, occupation and now massive massacres. What is needed now is not just a condemnation of the present massacre but also delegitimization of the ideology that produced that policy and justifies it morally and politically. Let us hope that significant voices in the world will tell the Jewish state that this ideology and the overall conduct of the state are intolerable and unacceptable and as long as they persist, Israel will be boycotted and subject to sanctions.

Similarly, we may be able to find the popular, as distinct from the high brow academic, way of explaining clearly that Israel's policy -- in the last 60 years -- stems from a racist hegemonic ideology called Zionism, shielded by endless layers of righteous fury. Despite the predictable accusation of anti-Semitism and what have you, it is time to associate in the public mind the Zionist ideology with the by now familiar historical landmarks of the land: the ethnic cleansing of 1948, the oppression of the Palestinians in Israel during the days of the military rule, the brutal occupation of the West Bank and now the massacre of Gaza. Very much as the Apartheid ideology explained the oppressive policies of the South African government, this ideology -- in its most consensual and simplistic variety -- allowed all the Israeli governments in the past and the present to dehumanize the Palestinians wherever they are and strive to destroy them. The means altered from period to period, from location to location, as did the narrative covering up these atrocities. But there is a clear pattern that cannot only be discussed in the academic ivory towers, but has to be part of the political discourse on the contemporary reality in Palestine today

[Brigg57]

FR, Rob,
we can all live in hope, but I'm afraid I'm not holding my breath for Obama. He's made his attitude to Israel crystal-clear. If he acts differently, then and only then will I applaud.

Zionism is the correct word for the reason Israel is launching its attacks. It's a specific ideology, founded by Theodor Herzl in the 1890s, and dedicated to building a national home by Jews for Jews. It's the ideology which led to the expulsion of Palestinian Arabs from Palestine, many of them forced into Gaza and the rest scattered around the Middle East.  The overcrowding and poverty which has resulted in Gaza is a direct result of Zionism, and a fuelling house for violence. If we had been viokently dislodged from our homes in Britain and forced to concentrate in a small area of Northumberland, we would be feeling the same.

I know that Dr Sacks clothes all he says with an aura of wisdom - most religious leaders are very good at doing that, as US Christian leaders blessed the airmen who fired napalm at the Vietnamese - but to equate the Nazi murderers with the Arab victims of Zionism, claiming that he will not hate Germans or Arabs, is taking the biscuit. If he is to be taken seriously by me, then he will be standing with Alexei Sayle at the demonstrations against Israel and sayng the these attacks are not in his name. Anything less is mealy-mouthed.

Instead of expressing disquiet at some of Israel's more extreme actions, I would be looking for him to extend the hand of equality as well as peace to the Palestinian people, There is no other way - it's not Obama or Brown in the end, but Jews and Palestinians on the ground who have to live with each other, and have to work things out. Justice and equality between the two - not the expulsion of Jews or Arabs from their homes - is the only possible way forward, and the only possible protection of jews from the dangers of perpetual war in the whole region, possibly at some point involving nuclear weapons.

[Free Radical]

Brigg

I do not think for one moment that Dr Sacks was suggesting any equivalence between Nazis and Palestinians. Perhaps you have concluded that because the quote lacks sufficient context.

The significance of Jonathan Sacks comments, some years back now, are that he is a pillar of the Orthodox establishment - a conservative Jew, as he himself says. I am not going to defend his views or actions, although I recomend reading of his book because it is deeply thougthful, thought provoking, scholarly and inspiring (not because it is left wing which it certainly is not). But the comments by a conservative rabbi show how deep the doubts about Israeli conduct go. That was all.  He did, after all, suggest that it might be worth his meeting with Abu Hamzar back in 2002, and he did support the two-state solution including support for Jerusalem as a capital for both Israelis and Palestinians.

If we are to make comparisons (which are not always helpful I know) between other conflicts - such as Ireland or South Africa, then perhaps we can see how important can be the role of quite conservative elements in the making of peace - the De Klerks and the Ian Paisleys of this world. So, actually, I do think that people like Jonathan Sacks are very significant figures.

You are right of course that Zionism is a particular political movement. My objection was much more to the use of the word Zion which can mean the whole Jewish people as well as other meanings. But, going back to my earlier point, Zionism is not monolithic and I think we should be as specific as possible in our use of terms. Zionism is no more appealing to me personally than any other nationalism. Basically I am a socialist and a secularist and an internationalist.

[Brigg57]

FR,
my apologies re Dr Sacks. I obviously misunderstood your point.

I notice that Israel has sent in ground troops into Gaza tonight. There can be no military solution to this, nor a solution imposed by the West, two-state or whatever.  Unless there is equality  between Jew and Palestinian, the area will remain a tinderbox. The reason for that lies in the Israeli expulsion of Palestinians from their land, and the continuing attempt by Israel to assert conquest rather than equality and friendship.

The protests in the UK today are part of an increasingly successful demonstration to Israel that its continuing military responses have no international support. When conservative Jews like Dr Sacks, and significant elements of the US Jewish community, join those protests, then a serious move towards ending violence will be made. I'm afraid I agree with Rob about the likelihood of that at the moment, but the protests have a very real meaning. Voices are being raised that Israel is isolated, and that will count in the end.

[Free Radical]

I agree Brigg.

Unfortunately, like you I think, I am not optimistic about what Obama will bring to the table for the Middle East. We can but hope, but the signs are not so good. One should not prejudge perhaps, but the risk is that he might, like LBJ, do some good things at home but still be tied to a conventional right-wing foreign policy. I hope I am wrong.

[rob9443]

You are almost certainly right. America's foreign policy is unlikely to change regardless of whether a dumbo or a donkey is in the White House.  Eventually the eagle will either go bankrupt or have its tail feathers pulled out by the Chinese dragon but until then it will be business as usual, and the Zionists will be free to carry on murdering Arabs with impunity.

[Free Radical]

Well Barak Obama is certainly no dumbo. Also, I would be cautious about forecasting the demise of the US prematurely. Some years ago people were confidently forecasting Japan overtaking the US, and look what happened. China is certainly growing at a rapid rate, and looks to continue growing albeit slower, when other countries are in recession. But all manner of things might happen, especially political instability in China. So we cannot be certain about Chinese ascendency or when it might occur. Though clearly China is a growing power and has bought up a lot of the US, and holds a lot of dollars.

Even if the US is overtaken economically during the 21st Century it will still be a power to reckon with for a very long time (unless something quite unforseeable happens).

But I suppose the other consideration is that Israel has very little oil, and other Middle Eastern states have an awful lot, and at some point the US might see some self interest in reorientating its foreign policy rather more towards Arab states.

In all of this, and in condemning Israeli actions, the last thing I want to see is the destruction of the Israeli population. Such hatred is building up, predictably, that I fear that reasonable voices are being marginalised in a terrible polarisation - between those who think Israel is right come what may, and those who want it destroyed. I see this on the left too I'm afraid. It is all too easy to understand this process and it's all to easy to understand hatred. The difficult thing is to work for peace.

Foremost in our minds are of course the one and a half million people in Gaza - without water, without power, without food and without medicine, and under fire. There is a risk of a terrible catastrophe unfolding unless the rest of the world steps in quickly to stop this.

I have written to my own MP to urge stronger government action and I would hope other comrades might consider doing the same. MPs need to feel a sense of pressure over this.

[rob9443]

This was posted on the comments section of Vineyard of the Saker's blog
...

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4046811478707691837&postID=6946683294228602653

[Please post and forward]

An Open Letter From Anti-Zionist Jewish Youth in Canada

**If you would like to sign on to this letter, send an email to
antizionistjews@gmail.com with your name and city**

January 5th, 2009

Like much of the world, we have spent the last week watching in shock and
disgust as Israel continues its assault on the Gaza Strip. With the body
count rising and a new tragedy in full bloom, we feel that it is important
to speak out as Jewish youth in Canada and to denounce what Israel is
doing in our name. The Jewish diaspora is diverse and divided on its
positions on the state of Israel's policies. At this juncture in history,
as Israel has committed its worst massacre in Gaza since it began its
illegal occupation in 1967, we feel that it is crucial that Jews speak out
and denounce Israel's actions that amount to no more than war crimes
committed by an apartheid state.

As Jewish youth, we are diverse, but we are unified in our solidarity with
our Palestinian brothers and sisters in Gaza.

Some of us are students. We are outraged by the bombing of the Islamic
University in Gaza city, as well as other civilian infrastructure such as
hospitals and mosques.

Some of us are Arab-Jews and people of colour. We stand against Israel's
racism, which has been enshrined in Israeli law, and privileges its Jewish
citizens over its non-Jewish ones.This apartheid state views Palestinians
as an expendable people, no more than collateral damage.

Some of us are queer. We reject Israel’s branding of itself as the only
safe place for queer people in the Middle-East while it targets gay and
lesbian Palestinians and renders life unsafe for millions of others.

Some of us are Israelis living in Canada. We are calling for a
solidarity that stretches beyond borders and nationalities. Israel's
violent actions will only serve to further isolate the state and its
citizens from the rest of the world. By calling itself a Jewish state and
committing war crimes in the name of Jews everywhere, Israel makes the
world even less safe for Jews, leading to an increase in animus towards
Jewish people around the world.

Even though there have been approximately 100 Palestinian deaths for every
Israeli killed by rocket fire, we recognize that Israeli Apartheid also
leads to Israeli casualties. The blame for these deaths lies with Israel –
if there were no occupation and no apartheid policies, there would be no
rocket fire. If Israel, the world's fourth largest military power, is
concerned about its citizens, it would abandon its apartheid policies and
seek out justice for the Palestinian people.

In 2005, Palestinian civil society put out a clear call for
international support through a non-violent campaign of Boycott,
Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) similar to that carried out against the
apartheid regime of South Africa. Now, with the people of Gaza being
crushed by Israeli bombs, manufactured in the USA and launched with
Canada's blessing, it is more important than ever for Jewish communities
throughout the world to take up this BDS campaign in order to end
Israel's apartheid system, which makes life unsafe for millions of Jews
and Palestinians alike.

Let us not be silent bystanders while humanity suffers. Let us raise our
voices, as Jewish youth, and demand a single, democratic state, with equal
rights for everyone in Israel/Palestine.

Ours is a generation that is committed to ending Middle-East violence by
opposing all forms of discrimination, calling for a just peace within the
entire region, and condemning Zionism to the dustbin of history.

Free Gaza, Free Palestine,


Jenny Peto, Toronto
Aaron Lakoff, Montreal
Max Silverman, Montreal
Rachel Gurofsky, Peterborough
Simon Gurofsky, Ottawa
Zohar Melinek, Montreal
Claire Hurtig, Montreal
Ben Saifer, Ottawa
Brook Thorndycraft, Toronto
Joel Balsam, Montreal
David Mandelzys, Toronto
Reena Katz, Toronto
Mia Amir, Vancouver
Matthew Shuster, Kingston
Avi Grenadier, Kingston
Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, Waterloo
Melissa Harendorf, Montreal
Jeff Hiemstra, Toronto
Sacha Moiseiwitsch, Vancouver
Jake Javanshir, Toronto
Noam Lapid, Montreal
Stephen Kamnitzer, Toronto
Naava Smolash, Vancouver
Tamara Herman, Victoria
Ryan Katz-Rosene, Ottawa
Sarah Fuchs, Montreal
Daniel Thau-Eleff, Winnipeg
Deborah Rachlis, Ottawa
Marie L. Belliveau, St. Catharines
Sarah Kardash, Sackville
David Taub Bancroft, Vancouver
Kinneret Sheetreet, Montreal
Rachel Marcuse, Vancouver
Lisa Barrett, Bowen Island
Maisie Jacobson, Montreal
Max Tennant,Vancouver
Noah Fine, Vancouver
David Hill, Vancouver
Corey Balsam, Ottawa
Lee Skinner, Vancouver
Britt Lehmann-Bender, Toronto
Alexis Mitchell, Toronto

[Free Radical]

A statement from the Jewish Socialists Group has been reproduced on the Labourhome site at http://www.labourhome.org/comments/2009/1/4/173138/2179/14#14

[rob9443]

Latest heroic achievement by the glorious IDF

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7814054.stm

[Brigg57]

Thanks,Rob,

the Israeli state really doesn't give a damn, does it?

and it really doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out what the Palestinians will do, does it?

When Israeli children die in retaliation, their death will be cheapened by the hypocrisy of 'the war on terror' whch will come out of the White House and Downing St.

[rob9443]

Guess what? The hasbara machine has already swung into the same sick routine it ALWAYS adopts whenever Israel is caught out in a particularly horrendous atrocity. A spokeswoman (yes, some hard-faced Amazon is always wheeled out in such occasions) will say that the matter is still under investigation the results of an 'initial investigation' showed that 'the Khamas" had fired from the building which they had previously booby trapped (under the eyes of the UN???). Therfore, as always, Israel had 'no choice' but to bomb the place but the blame had to go to 'the khamas'.

Really monstrous stuff. We've seen it before in Qana (twice) and the Gaza beach bombing a few years back. No doubt we will see it again, because the sick thing is - it works. The vile US govt has already said that 'not enough details are available and we should not jump to conclusions'.

Bastards.

[Brigg57]

News you don't see on CNN..anti-war demonstrations in Israel, thanks to Charlie Pottins for these youtube links -


<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHi2F67_uRo&feature=related>

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB23y9WQOWE&feature=related>

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpeC7P-2LfU>

[Brigg57]

sorry, I should mention, Charlie got those links from Moshe Machover, another brave anti-Zionist jew.

[Free Radical]

Professor Avi Shlaim - Oxford Professor of International Relations has an excellent analysis of the 40-year background to Israel's assault on Gaza in the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine

This account from a man who once served in the Israeli army, is one of the best I have read. Avi Shlaim says he has never questioned the legitimacy of the state of Israel within its pre-1967 borders, but "What I utterly reject is the Zionist colonial project beyond the Green Line."

He says does not exempt Hamas from criticism for fhe launching of rockets against Israel before the six-month ceasefire, but says that Israel's response to "the pinpricks of rocket attacks was totally disproportionate" going on to say that "Israel's entire record is one of unbridled and unremitting brutality towards the inhabitants of Gaza."

Most importantly he sets the current attack on Gaza in the context of a masterly analysis of the historical background and Israel's cynical attempts to undermine any peace process "Israel had a choice and it chose land over peace." He exposes Israel's policy of divide and rule towards the Palestinians, including their support in the 1980s for the nascent Hamas "in order to weaken Fatah." He ends up concluding that it is "difficult to resist the conclusion that [Israel] has become a rogue state."

I recommend reading the article in full http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine, but here are some quotes:
"Gaza is a classic case of colonial exploitation in the post-colonial era. Jewish settlements in occupied territories are immoral, illegal and an insurmountable obstacle to peace."

"As always, mighty Israel claims to be the victim of Palestinian aggression but the sheer asymmetry of power between the two sides leaves little room for doubt as to who is the real victim. This is indeed a conflict between David and Goliath but the Biblical image has been inverted - a small and defenceless Palestinian David faces a heavily armed, merciless and overbearing Israeli Goliath."

He concludes:
"This brief review of Israel's record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism - the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it. Israel's real aim is not peaceful coexistence with its Palestinian neighbours but military domination. It keeps compounding the mistakes of the past with new and more disastrous ones. Politicians, like everyone else, are of course free to repeat the lies and mistakes of the past. But it is not mandatory to do so."

[Johnnywas]

I want to draw attention back to the use of force on both sides of the conflict.

The Israelis have constantly miscalculated as to the damage that these incursions do to the prospect of peace in the Region and I agree it is time that European countries like Britain were more unequivocal in their condemnation.

However Hamas also bears cupability by launching repeated attacks at targets in Israel and glorifying assaulst which while they may be targeted at miltitary instalations kill Israeli civilians

That does not advance the cause of Interanational Justice, at all

The reality of the Region is few of those people posted into boxes labelled palestinian or israeli have any reason to choose armed conflict.

There isn't on either side a "cause" which merits another death of an arab or Israeli

the only people who benefit from that are generals and warlords

Whats needed is a ceasefire and a negotiated settlement

The aim of that should be provide all people with security and economic  opportunity

I imagine that it would take the form of a two state solution but frankly whether the Land is arab or Israeli is unimportant. a settled people at peace can rewrite the constitution and redraw the map as they wish   

My prognosis is that it is entirely possible but that it will take time and patience to build a prosperous community in Israel and Gaza. 

So no.. it time to ditch gesture politics and shroud waving in favour of working class solidarity

       

 

[Free Radical]

Johnnywas

I agree with your sentiments entirely. However when you write
The Israelis have constantly miscalculated as to the damage that these incursions do to the prospect of peace in the Region that presupposes that the Israelis want peace. But I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the Israeli government has not been serious (perhaps at least since Rabin - who maybe was murdered because he was serious) in its desire for peace. Of course the Israeli people are another matter and many probably want peace, but they are fed a constant stream of lies, and I believe the peace movement in Israel is now very weak. The governing parties have probably launched this assault on Gaza at this precise moment in order to improve their chances of re-election.

Why does the Israeli government not really want peace? Because (as Avi Shlaim explains in his excellent article that I referenced above) they prefer to be seizing land instead. Similarly the United States seems very happy with the situation. So there is, to my mind, no pressure for peace in Israel.

Whether surrounding Arab regimes care all that much about the situation is another question. Egypt is in massive receipt of US aid and risks falling to Islamists.

You also say 'the only people who benefit from that are generals and warlords ' but I think that omits the Israeli politicians and others in the Israeli establishment who gain from perpetuating this war and this shameful oppression of the Palestinians - because they want more of the West Bank, they don't want to relinquish it, nor do they want to share Jerusalem.

Peace can only happen when there is a will for peace, and, to my mind, in recent years, Israel has not shown that will for peace and has worked to undermine the agreements it has signed, just as it broke the recent 'truce' with Hamas (again as Avi Shlaim explains).

You are right that Hamas' firing of rockets is not excusable (and I don't think they are generally targeted at military installations because they are mostly home-made and not targetable at anything in particular). They have their own constituency to appease too. But the fundamental equation behind the relationship between Israel and Gaza is so grotesquely unfair that we can not imagine that we are looking at an agreement between equals.

A peace, which I would very much like to see - and I am certainly not someone who wishes the destruction of Israel and its population - needs to be wanted by all sides, and it needs to be fair, just, equitable. All of this is quite possible if the will is there.

[rob9443]

I agree FR that is exactly why Rabin was murdered. The tragedy was not only the event itself but Peres' catastrophic handling of the situation.  He should have seized the moment, called and emergency election and confronted the right head on. He should have spelt out that the two state solution would mean all the settlements removed and East Jerusalem as Palestine's capital. At that point the Israeli public was so shocked by their iconic PM being murdered by a fellow Jew that the Zionist far right could have been crushed at a stroke, especially with Clinton there to hold the ring.

Instead he wimped out and was so terrified of being accused by the Right of making political capital out of Rabin's murder that he delayed, lost the momentum and got snarled up in Lebanon finally presiding over the shelling of a UN camp just to prove how tough he was. And Netanyahu won the election anyway...

Deja vu...

[Brigg57]

FR, Jwas
FR
that was a good, thoughtful article by Avi Schlaim. If more Israelis and non-Israeli Jews are starting to think like this, it can only be to the good. I am convinced that only when the Jewish communityis revolted by israel's brutality can a genuine peace process begin.
On one point, I am dubious. Prof. Schlaim is fine about the Israel's pre-1967 borders, though he does accept that the expulsion of the Palestinians to Gaza involved "a monumental act of injustice". He also recognises a big change after 1967, when Israel moved from a defensive to an expansionist mode (I once talked to someone who had served in the Israeli army in June, 1967, who told me that there was a real change of mood in Israel amounting to arrogance after their victory).
The problem is that to establish a Jewish national Home for a more-or-less homogeneous group after 2000 years of exile was bound to involve a monumental act of injustice. It was rather a long time, and the existing Palestininan population had lived and worked their land in palestine for centuries. Tension and insecurity was built into the situation. Worse, Israel's 1967 borders were drawn by war - the extended as far as israel's armies were able to maintain them after the 1947-49 war with Egypt etc. They were indefensible against a determined enemy - there were only a dozen miles wide in some parts. To return to the pre-1967 frontiers is asking for trouble, and I don't see Israel agreeing. The post-1967 fronmtiers are more defensible, but again have tension and insecurity built into them. The injustice to Gaza's Palestinainas are more than magnified by absorbing the West bank. You don't need to be a fundamentalist Zionist to want to make the West Bank safe for Israel for the foreseeable future.
The two-state solution, where the borders are finally drawn, are tactics in a propaganda struggle. It may be the only solution possible, unhappy as such solutions often are. However, justice and equality, not a deal, should be our concern. A deal may emerge (I'm not too confident that it will), but it's not up to us to tell Jew and Arab where and how they should live. Wer can only give support to the victims of aggression, and demand that the West's support of Israel as a rogue state (I liiked Prof Schlaim's acceptance of this category) be stopped, and that Israel itself obey the internationally recognised rules on how states ought to behave.
If Prof Schlaim accepts that the establishment of the Gaza settlement was an act of monumental injustice, then some sort of solution must involve a rectification of that injustice - I can't see any other than Jew and Arab living in the same land with equality of access to that land's resources, whatever the state-system whihc eventually emerges.

Jwas,
radical islam is not what I would want to see, but the Palestinians of Gaza, and a substantial number within Lebanon, have opted for it. The only reason i can see is that Hamas and Hezbollah offer resistance to Israel, and not mere submission. Unless you think people should bear oppression and sufffer passively, then they are going to fight, and fighting usually involves tactics and indifference to human life which we would rather not see if we can at all avoid it. However, international justice is not served by identifying the violence of the oppressor with the violence of the oppressed. If the oppressed fight back, then I think we should show solidarity with them. Not 100% unthinking agreement, but solidarity.

[Johnnywas]

FR

You are certainly right that Israeli politicians are culpable for the violence - nationalism has an easy appeal to insecure electorates - and there actions have made the position much worse   

Briggs 

We agree that we live in an unequal world and the palestinians are not equitably treated. However that the situation across the Globe. Few advocate violence to solve the disparities which exist in the UK and few argue that the third world should resolve its problems by arms. I'm not sure why Palestine should be the exception. A place where class struggles and inequality is best resolved through violence. Indeed its not.

Its possible to be angry about injustice and to distance yourself from those who attack soft targets. Nelson Mandela, Ghandi  both managed to avoid indiscriminate killling. Yasser Arafat was also constrained by a sense of what was right and what was wrong. The PLO was ruthlessly determined and not afraid of confrontation but it didn't send out  snipers and suicide bombers 

Authr Nelsen on the Red Pepper site describes Hamas as pragmatists - pursuing diplomocracy but underpinned by threat of force. "The Gun and Olive branch gambit". Its not clear to me that is the case. If it were, there would be obvious ideological break between Hamas and Fatah.  It seems to me wishful thinking. It is not the type of langauge Hamas uses to its supporters. Hamas is opposed to a two state solution. But that is the only basis I can see for a negotiated settlement. 

That is not to say that Hamas is not a possible partner in a peace deal. Isreal should talk to the PA leaders. We should however challenge all leaders to commit to a negotiated deal and to call a ceasefire.
 

j