NOVANEWS
Dear Friends,
The first of the 8 items below is a call for help from the United States flotilla boat, the Audacity of Hope. Its electricity was cut off where it is docked in Greece and those on it are sweltering and wanting to leave—but with the boat. Please phone and write to the addresses given below to help them have the electricity restored, and more important, to have the boat released.
The following 3 items are about the new anti-boycott law passed by the Israeli Knesset last night. Interestingly, there was more attention to it in the major English language newspapers than to either the flotilla or the flytilla.
I have selected just one of the reports—the one in Al Jazeera—which seemed to me to be the fullest. Accompanying it are links to some of the other reports, just in case you want to read more. The SF Chronicle one is very brief and not worth much, but as the Chronicle seldom includes anything beyond the confines of the SF Bay Area, or at the most the United States, I include also its link as a kind of oddity.
Item 2, then, is the Al Jazeera report. Items 3 and 4 are reactions to it, one by Carlo Strenger, the other by Avirama Golan. A word about Strenger’s piece. I agree with everything that he says except for the final paragraph. He is surely on the right track in laying the anti-boycott law to “Existential fear, confusion and ideology.” But in the final paragraph, when looking at the ultimate conclusion, he, in my opinion, gives too much credit to Israelis, even to those whom he terms the ‘elite.’ Most Israelis, even the educated ones, are too brain washed or wrong thinking to come out of this ‘fear, confusion, ideology’ track without help. Had it been otherwise, the Israeli left would by now have become much larger.
Item 5 is a press release stating that Gush Shalom has appealed to the Supreme Court about the new law. Additional appeals are planned by various Israeli Human Rights and Civil Rights organizations. It is not unlikely that the Supreme Court will repeal the law as unconstitutional (except that Israel has no constitution!). But one can never be sure, here.
Item 6 is about deportees from the flytilla. Disgusting the conditions under which they were held, especially considering the advanced ages of many of the deportees. But, as you know, this is Israel, and this is not the only disgusting act it performs.
Items 7 and 8 are about a solidarity march this coming Friday. Israelis and Palestinians will march in support of Palestinian independence. May it materialize soon, be it a single state or two states (I continue to prefer a single one).
That’s it for tonight. Be well.
Dorothy
===========================================
1. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Ann Wright, 0030 694 165 7310
Regina Carey: 0030 694 203 6296
Athens, July 12, 2011, At 10 am today, the shore electricity was cut off to the Audacity of Hope, the US Boat to Gaza, leaving us with no power. The boat has been imprisoned at the US Embassy/Greek Coast Guard dock, near Piraeus, Greece, just outside of Athens since we tried to sail to Gaza on July 1 when the Greek Coast Guard intercepted our small boat and hauled us into this compound.
Its over 100 degrees inside the boat, and a Russian ship loading grain is spewing grain and dust over the entire area. In addition, the off-loading noise the ship is making is above environmentally acceptable limit, sounding like a bad rock concert playing at the back of the boat! Six women are staying on board to protect the boat, since two boats heading to Gaza were already sabotaged in an attempt to prevent us from sailing to Gaza. Four of us are over 60. The Greek naval facility is co-located with a US Embassy compound which has one warehouse exclusively for the U.S. government, as well as a ramp for loading vehicles onto a ship. It also has a parking area for the wrecked cars of Americans who have been involved in traffic accidents plus a secure warehouse compound behind the ubiquitous high fence topped with razor wire and signs printed in both English and Greek in the US government block style lettering
The Greek Coast Guard is probably caught in the middle and may be ready to release us, but government politics seems to wants to keep us in port to appease the Israeli government, since the occupation of Palestine has been outsourced to the Greeks.
Call the Greek Embassy in Washington and .the Greek consulates around the Country and demand that they release the Audacity of Hope
Embassy of Greece
2217 Massachusetts Ave. N.W.
Washington, DC 20008
Tel. 202.939.1300
Fax. 202.939.1324
You can also call Kim Richter at the State Department or write a text message to her at 202-647-8308 , insisting that the US release this boat and the six women on board who are making sure she remains safe. Our conversation with Kate Brandeis this morning, acting Consul General for the United States bore no fruit after we told her what was happening on board this boat.
==============================
2. Al Jazeera
12 July 2011
Israel passes law banning settler boycotts
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/07/20117123551218243.html
Bill stirs opposition from rights groups which call it ‘a direct violation of freedom of expression’.
Israelis who call for boycotts of settlements in the West Bank could be fined up to $14,500 [EPA]
Israel’s parliament has approved a contentious law that would allow illegal settlers in the West Bank to seek damages from Israelis who promote boycotts of settlements.
Critics of the law, including opposition parliamentarians and civil liberties groups, say the measure is anti-democratic.
Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said in a statement that making “the boycott of Israeli settlement products punishable by law will send a clear message that Israel is not committed to a two-state solution”.
The bill, sponsored by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, was carried by 47 to 38 in the 120-seat parliament on Monday night. Netanyahu did not vote.
The fierce debate reflected growing polarisation between Israelis who favour expanding settlements and keeping the West Bank in Israeli hands, and those who believe Israel must withdraw from much of the territory and dismantle some or all of the settlements as part of any peace agreement with the Palestinians.
“What this law will enable is for anybody harmed by a deliberate boycott campaign to seek damages through the courts,” said its sponsor, Zeev Elkin, a Likud parliamentarian.
Supporters of the bill said its reference to boycotts based on “geography” was aimed at countering calls in Israel and abroad for cultural and economic boycotts against settlements in the West Bank.
All settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, are considered illegal under international law.
The issue grabbed headlines in Israel several months ago after leading performers said they would not appear at a theatre in Ariel, one of the biggest settlements in the West Bank.
Under the new law, those calling for boycotts could be sued by any individual or institution claiming economic, cultural or academic damage as a result of the boycott.
The bill does not require the petitioner to prove the damage was caused, but only that the damage could reasonably have been expected as a result of the boycott call.
Anyone convicted of breaking the new law faces being fined with up to 50,000 shekels ($14,500).
Reuven Rivlin, parliament’s speaker, said he had appealed unsuccessfully to Netanyahu to seek a rewording of the legislation after the assembly’s legal adviser issued an opinion that it “impinged on political expression” in Israel.
The Association of Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), an opponent of the bill, said that “regardless of one’s position on the question of promoting or opposing a boycott, it is unquestionably a protected form of free speech”.
In an editorial, Israeli newspaper Haaretz said politicians who voted in favour of the bill were “supporting the gagging of protest as part of an ongoing effort to liquidate democracy”.
“They are trying to silence one of the most legitimate forms of democratic protest, and to restrict freedom of expression and association of those who oppose the occupation and the settlers’ violence,” the paper wrote.
BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14111925
The Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israels-hardliners-seek-to-outlaw-settlement-boycotts-2312140.html
France24 http://www.france24.com/en/20110712-israel-settlement-boycott-ban-stirs-controversy
NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/12/world/middleeast/12israel.html?_r=1&ref=middleeast
SFChronicle Jul12.11 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2011/07/12/MNNV1K8VLD.DTL
Ynet http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4094387,00.html
Haaretz http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israeli-left-launches-public-campaign-against-new-law-banning-boycotts-1.372857
========================================
3. The Guardian ,
12 July 2011
Israel’s boycott ban is down to siege mentality
Existential fear, confusion and ideology are behind this latest attempt by the Knesset to curb criticism and free speech
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/12/israel-boycott-ban
Carlo Strenger
‘Netanyahu’s systematic fanning of Israeli’s existential fears is tangible in Israel.’ Photograph: Jason Reed/Reuters
The flood of anti-democratic laws that were proposed, and partially implemented, by the current Knesset, elected in February 2009, constitute one of the darkest chapters in Israeli history. The opening salvo was provided by foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu party with its Nakba law, that forbids the public commemoration of the expulsion of approximately 750000 Palestinians during the 1948 war.
Since then, a growing number of attempts were made to curtail freedom of expression and to make life for human rights groups more difficult. The latest instance is the boycott law that was passed on Monday by the Knesset, even though its legal advisor believes it to be a problematic infringement on freedom of speech. This law makes any call for boycotting Israel economically, culturally or academically a civil offence that can be punished with a fine. Any public body making such a call will lose its legal status and will no longer be eligible for tax-deductible contributions.
The law, as Knesset member Nitzan Horowitz from the leftist Meretz party said, is outrageous, shameful and an embarrassment to Israel’s democracy.
Despite the outrage, I will try to analyse the question: what stands behind this frenzy of attempts to shut down criticism? The answer, I believe, is simpler than many assume: it is fear, stupidity and confusion.
It all starts with Binyamin Netanyahu’s political conundrum. He has been under great international pressure to move ahead with a peace agreement with the Palestinians.
Neither his right-wing coalition nor his own Likud party allow for meaningful compromise with the Palestinians. Add to this that Netanyahu is far more of a hardline rightwinger than his sophisticated appearance might suggest. I think he actually believes that the 1967 borders are indefensible, and that Palestinians cannot be trusted.
To play for time, he has been selling the Israeli public the idea that the Palestinians have never accepted Israel’s existence; that the issue is not Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza blockade, but that the legitimacy of Israel’s very existence is being called into question. While this is true for Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, it is not true for the free world except for a relatively thin layer of extreme leftists who claim that Israel is by nature a racist, illegitimate state. Netanyahu’s fear-mongering is enhanced by Lieberman, who keeps accusing Israeli Arabs of being a security danger for Israel, and has initiated a number of anti-Arab proposed laws.
The result of Netanyahu and Lieberman’s systematic fanning of Israeli’s existential fears is tangible in Israel: polls show that Israelis are deeply pessimistic about peace; they largely do not trust Palestinians, and in the younger generation belief in democratic values is being eroded.
But this pessimism and siege mentality is not only found in ordinary Israeli voters, but also in the political class. After talking to a number of rightwing politicians, I am unfavourably impressed by their total lack of understanding of the international scene. They have profound misconceptions about the world’s attitude towards Israel, and very little real understanding of the paradigm shift towards human rights as the core language of international discourse. All they feel is that Israel is being singled out unfairly for criticism and that it has a PR problem rather than realising that Israel’s policies are unacceptable politically and morally.
This is certainly justified when it comes to the UN commission on human rights, which has a record of absurd over-emphasis on Israeli human rights violations compared with any number of countries ranging from China to Sudan. But these politicians genuinely do not understand that the international community, for good reasons, is sick and tired of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, and simply wants Israel to comply.
Add to this a small, but very powerful, group of ideological rightwingers who, on theological grounds, genuinely believe that Jews have a God-given right to the greater land of Israel, including Judea and Samaria, the heart of historical Israel. No Israeli governments except those of Yitzhak Rabin and Ariel Sharon have risked head-on confrontation with ideological rightwingers, among other reasons because of their potential for violence; Rabin, indeed, paid with his life for taking on these apocalyptic, messianic fanatics.
Out of their utter confusion between international criticism of Israeli policies and existential danger for Israel, the more moderate rightwingers look for a scapegoat for Israel’s unprecedented isolation. The Israeli left and human rights organisations are an easy target. Rightwingers claim that these provide the international community with ammunition for criticising Israel, and are trying to silence them.
Existential fear, confusion and ideology create the explosive mix that is drawing Knesset members into the maelstrom of ever more anti-democratic measures, of which the boycott law is the latest, but, I am afraid, not the last instalment.
What will the future bring, then? In the short term, I am not optimistic. Ordinary citizens in Israel don’t trust the world; its politicians are richly rewarded for noisy declarations of undying patriotism and for defying the world. The result is a bunker mentality bolstered by melodramatic comparisons to the siege of Masada in the year 72CE that ended in mass suicide. All this is likely to keep the right in power for the time being.
In the long run, I think that Israel will come to its senses. The more recognition, including by the UN, a Palestinian state receives, the more Israel’s political class will come to the conclusion that the price for holding on to the West Bank is too high.
Until then Israel’s democracy will be beleaguered by the right, but it will survive.
Freedom of speech in Israel is intact; the Knesset’s more totalitarian leanings have been kept in check, and I do not expect their attempts to silence criticism to succeed.
Israel is too liberal in its basic structure, and its elites are too sophisticated and too committed to liberal democracy for any attempt to actually turn Israel into a totalitarian state to succeed. It is these elites’ task to sustain the structures of Israeli civil society, until the madness subsides.
=============================
4. Haaretz,
July 12, 2011
The boycott law is unconstitutional and undemocratic
At issue is not about the settlements; the real issue is completely eradicating open political debate.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/the-boycott-law-is-unconstitutional-and-undemocratic-1.372728
By Avirama Golan
It was apparently the swan song of attorney Eyal Yinon, a responsible jurist who had never – until yesterday afternoon – been slapped with that derogatory label “leftist.” Yinon tried to explain to Knesset members that the contradiction between the Boycott Law and the principle of freedom of expression created an unconstitutional and perhaps even undemocratic anomaly, but in vain.
Henceforth, Yinon will be tarred and feathered, as befits such an anti-patriot. The “leftists” will keep barking and the caravan will keeping moving on.
It’s interesting that it took a nonpolitical jurist to understand what MKs like Benny Begin and Dan Meridor refuse to understand: that the Boycott Law is only ostensibly about boycotts of goods produced in the settlements, just as the Admissions Committee Law is only ostensibly about community life in small towns and the Nakba Law is only ostensibly about commemorating the Palestinians’ “catastrophe,” and so on and so forth ad infinitum.
All of these new laws, all the new conditions stating that “anyone who doesn’t recognize the Jewish and democratic state” will not receive state funds or will lose his citizenship or will not be allowed to sleep in the afternoons, have one purpose only: to completely eradicate open political debate and to comprehensively delegitimize everyone who doesn’t think like MKs Zeev Elkin, David Rotem, Michael Ben-Ari and their friends.
The question that most preoccupied Meridor yesterday related to how Israel would be perceived by the international Quartet. He was genuinely worried that the law to punish those who boycott the settlements would not paint Israel’s parliament in a terribly flattering light.
But Israel’s image is a truly trivial issue compared to the process of change being wrought in Israeli society by the cabal of Yisrael Beiteinu, extremist rabbis and Kahanists. This process is crudely erasing entire entries from the democratic dictionary, and in their place – via a series of focused laws with intentionally vague wording – it is putting blatantly totalitarian values.
The Boycott Law is just one step in this process. Anyone who attempts to relate substantively of any of these separatist laws – all of which are meant to “defend” Israel from a long list of imaginary monstrous enemies – or who chooses to ignore their overall anti-democratic context is guilty of naivete at best, and perhaps even of dangerously feigning innocence.
Anyone who refuses to understand that a single, not particularly well-hidden thread links all these recent laws to the demonstrations opposite the Supreme Court, and the racist letters by the rabbis and their wives, and those who sang “utzu eitza v’tufar” (“take counsel together, and it shall come to naught” ) as they danced around Rabbi Dov Lior, ought to examine their foreheads in the mirror. Just to see whether there has suddenly sprouted the bud, too small to feel, of a rhinoceros horn.
=================================
5. Gush Shalom petitions the Supreme Court:
Boycott Law is unconstitutional and anti-democratic,
stifling criticism of policy in the Occupied Territories
Press Release July 12, 2011
Gush Shalom, which in the 1990’s was the first Israeli body to lead a boycott of settlement products, presented today (Tuesday, 12.7) an appeal to the Supreme Court against the “Boycott Law”, approved last night by the Knesset plenum. The petition was filed for Gush Shalom by lawyers Gaby Lasky and Neri Ramati.
The appeal states that the new law violates basic democratic principles: “The parliamentary majority seeks, through the Boycott Law as by other pieces of legislation, to silence any criticism of government policy in general and of government policy in the Occupied Territories in particular, and to prevent an open and productive political dialogue, which constitutes the basis for a functioning democratic regime” (art. 7).
The appeal also notes that “the a-priori silencing of one side’s voice by the other side party, causes substantial harm to the Freedom of Expression and is a clear indication of the weakening of the democratic regime” (a. 32)
Further, it is argued that the Boycott Law is unconstitutional and anti-democratic, as it violates the right to Freedom of Expression and to Equality, which are fundamental rights of citizens of Israel” (art. 7) – a violation which is neither “proportionate” nor “for a worthy purpose”, the only circumstances under which such a violation might be considered acceptable.
In addition, it is stated that the new law causes severe damage to the Freedom of Vocation of commercial companies, freedom of occupation of the companies, since it would blur the difference between products madeinside Israel’s sovereign territory and those made at settlements in the Occupied Territories: “Israeli companies seeking to break into overseas markets and increase the circulation of their goods might be required [in some countries] to state that they do not carry out production in the Territories nor purchase goods produced there. However, Article 4 of the Boycott Law makes such companies liable to lose significant economic benefits from the state [of Israel]” (a. 59).
The appeal asserts boycott is a legitimate tool for democratic discourse, which must not be infringed. Various examples and precedents are cited, ranging from the ultra-Orthodox boycott of restaurants that serve non-kosher food, the recent boycott of overpriced cottage cheese the boycott of tourism to Turkey launched by Israeli trade unions. Along with such Israeli examples are mentioned historical cases of boycotts that led to political change and to change in awareness, such as the boycott launched by Mahatma Gandhi against British products in India, the boycotts of the Afro-American community against segregation in the 1960’s, and more. Therefore, the new law is held to be violating the principle of Equality because it targets the right of opponents of the occupation engage in an ideological boycott – while other kinds of boycotts on an ideological basis going on now in Israel will be allowed to continue uninterrupted, such as a boycott on artists who did not serve in the IDF, on gay singers and on enterprises which do not observe the Sabbath.
Former Knesset Member Uri Avnery, Gush Shalom activist, said: “The Boycott Law is a black stain on the statutes of the State of Israel. It is my sincere hope that the court will overturn it, and save what is left of Israeli democracy.”
More info: Adam Keller, 054-2340749
=====================================
6. The Independent,
12 July 2011
Deported Israel campaigners return to the UK
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/deported-israel-campaigners-return-to-the-uk-2312350.html
By Karl Mansfield, PA
Two British campaigners have arrived back in the UK after they were detained in Israel while trying to visit the West Bank town of Bethlehem.
Mick Napier, 64, chairman of The Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, and retired university lecturer John Lynes, 83, flew back into Luton Airport early this morning after being deported by officials.
They were amongst 13 British people, including four Scots, who were detained by soldiers at Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport on Friday before being put in prison.
University lecturer Mr Napier said that all members of his group began a hunger strike after information on charges against them was not provided and they were denied a phone call.
The 11 other group members remain in Israel and are refusing to eat, but some are expected to return to the UK later today.
“Israel has cross another red line,” said Mr Napier, whose campaign group was planning to join 700 people from around the world invited to visit Bethlehem by families there.
“We were chained, handcuffed and detained for no apparent reason – we had committed no crimes – no UK or Israeli law was breached.
“We were denied any information about any charges against us and were also denied a telephone call over the entire period we were in prison.
“It was a situation of lawlessness.”
Mr Napier said around 124 people taking part on the planned visit were held by Israeli officials. His group were amongst around 50 taken to Ramle Prison where they were placed on a wing for illegal immigrants.
“Despite repeated efforts we were unable to find out what we were supposed to be guilty of – it was a ridiculous situation,” added Mr Napier.
The other Scots detained were Frank Thomas, 66, a retired statistician from Edinburgh; Ian Stewart-Hargreaves, who lives on the Isle of Lewis; and Joy Cherkaoui, a community worker from Dumfries and Galloway.
The English group members were Mr Lynes; Audrey Gray, 77, a retired nurse from West Chiltington; Val Kitchen, 68, from Tonbridge; Anne Gray, 66, a retired academic from London; and Les Levidow, 61, an Open University research fellow who works in Milton Keynes.
There were also four Welsh passengers: Pippa Bartolotti, 57, deputy leader of the Wales Green Party; Dee Murphy, 56, from Swansea, founder member of Swansea Palestine Community Link; Joyce Giblin and Fiona Williams.
A Foreign and Commonwealth Office spokeswoman said: “We can confirm that a number of British nationals were detained at the airport in Tel Aviv on Friday.
“All the British nationals currently detained pending deportation have been visited by consular staff from the embassy in Tel Aviv and we have been in contact with families in the UK.
“We understand they will be deported in the next few days.”
=========================================
7. Haaretz,
July 12, 2011
Zionists have a responsibilty to join the upcoming Jewish-Arab march
All of us, Israel’s Jewish citizens, bear some responsibility for the state’s support for the settlers, especially if we are silent.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/zionists-have-a-responsibilty-to-join-the-upcoming-jewish-arab-march-1.372755
By Chaim Gans
The planned Jewish-Arab march in support of the Palestinian declaration of independence has been causing quite a stir. In this newspaper, Ishay Rosen-Zvi (“Not masters and not culprits,” July 6 ) sees it as an “unprecedented event in the history of Zionism.” Yael Sternhell (“The right side of history,” July 7 ) compares it to the protest marches of the U.S. civil rights movement in the struggle for equal rights for blacks in the 1960s. And Ruth Gavison responds with “I won’t join the solidarity march” (July 10 ), fearing that the march will reinforce the Palestinians’ feeling “that someone is else doing the work for them and that they are likely to see their just demands met without committing to the necessary painful concessions.”
There are many reasons why Israel’s Jewish citizens should prefer the historic significance that Rosen-Zvi and Sternhell attribute to Jewish-Israeli support of the Palestinian declaration of independence, over the scorekeeping significance that Gavison sees in it. At least one reason has to do with Jewish Israelis’ responsibility for the interpretation of Zionism. Zionism’s interpretation as the realization of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination in the Land of Israel cannot justify the enterprise of settling the occupied territories or the attendant abuse of the Arab population. Jewish self-determination was achieved in Israel with the establishment of the state in 1948. The settlements, built after the occupation of the territories in the 1967 Six-Day War, are not vital to its existence.
Neither can the settlements be justified by the Jewish need for security. First, for security purposes, the territories could have been held by military means, without settling there. Second, the stunning victory in 1967 makes a mockery of the claim that Israel’s borders at the time were indefensible – particularly in light of Greater Israel’s weakness in the 1973 Yom Kippur War.
Based on what we, Israel’s Jewish citizens, have been accomplices to since 1967, Zionism since then can have only one interpretation. According to this interpretation, the goal is not (only ) to achieve Jewish national self-determination, and not (only ) to serve the Jewish need for security and dignity as Jews, but also, and more importantly, to realize the Jewish biblical deed of ownership over the entire Land of Israel.
This interpretation sentences Zionism and Israel to a continuous carrying out of injustice and oppression since 1967, via the settlements. The Arabs’ status, according to this interpretation of Zionism, is by necessity one of thieves. The settlers, honest people for the most part, would not abuse the Arabs if not for their adherence to this interpretation of Zionism and the status of thieves it necessarily attributes to the Arabs. Israel’s governments would not back the settlers if not for the belief of most of their members in the Arabs’ inferior status in this country.
All of us, Israel’s Jewish citizens, bear some responsibility for the continuation of these acts, especially if we are silent. Anyone who believes that Zionism’s task is not to put into practice the Jewish deed of ownership over the Land of Israel, but rather to achieve self-determination for a persecuted nation, must therefore interpret the solidarity march in Jerusalem this Friday in the historic spirit of the struggle for human rights. They must interpret it in the spirit as seen by Yael Sternhell or Rosen-Zvi, who believes that “this land and its peoples have no future without cooperation.”
The march expresses the need to show solidarity with the Palestinians and shift Zionism away from the path of corruption on which it has been headed for more than 40 years. It expresses the need to shift Zionism away from the settlements, the abuse of Arabs, and other acts of injustice committed in its name.
======================
8. From Jewish Peace News
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
On July 15 Palestinians will be marching throughout the West Bank to mobilize in support of the campaign to ask the UN to recognize the state of Palestine. Israelis will be supporting them by organizing solidarity marches – not marches to demand the resumption of negotiations, which have no chance of success with the present Israeli government in office (and very little chance with any government that can be elected in Israel in the foreseeable future). The call to the demonstration (first item) deploys language not typically used by the rather tired Israeli “peace movement.” Instead of “concessions” to the Palestinians which are necessary to secure the future of a democratic Israel, “Support for Palestine’s independence means committing to the Palestinians in their initiative and their struggle.” This language goes beyond the dead-end one-state/two-state debate and emphasizes justice and equality on the basis of solidarity. Yishay Rosen-Tzvi’s article in
Ha-Aretz (second item), uses the word “Zionism.” But he is also clear that, “This land and its peoples have no future without cooperation.” Cooperation, equality, and integration. What American ideals! Why are the Obama administration and the US Congress pathologically phobic about them when it comes to Israel/Palestine? [Joel Beinin]
http://www.en.justjlm.org/523
Marching for independence, Solidarity with Palestine
Jerusalem, July 15
“Unilateral steps are not constructive. I don’t think that an attempt to coerce things outside of direct negotiations will bring peace…. If anyone wants to do anything positive it must be to push for direct negotiations.” (Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Haaretz, 16 June 2011)
“Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman rejected on Tuesday the European Union’s peace initiative.” (Haaretz, 14 June 2011)
“This is an insoluble conflict because it is not about territory… Until Abu Mazen recognizes Israel as a Jewish State, there will be no way to reach an agreement.” (Netanyahu, Haaretz, 15 June 2011)
We can talk all we want about unilateralism and political processes, but we can no longer avoid a decision. Today it is clear that genuine negotiation is not going to happen under the current government. Even if the Europeans and the Americans drag Bibi to another round of talks, there will be no outcome. For a long time now, negotiations have been nothing more than yet another means of perpetuating occupation. There is no choice for anyone advocating for an end Israeli control over the Palestinians other than supporting the only realistic way left to achieve this goal: recognition of an independent Palestinian state.
Applying to the United Nations for such recognition is not merely the Palestinian people’s right, it is the sole remaining constructive step for countering unending negotiation and the threat of increased violence. As Israelis who support the Palestinian struggle for independence, it is our duty to express our backing for the Palestinian initiative. We can go on calling for “Two States for Two Peoples” and repeating that the occupation must end, but Bibi and Lieberman are [chattering] the same things.
Sure we can go on marching in Jewish Tel Aviv under tired slogans until Jerusalem no longer has a future. But another choice is to unflinchingly fix our gaze on reality and understand that there is only one political decision to be taken: are we for Palestinian independence or not? In the current reality, support for Palestinian independence can no longer be interpreted as a call for the government to enter into negotiations known in advance to be dead-end, or as encouragement to a right-wing government to “take an initiative”. Whoever feels with, but accepts going without, is, in a final analysis, naked. Support for Palestine’s independence means committing to the Palestinians in their initiative and their struggle, not reinforcing Israeli intractability and speechifying about negotiations and political processes.
On July 15 we will stand with our Palestinian partners in a Palestinian-Israeli march through the heart of Jerusalem for the independence of Palestine –
because the Palestinians also deserve to be “a people, free in their country”.
Because Jerusalem is the place for this freedom to be realized
and because Jewish-Arab solidarity is the only response to hatred and racism
We will march together in both sections of the city, the Israeli and the Palestinian, to express our support of Palestine’s independence and our commitment to fight for it together
Facebook page for the event: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=223656024322221
Not Masters and not Culprits, but Partners Instead / By Ishay Rosen-Zvi
Ha-Aretz, July 7, 2008
On July 15th, an unprecedented event in the history of Zionism is set to take place in Jerusalem: a Jewish-Palestinian independence march. This march will not be yet another demonstration in support of the negotiations; not a call for an end to violence nor for a bilateral two-state solution. We’ve had enough of those. This time Israelis, Jews and Arabs, will show our support for the unilateral Palestinian declaration of independence expected in September; a free state in the 1967 borders, with its capital in East Jerusalem. No more favors, thank you very much.
This way is unequivocally better than yet another statement of support in negotiations, which in turn is nothing more than the continuation of the occupation by other means, that of negotiations without end. At the same time, we must ask what the role of the Jewish marchers is in this march. Is not the Palestinian state a Palestinian project? Is it not our role to just stand back and not interfere? Is it not better that we fight against the occupation, and leave the founding of the state to those whose state it will be? Is it not just slightly offensive? Hast thou conquered, and also rejoiced?
We claim that the illusion that the end of the occupation will bring with it a separation from the Palestinians is the root of all evil. What lies behind the various “disengagement plans”, especially the greedy “separation wall”, if not the desire “not to see them anymore?” This land and its peoples have no future without cooperation. Not just because the oppressor will be free only when the oppressed will be free (as Hegel well understood in his master and slave dialectic), but also because after their respective freedoms, the two sides are destined to sit together, to share a land, its resources and history. Solutions based upon separation (always unilateral), are bound to fail (see under: Gaza).
Moreover, we are trying to undermine the most successful lie in the history of the Israeli public sphere, that which presents everything as a zero-sum game, as if every Palestinian gain is an Israeli loss. We are marching to say that the Palestinian declaration of independence is not just a theatre of conflict between Israel and Palestine, but first and foremost a discussion Israelis should be holding amongst ourselves. Similar deliberations should have taken place before the wars of choice in Lebanon and Gaza, and should now be held apropos the Gaza flotilla. The fact that we cannot hear even the slightest echo of such a discussion teaches us more than anything else about the total and unequivocal surrender of the Israeli media to official government policy. For exposing an internal disagreement will undermine the binary illusion, that of us against them, and might even begin to deter the Obama administration’s intention to veto the declaration in the UN security Council (
the US
has no power of veto in the general assembly) as a way of defending Israeli interests. One can dream, at least.
But all of these are just icing on the cake. And the “cake” is the solidarity itself. We do not come to the march “from above,” as masters, and not “from below,” as culprits. Rather, we come as partners in the desire for freedom. Against the fascist marches which washed over the city on Jerusalem Day, against the ethnic politics, becoming ever more violent, the marchers are attempting to make room for an alternative politics, one based on civil partnership, on amicability, on common, worldly interests. This then is the reason that the initiative comes from an organization whose very existence is based on solidarity, civic and human. This is why the real goal is not only political or a matter of publicity. Indeed it is nothing less than the shattering of the dichotomist model through which the entire Israeli political apparatus operates: “us” against “them.” Those who yearn for independence in this space are not “them;” they do not belong to the other s
ide.
They
are our very own poor. And, as the Talmud teaches us, our own poor come first.
Ishay Rosen-Zvi is professor of Talmudic Studies in Tel Aviv university and a research fellow in the “Shalom Hartman” Institute.
……………………………………………………….
——–
Jewish Peace News editors:
Joel Beinin
Racheli Gai
Rela Mazali
Sarah Anne Minkin
Ofer Neiman
Lincoln Z. Shlensky
Rebecca Vilkomerson
Alistair Welchman
————
Jewish Peace News archive and blog: http://jewishpeacenews.blogspot.com
————
Jewish Peace News sends its news clippings only to subscribers. To subscribe, unsubscribe, or manage your subscription, go to http://www.jewishpeacenews.net