NOVANEWS
-
Tent 1948
-
‘Housing crisis?’ Israel will build 930 more units in occupied East Jerusalem
-
‘NYT’ ‘analysis’ buries connection between protests and settlement project
-
Community board of leftwing radio station in Houston is so freaked out by boycott it calls for boycotting 21 countries, including US
-
A binational tent, in Jaffa
-
To my dear stateless Palestinian
-
South African student bodies declare, ‘We recognise apartheid when we see it’
-
Israel summons ambassador after Honduras endorses Palestinian statehood
Tent 1948
Aug 06, 2011
Abir Kopty
If you are Palestinian, it will be difficult to find anything to identify with in Tel Aviv’s tents’ city on Rothschild Boulevard, until you reach Tent 1948. My first tour there was a few days ago, when I decided to join Tent 1948. Tent 1948’s main message is that social justice should be for all. It brings together Jewish and Palestinian citizens who believe in shared sovereignty in the state of all its citizens.
For me, as a Palestinian, I don’t feel part of the July 14 movement, and I’m not there because I feel part. Almost every corner of this encampment reminds me that this place does not want me. My first tour there was pretty depressing, I found lots of Israeli flags, a man giving a lecture to youth about his memories from ’48 war’ from a Zionist perspective, another group marching with signs calling for the release of Gilad Shalit, another singing Zionist songs. This is certainly not a place that the 20% of the population would feel they belong to. The second day I found Ronen Shuval, from Im Tirtzu, the extreme right wing organization, giving a talk full of incitement and hatred to the left and human rights organizations. Settlers already set a tent and were dancing with joy.
The existence of Tent 1948 in the encampment constitutes a challenge to people taking part in the July 14 movement. In the first few days, the tent was attacked by group of rightwing activists, who beat activists in the tent and broke down the Palestinian flag of the tent. Some of the leaders of the July 14 movement have said clearly that raising core issues related to Palestinian community in Israel or the occupation will make the struggle “lose momentum”. They often said the struggle is social, not political, as if there was a difference. They are afraid of losing supporters if they make Palestinian issues bold.
The truth is that this is the truth.
The truth is, this is exactly what might help Netanyahu, if he presses the button of fear, recreates the ‘enemy’ and reproduce the ‘security threat’, he might be able to silence this movement. The problem is not with Netanyahu, he is not the first Israeli leader to rely on this. The main problem is that Israelis are not ready yet to see beyond the walls surrounding them.
Yet, one has to admit, something is happening, Israelis are awakening. There is a process; people are coming together, discussing issues. The General Assembly of the encampment decided on Friday that it will not accept any racist messages among its participants. Even to Tent 1948 many Israelis arrived, read the flyers, listened to what Tent 1948 represent and discussed calmly. Perhaps if I was a Jewish Israeli I will be proud of the July 14 movement. But, I am not a Jew, I am not Zionist, I am Palestinian.
I don’t want to beatify the reality, or hide anything for the sake of ‘tactics’ and I will not accept crumbs. I want to speak about historical justice, I want to speak about occupation, I want to speak about discrimination and racism, I want to put everything on the table, and I want to speak about them in the heart of Tel Aviv.
Social justice can’t be divided or categorized. If it is not justice to all including all Palestinians, then it is a fake justice, elite justice or “Justice for Jews only” exactly as the Israeli democracy functions “for Jews only”. July 14 is a great opportunity for Israelis to refuse to allow their state to continue to drown into an apartheid regime.
Abir Kopty blogs here. Follow her twitter feed @abirkopty. A media analyst and consultant and political activist, she is a former city council member in Nazareth & former spokeswoman for Mossawa, the Advocacy Center for Arab Citizens in Israel.
‘Housing crisis?’ Israel will build 930 more units in occupied East Jerusalem
Aug 06, 2011
Paul Mutter
Well, that’s one way to address the housing crisis in Israel today: build 930 new houses . . . in East Jerusalem!
I can just see PM Netanyahu saying to a Cabinet minister: “Housing crisis? I have just the thing!”
Absolutely brilliant (no, really, it is – well, kind of, at least in that ultimately self-defeating way we’ve come to know and love from Netanyahu and friends).
The sooner you get the settler protesters out of their tents ( the cry of “To your tents, O Israel!” has never boded well for Jewish rulers) and back to the Occupied Territories, the less chance there is that they might turn on you in elections and – Herzl forbid – vote for Labour or something crazy like that.Class solidarity is a terrifying thing for a government built on a different kind of solidarity altogether.
Although it would be a really ungrateful thing for said settlers to do that when right and center-right dominated governments have spent twice as much on the average settler in the Occupied Territories as they do on the average Israeli citizen living in, say, Tel Aviv, Ashkelon, Haifa or Acre.
Building new settlements (in Har Homa, between Jerusalem and Bethlehem) to resolve the housing crisis brings to mind the image of an Ouroboros, aka, the serpent that eats it’s own tail (one worth US$17 billion, to be precise). And, truthfully, it’s just more of the same. It’s not a new tactic, but it’s a tried and true one for garnering support (and building “facts on the ground” for legitimizing the settlements, which are illegal under international law).
As two +972 Magazine bloggers writing in the NYT have noted, the roots of this housing crisis lie in decisions made during the 1990s (back when Israeli governments said they were seriously considering giving the Palestinians their own “state”) to increase government subsidies for settlement housing over public housing projects within Israel’s pre-1967 borders. This encouraged Israelis – ardent Zionists and otherwise – to move to East Jerusalem and other destinations in the Occupied Territories (so that de facto annexation would precede – and justify – eventual de jureannexation).
We really don’t praise Bibi’s genius enough here. He has made more housing available (though only a certain number of demonstrators would probably want to live in them) and made East Jerusalem even more “fundamentally” part of Israel. What more could the Israeli right ask for?
(Well, a few things, but you get the idea.)
Saeb Erekat, Fatah spokesman and a leading negotiator with Israel over the settlements, had this to say (from Haaretz):
“Israel makes clear its intention to turn this occupation into an effective annexation . . . . Israel is armed with the impunity brought on by decades of international leniency and lack of consequences to its illegal actions. It is now the responsibility of the international community to make clear that it will no longer tolerate this impunity and destructive consequences.”
‘NYT’ ‘analysis’ buries connection between protests and settlement project
Aug 06, 2011
James North
Did you see Ethan Bronner’s analysis of the tent protests in the New York Times today? It’s not what it says, it’s what it doesn’t say. Not until the last paragraph does he tentatively raise the connection between Israel’s construction of settlements/colonies and the housing shortages and other economic problems in Israel itself.
And when Bronner does raise the issue, he does it in a roundabout way, quoting a rightwing columnist who says that the solution to Israel’s housing crisis is still more West Bank colonies:
Martin Sherman, a right-wing columnist for The Jerusalem Post, argued on Friday that the easy way to solve Israel’s housing crisis was to build more West Bank settlements because the settlement construction freeze last year caused the crisis.
The protesters tend to argue the opposite: the investment in West Bank settlements has reduced building in Israel proper and a shift is needed. That view, Mr. Sherman argued, exposed the movement’s real nature. “Genuine nonpolitical social protest?” he concluded. “Give me a break!”
Apparently Bronner doesn’t read his own op-ed page, where Dimi Reider and Aziz Abu Sarah of +972 made the connection between occupation and housing shortage in calm, persuasive detail.
Community board of leftwing radio station in Houston is so freaked out by boycott it calls for boycotting 21 countries, including US
Aug 06, 2011
Rob Block
Last December the Pacifica radio station in Houston, KPFT, offered a programming segment to the Israeli consulate. The move angered activists and led to a proposal to join the international boycott call against Israel. Rob Block is one of the activists.
We had a really weird meeting at the Houston Pacifica station KPFT Thursday night about the BDS resolution we’re trying to pass there.
How did a proposal asking for KPFT to support the human rights of Palestinian by supporting BDS turn into a resolution that makes no mention of the responsibility of Pacifica Radio and instead requests the United States government to impose weapons embargoes on 21 countries in The Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and North America– including itself–as well as call to limit aid to countries that don’t have a constitutional provision similar to the US First amendment against having a state ordered religion?
Here’s the story. This was the first meeting of the committee created by the Local Station Board [LSB] , early in 2011 (I think March). It was represented to some of the people working with the KPFT BDS ad hoc committee as follows:
“After polling the LSB, it looks like everyone who’s interested can come to a meeting Thurs. of next week to work on the language of the BDS resolution: …
I hope we don’t have to do much to the resolution language, although it might help to add some intro language (whereas clauses or whatever) that address some of the objections people have offered — that BDS is somehow like censorship, that it would turn over decisions to some outside BDS organization, etc.
Thanks again to all of you for your interest and patience.”
Myself and Nick Cooper from the committee went to the meeting expecting to talk about the language of the original proposal which we had submitted to the Local Station Board and expected a meeting where we could try to make the language of the proposal as palatable as possible to board members who had concerns about it. Present were seven board members (on both sides of the BDS proposal) and seven people who came to speak in opposition to the BDS resolution.
The opponents to the resolution were at the meeting to attempt to shut down the process and stop a proposal that represented the concerns of our group, many KPFT listeners, and human rights activists across the world. Some of the people who objected to the proposal acknowledged that they were not familiar with Pacifica but still felt that the proposal violated our mission. When polled, none of them were members of KPFT. Most of them refused to talk about the language of the proposal and alleged that the language did not matter and that BDS was a either a shadowy secret group or Hamas sponsored.
Board Member: “Do you have specific concerns with the language of the proposal?”
BDS opponent: “Yes very specific. When I think of BDS I think of blood, [unintelligible] and suppression. I think of KPFT adopting BDS, I think BDS becoming a governing body for this community, for you to signing up to a third party telling us what to do in this country, and supporting through the threats and hatred and bigotry of the community that launched BDS. When you say no to to BDS what you are doing is saying no to; threats, hypocrisy prejudice, suicide bombers..”
Steve Tobias in particular led the apparently faith-based charge that there is a BDS central (he repeated this a dozen times, as though saying it enough will make it true) and that this proposal will hand over editorial control to this “BDS Central.” To support this claim he cited an article for the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott. I was able to see this email “from BDS central” and pointed out that
1. the US in USCACBI stands for United States, not Palestine.
2. It is a campaign supporting BDS in academic venues, not a “BDS Central”
We also pointed out that the proposal concludes: “This proposal is not meant to set up a new review board or authority, but to establish a new commitment for our programmers, staff and management in addition to our Mission and Bylaws.” Steve maintained that the language did not matter, our resolution would be handing over authority to a foreign group.
The structure of the meeting was very confusing. I would like to commend the chair for trying to get as much feedback as possible, but ultimately the mass of people at the meeting demanded a vote on substituting a previously-written proposal by LSB chair Robert Marks which calls for “BDS” of 21 other countries. Eventually they pushed for this vote to be taken, and the majority (most of whom are not members or familiar with KPFT), replaced the proposal submitted by our group with the one written by Marks. What is wrong with the resolution by Marks?
1. It represents itself as a BDS proposal while not addressing the demands of the BDS (which are A. an end to occupation and colonization of Arab land, B. equal rights for Arab citizens of Israel and C. recognition of the right of return as described in UN resolution 194). It maintains a sad tradition of American arrogance that we can come up with our own ideas about how to solve problems on the other side of the world instead on engaging with and supporting the leadership of the Palestinian movement and their call for non-violent movements for social change.
2. It ignores the responsibility the KPFT has to address this issue, making demands on the US government that will obviously not be met, like and arms embargo on itself.
3. It jumps into whether or not we give relief aid to countries depending on their constitutional provisions, a pretty serious digression away for the demands for the human rights of Palestinians
4. It won’t work. The objective of the group of people who have manipulated the process to stop a BDS resolution will not address the concerns of the KPFT community that wants a BDS proposal, and want our community radio station to take a stand in support of human rights for Palestinians by respecting their just call for non-violent action and solidarity.
It is unclear what the fallout of this meeting will be if this outcome will stand. But it is clear that the call for BDS at KPFT is just starting, and will continue until it gets a fair hearing.
Here are the competing proposals:
Original boycott proposal for KPFT’s Local Station Board KPFT LSB members:
We ask that you pass this proposal locally and instruct our representatives on the National Board to pass this resolution for the Pacifica Network:
———— Proposal for Pacifica to sign on to the BDS campaign
Media collaboration boosts Israel’s image on the international stage. By refusing to participate in media partnerships, media institutions globally can send a clear message to Israel that their occupation and discrimination against Palestinians is unacceptable. While Israeli media enjoys relatively free global freedom of movement and access to well equipped facilities, Israel has subjected Palestinians to movement restrictions and a lack of adequate funding, economic damage caused by the occupation, and restrictions for media facilities.
Whereas all forms of international intervention have until now failed to force Israel to comply with international law or to end its repression of the Palestinians, which has manifested itself in many forms, including siege, indiscriminate killing, wanton destruction, and the separation wall built on occupied land and ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice,
In light of the escalation of human rights violations in the Occupied Territories of Palestine,
And until Israel meets the minimum obligations under international law by:
1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall,
2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality, and
3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194,
KPFT’s LSB recommends Pacifica Radio agree to join AMARC (The World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters) in supporting Palestinian civil society’s call for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions; and in particular:
a. There will be no form of restriction on the work of individual Israeli media workers, or on conducting interviews and debates with people from any institution, but we will not turn over program production, or enter into collaboration or joint projects with official Israeli institutions or institutions supported by the Israeli state.
b. We will discuss and hold dialogs about BDS on the air.
c. We will support Palestinian media institutions directly without requiring them to partner with Israeli counterparts as an explicit or implicit condition for such support.
We affirm our commitment to anti-racism by adding that Pacifica will not turn over program production, or enter into collaboration or joint projects with anti-Jewish racists, white supremacist, Nazi Holocaust deniers, as well as Islamophobic, or any other type of racist groups.
This proposal is not meant to set up a new review board or authority, but to establish a new commitment for our programmers, staff and management in addition to our Mission and Bylaws.
KPFT Pacifica Substitute Resolution on Boycott, Divestment and Sanction (Minority Report)
Whereas, The violence in Israel and Palestine is intolerable and must not continue, and
Whereas, the violence in the Middle East is a threat to the peace and security in the entire world and to civilization generally.
Now Therefore it is resolved that Pacifica Radio should support a network wide resolution condemning violence in all forms and on all sides of the political conflicts In the middle east generally and to Israel/Palestine in particular.
Further resolved, that Pacifica condemns the import or export of weapons and articles of war to or from the following countries: The United States of America, The Palestinian Occupied Territories, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates. Kuwait, Oman, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India. Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, Libya, Tunisia.
Further resolves, that the United States shall limit any form of aid or assistance to any nation of the world that does not have a constitution guaranteeing the civil rights of all persons living within said nation and which does not have a constitution guaranteeing the civil rights of all persons living within said nation and which does not have a constitutional protection against State ordered or sanctioned religion similar to the first amendment to the United States Constitution as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court as of the date of passage of this Resolution, exempting disaster relief, food, medical supplies and children’s educational materials. Said relief shall be delivered only in the form of commodities and not cash and be administered only by international relief agencies upon a demonstration that such aid is being used in those countries for the intended purpose of disaster relief, feeding the people, medical assistance and education. In no way should any such government of said country grant or receive assistance in the form of cash for these purposes, and
Further resolved, that Pacifica calls for a general effort to boycott, disinvest from and sanction nations that perpetuate violence as a means of resolving political disputes or making profit from war across the globe, but specifically by the above nations (including the United States of America).
