Israel's War Against Palestine: Documenting the Occupation of Palestinian and Arab Lands
Someone has deceived you… Not only may an Arab not build “anywhere,” but he may thank his god if he is not evicted from his home and thrown out onto the street with his family and property. Perhaps you’ve heard about Arab residents in Sheikh Jarrah, having lived there since 1948, who are again being uprooted and made refugees.
IOA Editor: If only Mr. Obama were to “use his clout…” as Sarid, perhaps optimistically, suggests.
The [UC Berkeley Student] Senate needed 14 votes to overturn [the] veto, but early this morning, after an epic 10 plus hour meeting, senators found they had only 13 yes votes with one abstention. So the students tabled a vote to overturn the veto. This means the veto stands but can still be overturned later–there will be much continued lobbying and activism in the coming weeks.
“J Street hopes that going forward we are building a relationship based on mutual respect and recognizing that our disagreements are rooted in a deep commitment to Israel’s security and its future as a democracy and the home of the Jewish people…”
IOA Editor: Occupation? What Occupation?
Retired chief justice of South Africa Arthur Chaskalson said it was “disgraceful” to put pressure on a grandfather not to attend his grandson’s bar mitzvah. “If it is correct that this has the blessing of the leadership of the Jewish community in South Africa, it reflects on them rather than Judge Goldstone. They should hang their heads in shame.”
According to the 2010 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion, conducted by the American Jewish Committee, 73 percent of American Jews characterize relations between Israel and the U.S. today as “very positive” or “positive.” In addition to this, 55 percent of American Jews approve of the way the Obama administration is handling U.S.-Israel relations.
Tony Judt: “[T]he ‘de-legitimization’ issue is a fraud… I know no one in the professional world of political commentary, however angry about Israel’s behavior, who thinks that the country has no right to exist… ‘De-legitimization’ is just another way to invoke antisemitism as a silencer, but sounds better because [it’s] less exploitative of emotional pain.”
Nancy Kricorian: “This is only a way of changing the subject… All we want is [for] Israel to respect human rights and international law. I don’t see how that delegitimizes Israel.”
IOA Editor: As always, the organized Jewish Community first tries to label us “anti-Semites” or “Self-Hating Jews,” but this doesn’t work nearly as well these days. Since the completion of the Reut ‘study’ — a consulting project conducted by propaganda experts for the Netanyahu government — the new term, “delegitimizers,” is in vogue. Much like the others, it is an empty charge designed to avoid the very specific reality of the Occupation and Israel’s legal responsibilities in connection with it.
When we criticize the Israeli Occupation (daily, on these pages), we surely point to the complete immorality, illegality — indeed, outright criminality — of the Occupation. We are hardly alone in pointing this out: the UN Goldstone Report, and numerous others, have challenged the legality of Israeli actions. None of this is a challenge to the legitimacy of Israelis as a people. As for the legitimacy of Israel as a state, there are many views one can take: that no state is legitimate; that colonial-settler states are illegitimate; or that Israel is as legitimate as any other state. Whatever one’s views on these matters, they are logically distinct from the condemnation of the Occupation and of the policies of the Israeli government — these are systematically and persistently in clear violation of international laws and conventions.
UPDATE: More of the same in Haaretz (13 April 2010), Want to delegitimize Israel? Be careful who you mess with
More on the important question of legitimacy of the state, and how it applies to Israel and other nation-states: Noam Chomsky, Gilbert Achcar: On the Legitimacy of the State
Today there are more than seven million Palestinian refugees around the world. Israel denies their right to return to their homes and land – a right recognised by UN resolution 194, the Geneva convention, and the universal declaration of human rights. Further, “an occupier may not forcibly deport protected persons… or transfer parts of its own civilian population into occupied territory” (article 49).
An illuminating e-mail exchange between Ur Shlonsky, professor of linguistics at the Universite de Geneve, and the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation. As Shlonsky points out, it is remarkable when accusations of anti-Semitism, or “self-hating Jew” (the version used for Jews), come from the executive director of a major research-funding agency.
“The Goldstone report is a defamation written by an evil, evil man,” Dershowitz said.
IOA Editor: The use of the term “traitor” is important: a Traitor loses a good deal of protection provided by civil society, and may become a target of assassination. Such a declaration is as close to a Fatwa as Jewish society gets – including secular, “Western” Jewish circles.
Yesh Din: “Past experience” fed suspicions that the Bnei Menashe would be encouraged to settle deep in the West Bank… Shavei Israel lobbies for other groups of Jews to be brought to Israel, including communities in Spain, Portugal, Italy, South America, Russia, Poland and China.
IOA Editor: An endless supply of lost tribes, and their relatively disadvantaged members, can provide a lifeline of fresh, enthusiastic ‘pioneers’ to Israel’s settlement frontier.
“People feel he’s anti-Israel. I don’t read it that way, but the leadership of AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and other elements of the Jewish community do and I don’t want to get into an argument with them,” said Siegel, who is Jewish.
Goldstone’s standing in the world will only rise as a consequence of Israel’s short-sighted attempts to discredit the man, the report and the facts. That our own government has chosen to join in this unworthy exercise should be a source of deep embarrassment and shame.
The hawks seem to think that if only J Street is crushed, American Jews will obediently fall back into line behind Israel’s every action. But I think they misread the mood of the Jewish community, the changes it has undergone in recent years, and the extent to which J Street is designed to play a moderating, rather than a radicalizing, role on Jewish public opinion.
IOA Editor: Indeed, a moderating role – AIPAC-lite. Moderately against the Occupation? Perhaps an Obama-like Occupation policy? Only time will tell. In the meantime, already behaving much like AIPAC, J Street Booted a Poet from its conference program. This after having pleaded with right-wing Israeli ambassador Oren to speak there (“what J Street shares in common with you far outweighs that on which we disagree”)… Alas, they were snubbed by Mr. Ambassador – maybe for being Occupation-lite?
J Street’s poetic injustice: “I told [J Street] I don’t think it’s the legitimacy they want, because it’s not the legitimacy that makes change. When you’re trying to make change, you must expect that some people will push back. But they kick out their allies – and I still consider myself an ally. I’m not personally offended – I’m politically disappointed… The Jewish community acts like children, with smear campaigns and name-calling.”
IOA Editor: J Street – more change you cannot believe in.
