Stamping Out (Mostly) Non-Violent Protests at Ni’lin and Bil’in.

Haaretz is reporting that the IDF has declared the West Bank villages of Bil'in and Ni'lin closed military areas for the next six months – on Fridays from 8 am to 8 pm. The purpose – to stop once and for all the protests against the expropriation of village land for the construction of the Security Barrier (a.k.a. the Land Grab Wall). The closure applies to the area between the Security Barrier and the villages.

As everybody knows, these two villages have been the scene of mass protests, mostly non-violent, occasionally rock throwing (sometimes by IDF provocateurs). The IDF has arrested the leaders, harassed the Israelis who come there, sprayed stink juice on demonstrators, shot and killed protesters – and have not been able to stop the protests.

Of course, the IDF is only carrying out the government's policy, and so ultimate responsibility lies with those rapacious government ministers who covet the expropriated lands for Jewish real estate development, etc. If Israel was really interested in security, they would build the fence within the green line, not on it or outside of it. Yet how much Jewish land has been expropriated for the Wall?

The weekly protests have also been the symbol of Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Palestinian-Foreign Human Rights activism. It made the Anarchists Against the Wall famous. And it has shown a new sort of struggle, where the Israelis are willing to play junior, subordinate roles, to the Palestinians.

By the way, the English translation of Amira Hass's piece (or, more accurately, abridged adaptation, does not yet have the official reaction of the IDF. You can read that here. But note why the villages are being declared off-limits. It has nothing to do with the villagers themselves, but rather

To prevent outside agitators from arriving at the scenes of the disturbances…the military order applies to Israeli citizens, foreigners, and Palestinians who are not residents of these villages on Fridays between 8am to 8 pm….It is to be emphasized that this does not apply to the villagers who will be allowed free movement.

It sure reminds me of when the US federal government, during the Civil Rights movement, declared the South off-limits to those outside agitators from the North who came down to protest segregation.

Or am I misremembering?

“There is a New Left in Town”

I started translating the address delivered at the Sheikh Jarrah demonstration Saturday Night by activist Sarah Beninga, but I was beaten to the punch by the Sheikh Jarrah website here. (And Didi Remez published his own translation here at his indispensable Coteret site)

The rousing speech, which does not have a single author, articulates a vision of the Israeli New Left. It will be very easy for old folks to dismiss them; in the Middle East, cynicism and a "been-there-done-that" mentality prevails. And yes, there are already important groups to which some of the Sheikh Jarrah activists belong, like Ta'ayush and others. But this manifesto captures something new, which, if it develops, will be an important moral and political force in Israel/Palestine --now and as long as the struggle lasts.

Even the consciousness, or the recognition that there is a new left, is important.

I hope that it is widely circulated throughout the world.

There is a New Left in Town

There is a New Left, and it is not a left that is content with peace talks; it is a left of struggle. There is a New Left that knows that there are things you have to fight against even when they are identified with the state and even when they are sanctioned by law. There's a New Left that knows that this struggle will not be decided on paper, but on the ground, on the hills, in the vineyards, in the olive groves. There's a New Left that is not afraid of settlers – even when they come down on us from the hills, masked and armed. This left does not succumb to political oppression by the police, nor does it care what Ma'ariv writes about it.

There is a New Left in town. This left does not want to be loved, does not dream of filling town squares and does not bask in the memories of 400,000 demonstrators. This left is a partnership of Palestinians who understand that the occupation will not be stopped by missiles and bombs, and of Israelis who understand that the Palestinian struggle is their own.

The New Left links arms with Palestinians in a cloud of tear-gas in Bili'in, and with them, bears the brunt of settler violence in the South Hebron Hills. This left stands by refugees and work immigrants in Tel-Aviv and fights the Wisconsin Project [privatized "welfare-to-work" program]. This New Left is us, all of us.

All those who came here tonight; all those who dared to cross the imaginary line separating West and East Jerusalem despite the threats and intimidation  -  we are all the New Left that is rising in Israel and Palestine. We are not fighting for a peace agreement; we are fighting for justice. But we believe that injustice is the main obstacle to peace. Until the Ghawis, the Hanouns and the El-Kurds return to their homes, there will be no peace; because peace will not take root where discrimination, oppression, and plunder exist. There is a New Left in town and this left stands with the residents of Sheikh Jarrah tonight, and it will continue standing with them until justice overcomes fanaticism.

But there is also a New Right in town. A Right filled with envy and racism that seduces the masses with its jingoistic rhetoric. The New Right has no interest in the well-being and the welfare of human beings. The New Right is only interested in a narrow ethnic and tribal loyalty a la Avigdor Liberman.  For the New Right only the Jewish poor deserve attention. And what makes someone Jewish is that they're not Arabic. The New Right has nothing to offer but never-ending war. The New Right has nothing to offer bur hate for the other: Arabs, refugees and leftists.

This New Right creates the fanatic settlers against whom we are demonstrating tonight. These settlers hate Jerusalem. They have no love for Israel and no love for humankind – they love only themselves. There are many amongst the settlers who can and should carry out a dialogue with. But the settlers in Sheikh Jarrah who sing songs of praise to Baruch Goldstein – must be defeated.

The New Right created the mayor of Jerusalem Nir Barkat. He is a technocrat who doesn't understand or care about Jerusalem. He is a mayor who uses administrative terror against the residents of East Jerusalem and neglects the residents of West Jerusalem, while mouthing empty clichés.  If Jerusalem is a powder keg, then Nir Barkat is the one who is striking the match. But Barkat doesn't scare us and neither do the settlers or Liberman.

We will continue coming to Sheikh Jarrah and everywhere that justice is crushed by the forces of occupation and oppression. Take a look around you; we are not as few as we thought we were! And we will prevail!

How Three Philosophy Students Bested the Police in the Israeli Supreme Court

The print edition of Haaretz on Friday told the fascinating tale of how three philosophy students, Asaf Sharon, Avner Inbar, and Avichai Sharon, managed to force the Jerusalem Police to allow the Sheikh Jarrah demonstration Saturday night.

Readers of the Magnes Zionist may remember two of those students, Avner Inbar and Asaf Sharon, among the signatories of the letter addressed to Prof. Moshe Halbertal criticizing his New Republic article against the Goldstone Report. Read about it here.

By the way, Prof. Halbertal was at the Sheikh Jarrah protest Saturday night, along with other members of the Old Zionist left. It wasn't his first time there, either. As Rabbi Hanina says in the Talmud,

From my teachers I learned much, from my colleagues I learned more, but most of all do I learn from my students

Here is an adaptation of the Haaretz article by Nir Hason.

How Three Philosophy Students Drove the Police Crazy

Somebody who entered the chambers of the Supreme Court yesterday was treated to a strange sight: across from three judges and the states attorney representative, all in black robes, as is customary, stood three young bearded students. The three, Asaf Sharon, Avner Inbar, and Avichai Sharon, among the central activists against the settlers in Sheikh Jarrah, were the sole authors of a petition and represented themselves in court without legal counsel. "We studied the law, the directive of the Police's Central Command, and the relevant petitions to the High Court. We followed the police's conduct, we received help from the residents, and we wrote," said Avichai Sharon."

Asaf Sharon took the role of litigator. "I felt pretty pressured. I am not accustomed to stand before judges. I never studied law. On the other hand, I felt quite certain of our claim and of its justice," Sharon said."But it was a very frustrating experience for me to see the District Commander say things that were far from the truth."

Apparently the Jerusalem Police didn't take their opponents seriously. When the petition for a demonstration was first presented to them, they refused even to consider it, saying that it was necessary for the petitioners to give a reason for the protest. When the petitioners arrived at court they were supported by people such as former Minister Yossi Sarid, the head of the Israel Civil Liberties Association, Haggai Elad, who himself was arrested at one of the demonstrations.... Avichai Sharon explained,"There is an important message that reflects the way we have organized, which is without any institutional backing. We are simply people that live in this city, who are consumed, disturbed, and worried by this story"

Sheikh Jarrah and the Birth of a Coalition

Around five thousand demonstrators protested the eviction of Arab families from their homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem and the settlement there of rightwing Jewish extremists. It was the largest Sheikh Jarrah protest and the largest joint Israeli-Palestinian protest so far.

The protest was composed of an interesting mix – Jewish leftwing activists, mostly (but not entirely) young; the Zionist left Meretz-Peace Now crowd, mostly (and entirely) old; Israeli Palestinian activists, and representatives of the evicted families. There were Israeli singers and a Palestinian hip-hop group from Shuafat. Many of the speeches were given in Arabic, both Jerusalem colloquial and standard, and judging from the crowd, more of the younger Israeli Jewish activists understood the speeches than the older generation. The “drummers” and the clowns were there in full force – these are activists who play the drum and dress up as clowns in an attempt both to lighten up the protest, and to drive home the point of non-violent protest. I also saw some familiar faces and fellow bloggers, including Rabbi Brian Walt (Didi Remez was also there, but I didn’t catch up with him.)

The speeches represented the spectrum of the new coalition – from an Israeli Palestinian actor-activist who protested the presence of an Israeli flag with the word “peace” on it, saying that there will not be peace until there is one democratic secular state, to the older generation of Peace Now activists like Daphna Golan and Mossi Raz, the latter speaking of two states. Dov Khenin of Had ash gave a rousing speech, and there were a bunch of red flags.

But in my opinion, the highlight of the night was a speech delivered by young Israeli activist, Sarah Benninga, who spoke about the New Left and the New Right. As soon as I get my hands on that, I will try to post some of it. At the end of the demonstration, three hundred activists were allowed to walk to the site of the Palestinian homes. Initially, the police had refused the protesters a permit to demonstrate near the houses, citing the usual reasons given for suppressing democratic protest in Israel (sensitive territory, friction between settlers and activists, difficulty of protecting the protesters, etc.) The court threw out all of the reasons but nevertheless did not allow the big demonstration to be held next to the houses. That was the compromise.

Haaretz published in its Friday Hebrew edition the fascinating story about how the activists beat the police in court. I will translate that in a separate post.

Saturday Night Live from Sheikh Jarrah

 

Readers of this blog have been informed of the weekly protests in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in Jerusalem/Al-Quds against the eviction of Arab residents from their homes. These evictions – with the imprimatur of the "leftist, activist" Israeli High Court -- demonstrate the immorality and hypocrisy of the Israeli Jewish occupation of Jerusalem – where Jews are allowed to reclaim pre-1948 houses but Palestinians are not. The purpose of these settlements is to Judaize all of Jerusalem and to herd Palestinians into ghettoes – and, of course, to ensure that Jerusalem is cut off from the Palestinian West Bank.

These are dark times. There is no peace process, thank God: the peace process is a scam, a stalling tactic that Israel and the Palestinian Authority used to maintain the status quo. Hillary stands up and make jokes about gefilte fish while people suffer in Palestine. Why George Mitchell hasn't quit yet is a mystery to me.

"Peace, peace, and there is no peace." No, now is not the time for peace. It is the time for protest, for demonstrations, for boycott, divestment and sanctions, for delegitimizing the very regime that fosters such injustice in my name.

And let's not forget about prayer.

There are so many things to do, even for ineffectual academics like yours truly. But why go to demonstrations? Years ago, after my umpteenth Peace Now demonstration, I swore off demonstrations. I still hate those things. I hate the crowds; I feel sorry for the police; and where does it get you? But then the next demonstration rolls around, and I say to myself, I won't be there?

So come to the demonstration at Sheikh Jarrah. Forget Rabin Square in Tel-Aviv. And when you come, say hello to the old white guy with the scruffy beard (no, not Uri Avnery), wearing a cap.

Open Shuhada Street – International Action on Feb. 25

February 25 has been proclaimed Open Shuhada Street Day by international activists who wish to focus attention on the plight of Palestinians in Hebron, and in the Occupied Territories. Initiated by a group of south African activists, there will be activities around the world dramatizing the plight of the Palestinians of Hebron. Please check out their website here for more news.

What is Shuhada Street.? It is – or was – the main market and commercial section of the city of Hebron. In 1994, in response to the Barukh Goldstein massacre, the street was closed, ostensibly for the safety of the Palestinian residents. Over the next few years, the street has been closed, the businesses left to wither, and Palestinians not allowed to walk on the street. (Jews can and do.) Residents of buildings on the street cannot enter their homes from their doors, which are welded shut.

Why is the street closed? In order to create a buffer zone between the Jewish settlers in Hebron and the Palestinians. The closure has been criticized by the Israeli High Court and has destroyed countless lives, but let's face it – the people in charge in Hebron are the settlers and their allies in the military and the government.

An excellent F.A.Q. is available on the Open Shuhada Website here. You still have time to find out about activities close to you.

February 25 also happens to be this year the Fast of Esther, observed by Jews throughout the world in commemoration of the dark days that preceded the Festival of Purim and Queen Esther's fast for the Jews.

In Purim, the mood for the day is nahafokh hu, 'topsy turvy'. Unfortunately, in Hebron, and throughout the Occupied Territories, topsy turvy reigns. The oppressors are not the Persian Haman and his crowd, but the Israeli Jews. And the oppressed are not the Jews of the Persian empire, but the Palestinians of the Israeli empire.

When Queen Esther hesitated to take action on behalf of her fellow-Jews, her uncle Mordecai said, "If you keep silent now, deliverance for the Jews will come from an other place." Traditional Jews have taken the "other place" to refer to God, who is sometimes called, the Place. I believe that God will, ultimately, bring deliverance to the Palestinians from their decades of suffering. But that is not an excuse for inaction. After all, Esther acted.

The Open Shuhada website has videos of Shuhada street. But there is no substitute for seeing it with your own eyes, on a tour offered by the Children of Abraham organization.

I end this post with a statement by a Palestinian resident of Shuhada Street, who can tell you better than I can what it is to live on it.

What it means to re-open Shuhada Street..

Many people might think why do we need to have Shuhada Street open.. it's one of the most important streets in Hebron, as it connects the northern part of the city to the south. Not only this, it also connects people.. many people have lost their social life when the Street was closed, because their relatives and friends do not like to be stopped at the check-points or in the streets when they come to visit. And when they visited in the past, it used to be a walking distance, but now they need to take a detour around the city to get to the house they desire. People now think ten times when they plan a visit to house at Shuhada Street. First, they have to consider the time that they will take for the visit, and the money they will spend. Many people lost their businesses when Shuhada Street was closed and the job opportunities are less available these day than before, so they have to think money wise.

Personally, I live at Shuhada Street but I can't use my front door because I am Palestinian. My neighbours made an opening in their wall to make me a passage so that I don't become a hostage in my house. In fact I live like a prisoner in my house.. I have installed some wire fence on my balconies to be protected from the stones "gifts" that the settlers always throw at the house. Before the fence, I could not open my shutters. If by mistake I left the shutters open, I would immediately receive the "gifts" from these settlers. I still receive these "gifts" but they do not hit me like before. I collected these "gifts" and used them to decorate my garden and wrote the word "peace" in Arabic.

It's really hard to live where I am because everything is closed, I used to go shopping nearby, but now if I go shopping, I need to walk a distance and carry my shopping because I can't bring my shopping home in a car. One time I had a severe kidney pain, I could not have the ambulance in front of my door to go to the hospital. My brother's house is 2 minutes walk from Shuhada, but I need to walk about 20 minutes to get to his house.

The Israeli army and police always tell us that they are in the area for the protection of both Palestinians and Israelis, but in fact, they stormed my house 3 times in one week to check about a complaint from a soldier that some children threw stones at the street from my house, although I live only with my mother and have no children. Many times the settler children and youth threw stones at my house and I filed complaints to the soldiers and police, and they did nothing to stop it.

Opening Shuhada Street is a big need for peace and humanity.

Zleikha Muhtaseb, Principal of the al-Ibrahimiya Kindergarten
Shuhada Street

 

 

Why Bomb Iran When You Can Become Iran?

That seems to be the thinking behind the Israeli government's endorsement of legislation that will require human rights NGOs in Israel (e.g., B'Tselem, Machsomwatch, Breaking the Silence, Adalah, etc.) to publicize contributions from foreign governments, not only in an annual report (they all do that anyway), but every single time they host an event, have a meeting, publish a report, issue a news release, whether they have received outside funding for that particular occasion or not.

And what's particularly odious about the proposed legislation is that if these groups receive such funding, they groups will lose their tax status as public institutions, but will be defined as "political entities" that have to register and report to the Registrar of Political Parties.

Lest you think that I am exaggerating, I publish sections of the government-approved legislation below. And the Iran analogy is apt: the Iran regime requires all NGOs, including the civil society ones that Americans of all stripe support, to inform a government agency of every contribution they receive from foreign sources, except the United Nations. Read about it here Or read about how Egypt controls and harassess its civil society NGOs here (h/t to Dr. Marsha Cohen and Dan Sisken for these links, respectively.)

Of course, in Iran, the groups also have to ask the agency's permission to receive those grants; I expect that this will be the next step in the Israeli's governmental campaign against the human rights NGOs.

But hang on a second: What's wrong with requiring Israeli human rights organizations to report receiving money from foreign governments? In fact, why should they be allowed to receive such money at all? Isn't that gross interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state? And what's the big deal of simply announcing the truth. Transparency and full disclosure should accompany such organizations, no?

OK, so here are three answers to the stated purpose of the law, which is to balance freedom of speech with the right of the public to know who is behind these organizations.

1. The proposed law is unnecessary.

As I said above, all the voluntary organizations in Israel (amutot) are required by law to report regularly to the government. It so happens that the human rights NGOs often go beyond the requirement and publicize the sources of their funding. This is expected; you don't get money without thanking the organization or individual or government that gave you the money. The human rights organizations are, not surprisingly, proud of their work and grateful for support. Some of them are required by the donors to publicize the funding. When NGO Monitor "broke" the story this summer that the Breaking the Silence booklet of soldiers' testimonies was paid for, in part, by grants from foreign governments, they found that information printed on the first few pages of the booklet! And unlike NGO Monitor, Breaking the Silence publishes its annual financial reports on its website.

2. The proposed law is discriminatory.

The law has been crafted by right-wingers to target the human rights organizations. If your organization receives money from a Jewish gambling mogul, or from an evangelical Christian organization that looks forward to the destruction of the State of Israel when Jesus returns, you are exempt. Governments like Spain, Holland, and Great Britain, don't fund illegal settlements; they fund peace initiatives civil society initiatives, in Israel as in Iran.

3. The proposed law's real purpose is to harass, delegitimize, and dry up funding for progressive NGOs.

If the law only required disclosure on a website, that would be bad enough. But the law requires each organization to go through bureaucratic hoops repeatedly, and to proclaim something like the Surgeon General's warning every time it does anything publicly. Thus, if B'Tselem rolls out a report on settler violence, and hosts a public event to publicize the report – remember, this is the organization that works together with the Israel Defense Forces to locate Palestinian witnesses in IDF investigations -- it must begin the event by announcing that it has sometime, somewhere received money from Holland, say. And if it does not do so? According to the proposed legislation, all members of B'Tselem who were in a position to know where the money came from, and who did not do anything about it are liable to fines and up to a year in prison, "or four times the value of the consideration that was received, whichever is higher."

The analogy with the Surgeon General's warning is significant. The purpose of requiring such disclosure is not merely to satisfy the public's right to know (Who doesn't know by now that cigarette smoking causes cancer?) but to stigmatize and delegitimize cigarette smoking.

Not every government will be willing to have this publicity. Already the foreign ministry and the prime minister have tried to dissuade foreign governments from donating to such groups. And, from the government's perspective, it is understandable why. They are an embarrassment to Israel's image, and they publicize the crimes of the Occupation. These are things that the current rightwing government in Israel doesn't like. Nor does the current rightwing government in Iran.

If there is a need to inform the Israeli public about foreign funding of NGOs, or of transparency in their operations, then have a law that requires transparency of all such organizations, left, right or none of the above. As I said earlier, the human rights NGOs are among the most transparent in the country. Try tracing the funding for some of the settlers' organizations; it isn't easy.

If such a law passes, it will be not only be a black day for what is left of Israeli democracy but there will be other consequences as well. First, foreign governments that sponsor human rights and peace projects will figure out a way how to get the money to the organizations, bypassing the law. So that could make things worse for transparency. Second, I would advise the NGOs to discuss with their legal advisor whether the bill applies to them. After all, they do not view themselves as political entities, and at least some of the NGOs are not there primarily to influence domestic or foreign policy. Breaking the Silence sees its task as informational – letting the Israeli public know what happens to IDF soldiers when they are placed in Occupation situations. The group does not call to end the Occupation or to annex the West Bank and Gaza – it simply wants the Israeli public to know what price Israel is paying for the Occupation. The rightwing considers that political, fine. But will the law and the courts? Third, Israel will be placed by the EU on a list of countries that are unfriendly to human rights organizations. This, too, will have consequences

Here are some passages from the proposed legislation, with my "Perush Rashi" (commentary; my thanks to Didi Remez for providing me with a translation of the bill.) Let's start with the wide expansion of the phrase "political activity"

"political activity" – an activity intended to influence public opinion in Israel or in whatsoever entity in one of the government authorities in Israel concerning any component of internal or external policy of the State of Israel.

Perush Rashi: The expansion is deliberate in order to counter the argument that these groups are not political organization, or lobbying groups. In fact, they are not, and I think that even with the expansion, at least some of the groups could claim that they are not covered by the law.

A person or body shall not receive the financial support of a Foreign Political Entity for the purpose of financing political activity in Israel until after it has registered with the Registrar of Political Parties; for this purpose, any support that is received by anyone who finances or engages in political activity is presumed support for the purpose of financing political activity.

Perush Rashi: Now that we have expanded the meaning of political activity, we expand the meaning of what support for political activity means. So any Euro received by an group will automatically be considered political in purpose.

    The Registrar of Political Parties shall also serve as Registrar of Foreign Political Entity Support (hereinafter – the Registrar).

Perush Rashi: This is my favorite line in the bill. Since there is no government agency that supervises such bodies, the authors decided to "create" one by interpreting the Registrar of Political Parties to include the human rights NGOS. It reminds me of Firesign Theater's famous, "Department of Redundancy Department." Except that here there is no redundancy – there is an expansion to brand the human rights NGOS as political parties.

The supported entity shall file an annual balance sheet and financial statement of its income and expenditures as a supported entity in each fiscal year.  The statement shall include full particulars according to the list appearing in Section 36 of the Amutot Law, and in the Second Addendum thereto.  The supported entity shall file an annual verbatim report which will include details of the matters enumerated in the Third Addendum to the Amutot Law.

Perush Rashi: Here is where we really get to the Department of Redundancy Department. The NGOS already file an annual balance sheet, etc. with the agency governing Amutot. So what is the purpose of this filing? Harassment.

The supported entity or one acting on its behalf will clearly note this status in every document, including electronic one, which relates to political activity. The supported entity or one acting on its behalf, when presenting orally in the framework of a discussion or meeting in which there is political activity, shall note its status at the outset if the subject of the discussion or meeting has an affinity to the aims for which the support was received.

Perush Rashi: Maybe next year the government will require all members of human rights NGOs to walk around with scarlet letters or yellow stars on their t-shirts.

              A supported corporation shall not be considered a Public Institution as defined in Section 9(2) of the Income Tax Ordinance.

Perush Rashi: I.e., it will lose its former tax status, another form of harassment.

The recipient of financial support of a Foreign Political Entity in contravention of the provisions of Section 3, shall be sentenced to one year imprisonment or a fine, as stated in Section 61(a)(3) of the Penal Law, 5737-1977 or four times the value of the consideration that was received, whichever is higher. Delivery of an essentially false detail in a declaration according to Section 6 shall be punishable by three years imprisonment.

Perush Rashi: And while you're out, don't forget the pound of flesh.

Who says that Israel's government doesn't try to fit in with the other Middle East governments?