Category Archives: Human Rights

Syrians Pay the Price in a Sick Proxy War

An injured civilian is evacuated after shelling by government forces in Aleppo. (Zohra Bensemra/Reuters)

Now that UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has resigned and is no longer leading the effort to find a diplomatic solution to the horrors unfolding in Syria, the prospect for a peaceful conclusion to this conflict look bleaker than ever – if it’s even possible to suggest such a thing:

(Kofi Annan) cited the Syrian government’s “intransigence” and the opposition’s “escalating military campaign” as major impediments to his peace efforts, along with a lack of unity in the international community on how to deal with the crisis.

I’m thinking “lack of unity in the international community” was just Annan’s polite way of saying this tragic mess in Syria has devolved into a sickening proxy war in which no one’s hands are clean and the only losers are the Syrian people themselves.

If you dare, I recommend you read this blisteringly bitter analysis by journalist Robert Fisk, who excoriates the cynical interests – from the US, to Russia and China, to Qatar and Saudi Arabia, to Hezbollah, to the media, to “our dear liberal selves – who are allowing Syria to be used as a bloody chess board, even as they speak out against the daily atrocities that are occurring there:

Has there ever been a Middle Eastern war of such hypocrisy? A war of such cowardice and such mean morality, of such false rhetoric and such public humiliation? I’m not talking about the physical victims of the Syrian tragedy. I’m referring to the utter lies and mendacity of our masters and our own public opinion – eastern as well as western – in response to the slaughter, a vicious pantomime more worthy of Swiftian satire than Tolstoy or Shakespeare.

What could possibly be the outcome of a cowardly proxy war in a sectarian Middle Eastern country? Samia Nakhoul, in a lengthy piece for Reuters, offered this dismal – if most likely – answer:

With no Western appetite for military intervention and no prospect of an internationally mediated political resolution, many see the civil war spreading and tearing the country apart.

“Disintegration of Syria is a possibility and the problem is it won’t work. It would create a power vacuum in which others get dragged in just like Iraq. It is a very frightening scenario,” (Cambridge University analyst George) Joffe said.

Lebanese columnist Rajeh Khoury predicted: “Syria could plunge into a long protracted civil war that could last years. The civil war in Lebanon, with its much smaller population of five million, lasted 15 years due to foreign interference so Syria would be much more complicated.

“The Syrian crisis is so inflammatory that its flames will affect the region in one way or another.”

A prayer for the people of Syria – and a pox on all our houses…

The New One-State Solution: Connecting the Dots

27 Replies

Connect these dots:

From The Guardian:

The number of Jewish settlers in the West Bank grew by more than 15,000 in the past year to reach a total that exceeds 350,000 for the first time and has almost doubled in the past 12 years.

Figures from Israel’s population registry show a 4.5% increase in the past 12 months. Most of the newcomers moved into settlements that many observers expect to be evacuated in any peace deal leading to a Palestinian state.

There are an additional 300,000 Jews living in settlements across the pre-1967 border in East Jerusalem, the pro-government and mass-circulation newspaper Israel Hayom reported.

Putting a finer point on these statistics, Dani Dayan, chairman of the settlers Yesha Council had this to say in a recent NY Times op-ed:

(We) aim to expand the existing Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria, and create new ones. This is not — as it is often portrayed — a theological adventure but is rather a combination of inalienable rights and realpolitik. Even now, and despite the severe constraints imposed by international pressure, more than 350,000 Israelis live in Judea and Samaria. With an annual growth rate of 5 percent, we can expect to reach 400,000 by 2014 — and that excludes the almost 200,000 living in Jerusalem’s newer neighborhoods. Taking Jerusalem into account, about 1 in every 10 Israeli Jews resides beyond the 1967 border. Approximately 160,000 Jews live in communities outside the settlement blocs that proponents of the two-state solution believe could be easily incorporated into Israel.

…Our presence in all of Judea and Samaria — not just in the so-called settlement blocs — is an irreversible fact. Trying to stop settlement expansion is futile, and neglecting this fact in diplomatic talks will not change the reality on the ground; it only makes the negotiations more likely to fail.

In essence, Dayan is calling for a kind of a one-state solution here – albeit one that does not extend citizenship rights to non-Jewish residents. (Although in fairness to Dayan, he does say they should be given “freedom of movement.”)

Still can’t figure out what’s going on here? Let’s connect the final dot. While the Jewish population in Area C of the West Bank is increasing, Israel is demolishing homes, evicting Palestinians, and moving them into Areas A and B at an ever-increasing pace.

Here’s Mya Guarnieri, writing in +972:

At the same time that Israeli settlements are expanding unchecked, the state is putting the Palestinians and Bedouins who live in Area C under extreme, unrelenting pressure, as exemplified by this week’s report by Haaretz that Defense Minister Barak has ordered the demolition of eight Palestinian villages to make way for IDF training.

Demolitions of homes and structures in 2012 have seen an increase. According to a source at the United Nations, between January 1 and April 27 of 2011, 352 Palestinian and Bedouin were forcibly displaced from their homes in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. The same period of 2012 saw “at least 487″ people lose their homes.

It’s a one-two punch intended to increase the Jewish population in the West Bank as much as possible and deplete the Palestinian population as much as possible to ready the area for annexation. Susya, a Palestinian village that is under threat of demolition, is an example of how this works. The village has been destroyed numerous times since the Jewish settlement of Susya was built there in 1983, despite the documents proving it belongs to Palestinians and the fact that this small community has no where else to go.

Israeli pressure on the Palestinian and Bedouin residents of Area C has resulted in a drop in the Arab population in the same area.

And then there’s the Levy Committee Report, which denies that there is an occupation and, according to some observers, lays the legal groundwork (at least in the mind of the Israeli government) for a unilateral annexation of Area C.

It’s not a matter of if. It’s a matter of when.

OK, I’ll say it for you: Israel has no intention of creating a two-state solution. It is creating it’s own “one-state” solution by increasing the Jewish population in the West Bank and warehousing Palestinians in Bantustans throughout Areas A and B. By any other name this would be called an “apartheid” state.

If there are those who disagree with my calculus, I’m certainly open to hearing alternative explanations. In the meantime, here are two questions I’m still unable to answer: when will our community be ready to call out this illegal and immoral behavior? And what will we be willing to do about it?

Why I Support Kairos USA

16 Replies

Last week a group of US clergy, theologians and laypersons unveiled Karios USA, a powerful and important American Christian spiritual call for justice in Israel and Palestine. As a religious Jew, I am inspired by its prophetic courage, its unabashed call for justice and its heartfelt model of compassion. It truly deserves to be shared and studied by all who who seek a genuinely religious call for justice in this land that is so central to so many peoples and spiritual traditions.

Kairos USA is modeled on the religious testimony of Kairos Palestine, a document that was drafted by prominent Palestinian Christian leaders in 2009 (which was itself inspired by the 1985 South African Kairos statement). Despite these important influences, however, Kairos USA stands on its own as a uniquely American Christian call for justice in Israel/Palestine.

Indeed, this unique mission is evoked in the statement’s Preamble at the very outset:

In June 2011, a group of U.S. clergy, theologians and laypersons, cognizant of our responsibility as Americans in the tragedy unfolding in Israel and Palestine, and mindful of the urgency of the situation, met to inaugurate a new movement for American Christians. We have been inspired by the prophetic church movements of southern Africa, Central and South America, Asia and Europe that have responded to the call of their Christian sisters and brothers in occupied Palestine. This is our statement of witness and confession—and our response as U.S. Christians to the Palestinian call.

And more specifically, from the Introduction:

As U.S. Christians we bear responsibility for failing to say “Enough!” when our nation’s ally, the State of Israel, violates international law. Our government has financed Israel’s unjust policies and has shielded its government from criticism by the international community. At the outset of the current U.S. administration, our government led Palestinians to believe that at last we would pursue a political solution based on justice. But the “peace process” has continued to be no more than a means for the continuing colonization of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the imprisonment of Gaza and the intensification of the structures of oppression.

I have no doubt at all that like Kairos Palestine, Kairos USA will be excoriated by many self-appointed leaders of the American Jewish establishment. As for myself, now that I’ve read the document carefully, I can say without hesitation that I believe this statement is a truly sacred testimony, offered in good faith and with genuine religious integrity.

I was particularly moved to read how sensitively Kairos USA treads over some of the most complex hot-button issues in the Jewish-Christian relationship. For instance, on the issue of historical church anti-Semitism, the statement includes the following confession:

As Christians addressing the Palestinian cause we must also acknowledge our shameful role in the historic persecution of the Jewish people. We recognize the dehumanizing and destructive power of doctrines and theologies that denigrated Judaism. Our predecessors perpetuated anti-Semitic stereotypes, practiced scapegoating and cloaked prejudice, hostility and murder itself in the robes of our religion. We confess that our churches failed to resist, and sometimes even aided and abetted pogroms, mass dislocations of Jews, and the calamity of the Nazi Holocaust itself. In so doing, they betrayed the teaching and example of the one we claim to follow. We speak for and with our forbears in expressing deep remorse. With a commitment to never forget those failures and to be instructed by them, we pledge ourselves to growth in faithfulness, compassion and justice.

The statement goes on, however, to state that Christians’ honest desire to repent for the church’s historic crimes against Jews must not inhibit them from speaking out against injustices perpetrated by Israel against Palestinians. To my mind, this is a call for real and honest interfaith relations – dialogue that is not defined by guilt or emotional blackmail, but rather by a willingness to venture into and openly discuss the more difficult and painful places:

We acknowledge with sadness and distress that because of the powerful impulse on the part of Christians to atone for their sins against the Jewish people, vigilance against anti-Semitism today has come to trump working for justice in Palestine and Israel. The Christian need to rectify centuries of anti-Jewish doctrine and actions and to avoid even the perception of anti-Jewish feeling has served to silence criticism of Israel’s policies and any questioning of the consequences of U.S. government support for Israel. Differences between anti-Semitism and legitimate opposition to Israeli actions are avoided or explained away. Responsible discourse about Zionism is often denounced as hostility toward Israel and its citizens or branded as anti-Semitism. We believe that in our dialogue with our Jewish friends, family members and colleagues and in our relationships with the Jewish community on institutional levels, we must confront this pattern of avoiding, denying or suppressing discussion of issues that may cause conflict or discomfort. The fact that anti-Semitism still exists makes it all the more important to differentiate between actual anti-Jewish feelings and criticism of the actions of a nation state. Uncomfortable though it may be, we cannot be afraid to address the urgent issue of justice and human rights in Israel and Palestine with our Jewish sisters and brothers here in the United States.

I also deeply admire the statement’s willingness to directly address the charged issue of so-called Christian “replacement” or “supersessionist” theology (a view that promotes Christianity – and not Judaism – as the genuine fulfillment of Biblical tradition):

We are aware that in denying a theology of entitlement that gives the Jewish people exclusive rights to the Holy Land, we risk the charge of reviving the Christian doctrine known as replacement theology (sometimes known as supersessionism). In this view, the Church takes the place of Israel in God’s purposes, denigrating Judaism itself and condemning the Jews to suffering for rejecting the Gospel. Christians have rightly wished to distance themselves from this destructive and divisive doctrine. We repudiate the anti-Semitic legacy of the church’s past and the theology that undergirds it.

As a Jew who rejects a sense of Jewish entitlement just as strongly as I reject any religious viewpoint that makes an exclusive claim to the land, I particularly appreciate Kairos USA’s religious approach on this point:

Our core Christian belief is that God’s promise in the Gospel is a promise to all nations. This means that God’s kingdom work in Christ is a promise to everyone regardless of race. We believe that the Church has found in Christ a fulfillment of all that God promised in Abraham, and that both Jews and Gentiles have been invited equally into this promise of a world renewed in love and compassion. The Church does not replace Israel. Jews continue to have a place in God’s plan for the world. In Christ, all nations can be blessed (Genesis 18:18, 22:18; Galatians 3:8). In these times of growing international conflict and cultural mistrust, this is a significant promise. Theologies that privilege one nation with political entitlements to the exclusion of others miss a central tenet of the Gospel and inspire increased conflict.

I believe the above statement provides a crucial challenge to both American Jews and Christians. From a theological point of view, I believe it is time to reframe the issue. The real debate is not about which religious tradition or people has a more compelling religious “right” to the land of Israel, rather, it is between those who make exclusivist theological claims and those whose theology makes room for all peoples who live on or feel a connection to this land.

I also have no doubt that many in the American Jewish establishment will reject out of hand Kairos USA’s positive advocacy of BDS (“Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions”). But here again, I find that the statement deals with a hot-button issue with sensitivity and integrity:

Participation in the BDS movement by U.S. churches, notably in the form of initiatives to divest church funds from companies profiting from the occupation of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza, has generated critically-important discussions at local, denominational and ecumenical levels about the responsibility of the church to act. It has also generated intense controversy. Opposition, from Jewish organizations as well as from voices within the churches, has often been fierce, claiming that such actions will inflict grievous damage on hard-won positive relationships with the Jewish community. Many express fear that these actions may encourage anti-Semitism. We note with distress that many have confused these actions with anti-Jewish discrimination and persecution in the Christian past. But BDS is directed at Israeli policy, not the state itself or its citizens, and certainly not against the Jewish people. Divestment and other forms of socially responsible investing (SRI) are not directed against groups, nor are they intended to hurt individuals, corporations or states. They are, rather, directed at unjust, oppressive policies and are about promoting our own values and stated commitments by noncooperation with evil. Furthermore, methods to exert economic pressure on governments and companies, in addition to being a legal, ethical and time-tested way of influencing the political process and corporate behavior, serve to increase awareness, promote open discussion and create the grassroots support required to urge governments to take effective action and to change unjust policies. We urge congregations, clergy and church leaders to become educated about the BDS movement and to consider the many forms that it can take on personal, local and national levels.

As I American Jew who is deeply distressed by the American Jewish establishment’s abject vilification of BDS, I don’t think I could possibly put it any better.

I urge all people – whether religious and secular, Christian, Jewish or Muslim – to read, share, discuss and respectfully debate this important new American statement of faith. My deepest gratitude to those (including my good friends Mark Braverman and Father Cotton Fite) who helped spearhead and draft Kairos USA. May it inspire us all to reframe a new religious response to the sorrows of Israel/Palestine – and lead the way to a better future to all who call this land home.

Some More Thoughts on Caterpillar Divestment

9 Replies

A follow-up on my last post:

I just read an interesting article in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency by Ron Kampeas that concludes the sale of Caterpillar tractors to Israel was a factor (if not the “determining one”) in the MSCI and TIAA-CREFF decisions to delist Caterpillar from its portfolios.

For such a mainstream Jewish publication, it was a fairly bold admission. Of course the article also contained the obligatory statements from Caterpillar and Jewish establishment reps downplaying CAT’s responsibility in the sale of armored/weaponized bulldozers to the Israeli military. In one instance, Kampeas’ article quoted a Caterpillar statement that denied the direct sales of the infamous D9 Track-Type bulldozers to Israel:

“This is how it works,” corporate spokesman Jim Dugan said. “Caterpillar sells equipment to the U.S. government, which then transfers the equipment to the Israeli government, which then transfers it to the Israeli military. Israeli is one of about 150 countries that take part in the program, which supports U.S. allies. For the D9s, the protective armor plating, the bullet resistant glass and other modifications take place after the machine has been transferred to the Israeli government by the U.S. government. These changes happen after the sale, not in our factories.”

Actually, it’s misleading in the extreme to claim that Caterpillar “sells its equipment to the US government.” In truth, the US government acts as a intermediary between the CAT and the Israeli military through the US Foreign Military Sales program (FMS). Caterpillar certainly knows full well that it is entering into a contract with the Israeli military – every FMS sale is preceded by a notification to Congress that lists the government purchasing the equipment and the contractor providing it.

It is also highly disingenuous to claim CAT has nothing to do with the armoring and weaponizing of the D9s. In fact, these massive bulldozers are retrofitted by ITE – Caterpillar’s sole representative in Israel, who is also responsible for the D9’s ongoing maintenance and support during operations, including military operations.

To put it simply, the relationship between CAT and the Israeli military are a key part of the military-corporate alliance that enables the occupation.

I was also struck by this quote from Ethan Felson, the vice president of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs:

Felson … said that linking Caterpillar to Israeli practices was “nonsensical,” noting that it had no say in how the US military resells the tractors, and that it could not legally turn down the U.S. military as a client.

In fact, Felson’s statement is beyond “nonsensical.” CAT has “no say in how the US resells the tractors?” The US Foreign Military Sales program exists for the specific purpose of facilitating individual contracts between companies and foreign governments. Moreover, Caterpillar certainly has the right and the ability not to renew its contract with Israel’s military if it determines its equipment is being used to violate human rights.

Yes, there were likely many factors considered in this latest divestment decision, but as the article points out, the efforts of divestment activists certainly played an important part. And it is also important to bear in mind that this is not ultimately about MSCI or TIAA-CREFF or even Caterpillar – it is about exposing the human rights abuses committed by Israel in pursuance of its brutal and illegal occupation.

The professional apologists can spin or distort the facts all they want – but in the end, the dogged efforts of divestment activists are helping, slowly but surely, to bring Israel’s egregious policies out into the light of day.

UPDATE 6/27/12: In a just-released statement, MSCI stated that the “on-going controversy associated with use of the company’s equipment in the occupied Palestinian territories” was a “key factor” in their decision to drop Caterpillar.

MSCI and TIAA-CREFF Divest from Caterpillar!

11 Replies

This is huge.

In the most significant Israel divestment milestone to date, the MSCI (Morgan Stanley Capital International) World Socially Responsible Index recently removed Caterpillar from its list. Shortly thereafter, financial retirement fund giant TIAA-CREF divested Caterpillar from its portfolio as well!

Did I say this was huge? CAT has been a target of divestment activists for many years – and rightly so. The company has come under increasing criticism from human rights organizations for continuing to supply bulldozers to Israel, which uses them to demolish Palestinian civilian homes and destroy crops and agricultural land in the occupied territories. In the succinct words of Amnesty International: “Thousands of families have had their homes and possessions destroyed under the blades of the Israeli army’s US-made Caterpillar bulldozers.”

This is only the beginning. Last month, the Quaker Friends Fiduciary Corporation, divested $900,000 in shares of Caterpillar. And earlier this month the undergraduate student government at Arizona State University, unanimously passed a bill demanding that ASU divest from and blacklist all companies that continue to provide the IDF with weapons and militarized equipment. All this in advance of the Presbyterian Church (USA) General Assembly in Pittsburgh later this month, in which church commissioners will vote on a motion to divest from Caterpillar and two other companies (Motorola Solutions and Hewlett-Packard) that profit from Israel’s occupation.

To those who say that the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement will not succeed, stay tuned. This is precisely how movements get started. A few significant victories and the dominoes begin to fall more rapidly. Individual actions such as this may have more symbolic than financial impact, but don’t discount the power of symbolic victories. History has taught us again and again that nonviolent direct action has the power, step by step, to leverage real and lasting political change.

Israel continues its brutal occupation and settlement policy with impunity and no government (notably our own) seems able or willing to hold it to account.

Just watch as people power moves in to fill the vacuum.

On Syrians, Palestinians and American Options

6 Replies

I’ve just written the following in response to a comment on the tragic situation unfolding in Syria, but I think it bears posting here front and center on the main page. Further comments, as always, are welcome:

Ike, you are right that the butchery going on in Syria is heinous and deserves the highest possible condemnation. I also agree 100% with you that the human rights situation going on there is far more acute than “what is going on with the Palestinians.” In fact, Palestinian blogger Sami Kishawi recently made this very point in a recent post in which he also quoted a Palestinian protester in New York who said on YouTube:

The horrible things happening in Syria, even Israel didn’t do to us in Palestine. Anybody who says that the Assad regime is with Palestine and that the atrocities happening are in our favor is wrong, and if the freedom of Palestine was dependent on the slaughtering of Syrian children, I would tell you as a Palestinian that I don’t want to be free.

While this certainly should not be about “who is suffering more,” I do think it’s important to point out that the Syrian situation has been front and center in the mainstream media for at least a year – and has been met with world-wide condemnation, while the Palestinians’ plight, which is constant and ongoing, has flown well under the media radar – and not only is it not condemned by the West; it is actually enabled and made possible by our country. As I’ve written many times before, as Americans and as Jews, I/we are directly culpable in this situation – and, yes, this is indeed something I try to highlight in my blog.

On the issue of “pressing our government to do something about” the Syrian crisis: as tragic as this slaughter may be, I do not think the US has many good options to stop the bloodshed beyond what it is doing right now – and I strongly believe that US military intervention would only beget even greater tragedy. On this point I am in full agreement with Josh Landis – one of the smartest and most insightful Syria experts we have. I recommend his recent post in Syria Comment on this issue:

The US, Europe and the Gulf states want regime change in Syria so they are starving the regime and feeding the opposition. They have sanctioned Syria to a fare-thee-well and are busy shoveling money and arms to the rebels. This will change the balance of power in favor of the revolution. Crudely put, the US is pursuing regime-change by civil-war. This is the most it can and should do…

It seems heartless to stand by and do so little as massacres such as that carried out at Houla continue. More than 13 thousand Syrians have been killed in the last 14 months of revolution. All the same US intervention is not the solution. American troops killed over 10 thousand Iraqis in the first month of invasion in 2003. They killed a further 120,000 Iraqis in anger by the time the country was stabilized and safe to leave – and even then Iraq remains in turmoil and a new dictatorship seems to be taking shape. Car bombs are a daily occurrence in Baghdad.

In all likelihood, the Syrian revolution will be less bloody if Syrians carry it out for themselves. A new generation of national leaders will emerge from the struggle. They will not emerge with any legitimacy if America hands them Syria as a gift. How will they claim that they won the struggle for dignity, freedom and democracy? America cannot give these things. Syrians must take them. America can play a role with aid, arms and intelligence, but it cannot and should not try to decide Syria’s future, determine winners, and take charge of Syria. If Syrians want to own Syria in the future, they must own the revolution and find their own way to winning it. It is better for Syria and it is better for America.

Rabbi Brian Walt Imagines a Judaism Without Zionism

15 Replies

My dear friend and colleague Rabbi Brian Walt just posted a transcript of his talk, “Affirming a Judaism and Jewish Identity Without Zionism” – a breathtaking piece that deserves the widest possible audience. I don’t know exactly how describe it except to say it’s at once an intensely personal confession, spiritual autobiography, political treatise and most of all, an anguished cri de coeur.

I finally had to admit to myself what I had known for a long time but was too scared to acknowledge: political Zionism, at its core, is a discriminatory ethno-nationalism that privileges the rights of Jews over non-Jews. As such political Zionism violates everything I believe about Judaism. While there was desperate need in the 1940s to provide a safe haven for Jews, and this need won over most of the Jewish world and the Western world to support the Zionist movement, the Holocaust can in in no way justify or excuse the systemic racism that was and remains an integral part of Zionism.

In the past I believed that the discrimination I saw – the demolished homes, the uprooted trees, the stolen land – were an aberration of the Zionist vision. I came to understand that all of these were not mistakes nor a blemishes on a dream – they were all the logical outcome of Zionism.

As a Jew, I believe in the inherent dignity of every human being. As a Jew, I believe that justice is the core commandment of our tradition. As a Jew, I believe that we are commanded to be advocates for the poor, the oppressed, the marginalized. Zionism and the daily reality in Israel violated each of these core values. And I could no longer be a Zionist. I will always be a person with deep and profound connection to Israel and my friends and family there, but I was no longer a Zionist.

I’m sure many readers will not agree with Brian’s conclusions. I’m even surer he will be attacked viciously by many for such “apostasy.” As for me, I salute the courage it took for him to venture out onto such a precarious limb by sharing his thoughts.

Whatever your reactions, I hope you will be open to the challenge he lays before us.

In Support of the “Battle of the Empty Stomachs”

2 Replies

Photo: AFP

From the Palestinian NGO, Adameer: Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association:

After nearly a full month of fasting, around 2,000 Palestinian political prisoners ended last night their mass hunger strike upon reaching an agreement with the Israeli Prison Service (IPS) to attain certain core demands…

The written agreement contained five main provisions: the prisoners would end their hunger strike following the signing of the agreement; there will be an end to the use of long-term isolation of prisoners for “security” reasons, and the 19 prisoners will be moved out of isolation within 72 hours; family visits for first degree relatives to prisoners from the Gaza Strip and for families from the West Bank who have been denied visits based on vague “security reasons” will be reinstated within one month; the Israeli intelligence agency guarantees that there will be a committee formed to facilitate meetings between the IPS and prisoners in order to improve their daily conditions; there will be no new administrative detention orders or renewals of administrative detention orders for the 308 Palestinians currently in administrative detention, unless the secret files, upon which administrative detention is based, contain “very serious” information.

This is heartening news to be sure, particularly for the families of the strikers. But on an even deeper level, this deal is a testimony to the astonishing moral/political power of fasting in response to oppression. As my colleague Rabbi Alissa Wise recently wrote:

I can not even begin to fathom the pain, the discomfort, the anguish of starving yourself to protest injustice. Their decision to take up this action surely was not taken up lightly, and neither, I imagine, (was) their decision each and every day to continue with the fast.

Nor can I think of any more basic or courageous form of resistance than the simple act of refusing food. For an eloquent, heartbreaking expression of this principle, look no farther than the widely published letter written by hunger striker Thaer Halahleh to his two year old daughter Lamar. (Halahleh hovered between life and death for weeks before ending his strike at 77 days):

When you grow up you will understand how injustice was brought upon your father and upon thousands of Palestinians whom the occupation has put in prisons and jail cells, shattering their lives and future for no reason other then their pursuit of freedom, dignity and independence. You will know that your father did not tolerate injustice and submission, and that he would never accept insult and compromise, and that he is going through a hunger strike to protest against the Jewish state that wants to turn us into humiliated slaves without any rights or patriotic dignity.

Hunger striking is, of course, is an ancient time-honored form of protest. And as a Jew, I’m particularly mindful that the Book of Isaiah passionately connects the act of fasting to the pursuit of justice:

Is not this the fast that I choose:
to loose the bonds of wickedness,
to undo the straps of the yoke,
to let the oppressed go free,
and to break every yoke?

Indeed, it is critical that we understand that the Palestinians’ “Battle of the Empty Stomachs” as part of this long and honorable tradition of nonviolent resistance. As we have seen from the events of the past several months, it has lasted so long largely because it is a tactic that works.

At the same time, however, it is imperative to bear in mind what has been accomplished and what has not. While several specific demands regarding prison conditions have been met, Israel’s overall policy of administrative detention essentially remains in place. Adameer’s press release rightly noted this point:

Addameer is concerned that these provisions of the agreement will not explicitly solve Israel’s lenient and problematic application of administrative detention, which as it stands is in stark violation of international law.

In a recent blog post for +972mag, Palestinian journalist Omar Rahman also viewed this agreement in context of the overall Israeli/Palestinian power dynamic:

We must also remember that Israel holds all the chips. These hunger strikers have managed to pressure Israel into a level of accommodation, but only while people are focused on the issue. As soon as that attention dissipates, Israel is free to take back what it has offered. In the relationship between the occupier and the occupied, Israel is the Lord who giveth and taketh away. What will the Palestinians do? Stage another collective hunger strike only to repeat the process of give and take? The costs are simply too high to stage such a strike every time the need arises to challenge the system.

In the meantime, it seems to me, the most important outcome of the hunger strike campaign is the way in which it powerfully frames the ethical stakes of Israel’s occupation. As a recent Guardian editorial stated plainly, “Israel cannot claim the moral high ground while it is holding Palestinians without charge.”

For Jews, the “Battle of the Empty Stomachs” thus represents a profoundly critical challenge. Will we, who are the bearers of a tradition that bids us to call out oppression, find the wherewithal to stand with those who fast in response to their oppression by the Jewish state?

I don’t know how to say it any better than my colleague Rabbi Rachel Barenblat:

When I read anything which speaks ill of Israel and of Judaism, my heart aches. I do not want to hear these things about my coreligionists. But the answer is not to silence or ignore those who are speaking out. The answer is for my fellow Jews to live up to what is best in our tradition. Detaining people without trial, without informing them or their lawyers of the charges against them, is wrong. When the only Jewish government in the world makes those choices, we are all diminished.

2,000 Palestinians are on Hunger Strike – Tell Hilary to Break Her Silence!

1 Reply

Protest tent, Nablus, May 11, 2012. (Photo: Ahmad Al-Bazz/ActiveStills)

Did you know that two thousand plus imprisoned Palestinians have been on an hunger strike for months demanding basic human rights and an end to detention without trial? Did you know that two of them have not eaten since February 28 and are hovering between life and death? Did you know that thousands of Palestinians have been protesting in support of the strikers in growing demonstrations throughout the West Bank?

Alas, while it’s been reported fairly regularly via the world media, there’s been a near-total silence from the American government on the matter. Actually, that’s not quite correct – at a recent press briefing, spokesperson Victoria Nuland remarked that the State Department doesn’t “have anything to say (about it) one way or the other.”

As journalist Robert Naiman recently observed, the State Department did manage to speak out in support of Bahrainian Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, also on hunger strike to oppose his unjust detention. Yet 2,000 Palestinian hunger strikers do not rate even an official acknowledgement?

At present, Egypt is attempting to broker a solution – and as Naiman rightly points out, “a few words from the State Department could help tip the balance toward a more positive resolution.” I encourage you to join me in signing this petition urging Hilary Clinton to end her silence and use her good offices to help save the lives of these nonviolent Palestinian protesters.

For a deeply moving meditation on the hunger strikers campaign, I commend to you this post by Vicky at Bethlehem Blogger:

Through the hunger strike, the prisoners have demonstrated that there are some things that can never be taken from them – dignity first of all. Maher Halahleh, whose brother Thaer is in a critical condition after seventy-four days without food, said today, “This is a new weapon that is stronger than a nuclear bomb. Israel is fighting people who have no weapons, only their will.”

Coming Soon: 5 Broken Cameras