Home › Features › Web exclusives › ‘Israel’s gone way beyond apartheid’
- Details
- Written by Frank Barat interviews Jeff Halper Frank Barat interviews Jeff Halper
- Published: 28 April 2012 28 April 2012
- Hits: 4315 4315
Could you give us an update on the demolition of Palestinian homes and of what people now often refer to as the ‘ethnic cleansing’ of Jerusalem.
I think what’s coming down the pipeline is that Israel today has basically finished this. We’ve gone beyond the occupation. The Palestinians have been pacified and from Israel’s point of view the whole situation has been normalized. Netanyahu went to Washington to meet with Obama last month. When he came back his adviser was asked what was new about this meeting and said ‘this is the first time in memory that an Israeli Prime Minister met with a US president and that the Palestinian issue was not even mentioned, it never came out.’
So, in this situation where the USA is really paralysed because Netanyahu has [influence over] both parties in congress and Obama does not want to do anything, Netanyahu is going to make the last move in nailing this whole thing down. Israel could well annex area C, which is 60 per cent of the West Bank. Now, a couple of months ago the European Council diplomats in Jerusalem and Ramallah sent a report to the EU saying that Israel has forcibly expelled the Palestinians from area C. Forcible expulsion is hard language for European diplomats to use.
‘We're finished. Israel is now from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, the Palestinians are confined in areas A and B or in small enclaves in East Jerusalem, and that's it’
So area C contains less than 5 per cent of the Palestinian population. In 1967 the Jordan valley contained about 250,000 people. Today it’s less than 50,000. So the Palestinians have either been driven out of the country, especially the middle class, or they have been driven to areas A and B. That’s where 96 or 97 per cent of them are. The Palestinian population has been brought down low enough, there is probably somewhere around 12,5000 Palestinians in area C, so Israel could annex area C and give them full citizenship.
Basically, Israel can absorb 125,000 Palestinians without upsetting the demographic balance. And then, what is the world going to say? It’s not apartheid, Israel has given them full citizenship. So I think Israel feels it could get away with that. No one cares about what’s happening in areas A and B. If they want to declare a state, they can, Israel has no interest in Ramallah, Nablus and Hebron.
In other words, we’re finished. Israel is now from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, the Palestinians have been confined in areas A and B or in small enclaves in East Jerusalem, and that’s it.
So when people talk about a Palestinian state on 22 per cent of historical Palestine, it’s not even that, right? The number is much smaller.
Yes, what [Salam] Fayyad (Palestinian National Authority prime minister) is saying is our state does not have to be on any particular amount of territory, our state is an economic state and we can work around you annexing this and that because we can make our cities. The idea is that Israel will give them a bit of area C, to put the enclaves a little bit more together. So the north, the south and Gaza will still be cantonized, but what Fayyad is saying is we can make a go of that. Both Netanyahu and Fayyad have moved from a territorial conception of two states to an economic conception of two states, which is a whole different thing. The problem that the bosses have is how to sell that to the Palestinian people. But it seems to me that this is what is coming down the pipeline.
‘The Zionists have always said that once the Arabs despair that was the end, victory for them. Israel feels that's what we have got now. If you go today to the West Bank you'll hear the people say that they don't care anymore’
Israel feels that the Palestinians have been defeated. It’s over. Resistance is impossible because of the Israeli army, the Palestinian proxy army, the wall, I mean, you can’t mount a Third Intifada. Israel policy since the Iron Wall of 1923, has been despair. I wrote an article about this once ‘The mounting despair in Palestine‘.
The Zionists have always, always said that once the Arabs despair – [Ze’ev] Jabotinsky once put it interestingly ‘despair of the land of Israel ever becoming Palestine’ – that was the end, victory for them. Israel feels that’s what we have got now. If you go today to the West Bank, Gaza might be different, you’ll hear the people say that they don’t care anymore, let me have a job, let me live my life and I’ll be happy. In a sense, Fayyad feels he can respond to that.
Some pogroms took place recently when a group of Beitar soccer fans attacked Palestinian workers in a shopping mall. Were those people a few bad apples, or do these types of events indeed say something about Israeli society?
They are more than bad apples. They are not completely Israeli society either. This football team in Jerusalem is connected to the Likud. In Israel many football clubs are associated with political parties. There is a very close relation between the ideology of Likud and Begin and the Beitar football team. They see the Arabs as the enemy. So it reflects about a third of the Israeli public that is very committed to expansion, settlements, that see the Arabs as enemies. In Beitar, their chants, it’s not just the pogroms, they chant every time their team scores a goal, ‘death to the Arabs’. That’s what 20,000 people chant. Beitar for example has never had an Arab player.
The Arabs are beginning to be more prominent in Israeli football teams. Not in Beitar Jerusalem. This pogrom is kind of an extension of this. It’s all in the context of kids, for the most part its kids that have seen Israel changed into a neoliberal economy, become more and more Thatcherite, and you have tremendous income disparity in Israel. Israel is now in the OECD, but it has one of the highest income disparities.
‘I think occupation is an old word. We are way beyond occupation. I think we are also way beyond apartheid’
Kids have got no real future, that’s part of the context too. Those kids come from the housing projects, very much like those who follow the National Front in France or the EDL in England, people that only have this racist emotional outlet for their frustrations, and football is great for that. It channels anger away from the government. That’s why they sponsor football teams!
How important are the words we use, in your opinion, when it comes to Palestine/Israel. Ilan Pappe recently told me that we should rethink our vocabulary. Can we objectively still talk about ‘peace/occupation’? Shouldn’t we talk about ‘right to resist’ and ‘apartheid’ instead?
For sure. We deal a lot with words in our analysis. There are two words, because I think occupation is an old word. We are way beyond occupation. I think we are also way beyond apartheid. There are two words that capture the political reality but don’t have any legal substance today. One of them is Judaization. The entire country is being Judaized. It’s a word that the government uses, to Judaize Jerusalem, the Galilee, so the Judaization process is really at the heart of what’s going on. But it has no legal reference. So one of our projects we’re working on with Michael Sfard and some other lawyers is to try to introduce those terms into the discourse with the idea of trying to give them some legal frame. We have to try to match the political process, the political reality, because it is unprecedented in the world.
‘In a sense Israel has succeeded with the international community, and the US especially, in taking out of this situation the political. It's now solely an issue of security, just like in prisons’
Another term is ‘warehousing’ because I think that captures what’s going on better than apartheid. Warehousing is permanent. Apartheid recognizes that there is another side. With warehousing it’s like prison. There is no other side. There is us, and then there are these people that we control, they have no rights, they have no identity, they’re inmates. It’s not political, it’s permanent, static. Apartheid you can resist. The whole brilliance of warehousing is that you can’t resist because you’re a prisoner.
Prisoners can rise up in the prison yards but prison guards have all the rights in the world to put them down. That’s what Israel has come to. They are terrorists and we have the right to put them down. In a sense Israel has succeeded with the international community, and the US especially, in taking out of this situation the political. It’s now solely an issue of security, just like in prisons. It’s another concept that does not have any legal reference today but we’d like to put that in because warehousing is not only in Israel. Warehousing exists all over the capitalist world. Two-thirds of the people have been warehoused. That’s why I’m writing about Global Palestine. I’m saying that Palestine is a microcosm of what’s happening around the world.
Frank Barat is a human rights activist based in London. He is the coordinator of the Russell Tribunal on Palestine. He has edited two books, Gaza in Crisis, with Noam Chomsky and Ilan Pappe, and Corporate Complicity in Israel’s Occupation with Asa Winstanley. He has also contributed to Is there a court for Gaza? with Daniel Machover. He can be found on Twitter @frankbarat22.
More Palestinian prisoners join hunger strike: 2,000 are on hunger strike against indefinite detention without charge and alleged ill-treatment
- Details
- Written by Harriet Sherwood, Ramallah Harriet Sherwood, Ramallah
- Published: 27 April 2012 27 April 2012
- Hits: 3666 3666
More Palestinian prisoners join hunger strike
Human rights groups say 2,000 are on hunger strike against indefinite detention without charge and alleged ill-treatment
Palestinian women hold photos of people imprisoned in Israeli jails at a protest in Ramallah. Photograph: Mahmoud Illean/Demotix/Corbis
The number of Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike in Israeli jails has grown to 2,000, with more preparing to join the protest next week, according to human rights groups in the West Bank.
The Israeli prison service is taking punitive measures against hunger strikers, including solitary confinement, the confiscation of personal belongings, transfers and denial of family visits, say Palestinian organisations.
Seven prisoners have been transferred to a prison medical centre, including Tha'er Halahleh, 34, and Bilal Diab, 27, who by Thursday had been on hunger strike for 58 days. Their appeals against imprisonment without charge – known as administrative detention – were dismissed by a military court earlier this week.
The men's condition is rapidly deteriorating, according to Addameer, a prisoners' rights group. It expressed "grave concern that these hunger strikers are not receiving adequate healthcare … and that independent doctors are still being denied visits to them".
Administrative detention is one of the main issues behind the protest. More than 300 Palestinians – a 50% increase since last year – are being held without charge, trial or even being informed of accusations or evidence against them. Their term of imprisonment is determined by an Israeli military judge. Halahleh has been held for 22 months; Diab since last August.
Israel says administrative detention is a necessary security measure and that disclosing evidence could put intelligence-gathering or security operations at risk.
The prisoners are also protesting over the use of solitary confinement, denial of family visits and the treatment of sick detainees. "They also want to be treated with respect and dignity," said Shawan Jabarin of the human rights organisation al-Haq. "They want an end to middle-of-the-night checks, strip searches, humiliation and general ill-treatment. They are asking for humane treatment."
One female prisoner, Lina Jarbouni, who is serving 17 years for aiding a suicide bombing, was placed in solitary confinement after joining the hunger strike last week. Six other female prisoners have said they will begin refusing food from 1 May.
The Israeli prison service said most of the hunger strikers were affiliated with militant organisations, but denied the number of protesters was rising. "It is the same as it was at the beginning - 1,350," said a spokeswoman. "Those on hunger strike are separated from prisoners who are eating, and they don't get visitors." The revoking of privileges was a normal procedure in a prison protest, she added.
Meanwhile, the leader of a West Bank village protest movement was released on bail this week after more than a year in prison before the verdict in his military trial on 13 May. Bassem Tamimi, who has been recognised by the European Union as a "human rights defender", is accused of incitement and organising illegal demonstrations. He has previously spent around three years in administrative detention.
Palestinians had a duty to resist the Israeli occupation through popular peaceful protest, he told the Guardian after his release. "They have military superiority, but we have moral superiority," he said.
Under the terms of his bail he is not permitted to enter his home village of Nabi Saleh, which has been the scene of weekly protests against the expansion of a nearby Israeli settlement built within the village boundaries. The Israeli army routinely fires teargas, water cannon and rubber bullets at demonstrators.
The protests would continue despite regular night-time raids by the Israeli military and the arrest of at least 80 of Nabi Saleh's 500 inhabitants, Tamimi said.
Oregon's Media Must Cover the Annual Oregon AIPAC Event.
- Details
- Written by Peter Miller Peter Miller
- Published: 26 April 2012 26 April 2012
- Hits: 4274 4274
Time for a thought experiment. Imagine that the National Rifle Association (NRA) held a yearly policy event in Oregon that regularly attracted Democrats and Republicans from the entire spectrum of Oregon political life: our Governors, Senators, Representatives, our Attorney General and Secretary of State and many others flocking to show their support. Imagine that the Governor proudly states that support for the NRA is "an article of faith for both political parties" and imagine that an Oregon Member of Congress tells the audience that, when it comes to gun legislation, he goes to the NRA first for all his information. Would you expect the media to cover the event and find out who attended, what was said, and what the NRA was demanding of our leaders? Do you think citizens of Oregon have a compelling interest in learning more about the event?
This is the exact situation we have in Oregon with respect to the hardline pro-Israel lobby the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Politicians of all stripes, local, state and federal, Democrat and Republican flock to Oregon's annual AIPAC events to show their support. Former Governor Kulongoski really did say in a speech there that "support for AIPAC is an article of faith for both political parties . . . this is as it should be." Congressman Kurt Schrader really did say "If I want to learn about the Middle East, I know who to go to, I go to AIPAC." And AIPAC really is trying to drum up support for military action against Iran.
But does Oregon's media cover it? Almost not at all. Oregonians are not privy to what goes on there or what politicians say there, or what AIPAC is telling them, because our media simply does not cover it. Last year, the only press coverage was a reporter waiting to see if the beleaguered Congressman David Wu had the temerity to show up. He did. Other than Wu's attendance, the reporter wasn't interested in all of the rest: wasn't interested in the fact that Senators Wyden and Merkley were speaking there, wasn't interested in what they said, wasn't interested in what AIPAC was telling its fawning audience.
Oregonians have a compelling need to know what our politicians are doing at these AIPAC events, what speeches they make and what they are told by AIPAC's keynote speakers. It is the simple, democratically sacred duty of Oregon's reporters to do their job and report it. Given the incredible power lobbies have in our system of government to influence policy, citizens have a right to know and understand how our politicians are influenced by special interest lobbies. All the more when issues of war, peace, and human rights are at stake.
Infamous former AIPAC official Steve Rosen famously once said that "A lobby is like a night flower. It thrives in darkness and withers in the daylight." The only reason AIPAC operates in the dark in Oregon is because our media refuses so far to work for the public's interest.
Peter Miller is president of Oregon based Americans United for Palestinian Human Rights and on the steering committee of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation based in D.C.
References
"night flower" quote:
Shocker! Steve Rosen (That Steve Rosen) Backs Bibi, Not POTUS
M.J. Rosenberg, April 5, 2010, http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/04/05/hes_baaaaack_the_gop_embraces_steve_rosen_yes_that_1/
Kulongoski's quote:
http://archivedwebsites.sos.state.or.us/Governor_Kulongoski_2011/governor.oregon.gov/Gov/speech/speech_043006.shtml
Kurt Schrader quote:
(from audio recording of his speech)
http://oregonprogressivenetwork.org/actions/Protest!-The-Annual-Oregon-AIPAC-Event
Reporting on David Wu's attendence:
Janie Har, The Oregonian, March 06, 2011,
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/03/rep_david_wu_attends_annual_ai.html
Coverage of protest outside AIPAC (but not what is happening inside):
Steve Duin, The Oregonian, April 26, 2010,
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/steve_duin/index.ssf/2010/04/the_aipac_protest_alls_quiet_i.html
Netanyahu Himself Tried To Stop 60 Minutes
- Details
- Written by MJ Rosenberg MJ Rosenberg
- Published: 25 April 2012 25 April 2012
- Hits: 4651 4651
Netanyahu Himself Tried To Stop 60 Minutes
60 Minutes was the #6 most watched show of the entire week that ended on Sunday. Think about that: in a country that seems addicted to reality shows and dancing with stars, 60 Minutes ruled the airwaves on the very week it defied the Israeli government and ran Bob Simon’s segment on Palestinian Christians.
And now we learn that Prime Minister Netanyahu himself was involved in the effort to suppress the CBS show.
How amazing. Isn’t it enough that the United States provides Israel with $3.5 billion in aid, that we repeatedly use our veto in its behalf at the U.N., and that, for Netanyahu, we have made Iranian nuclear development the most significant international issue in the world? We may even wind up going to war because Netanyahu will not be denied.
Isn’t that enough? No. The right-wing Israeli government wants to control what we see on television. And what we read. And who teaches our kids in college.
In every venue in which public opinion is formed the Israeli government and/or its lobby (AIPAC, the American Jewish Committee, the ADL, the Federations, the Jewish Council On Public Affairs, etc) are there to monitor and enforce.
Ambassador Oren’s performance on 60 Minutes might have been the lobby’s Murdochgate moment: the moment in which we see the lobby operating in broad daylight and the edifice starts crashing down.
Who knows? But I’ll say this. 60 Minutes on Sunday did more damage to the lobby than any institution or development in 40 years. Not even the AIPAC spying indictments hurt like this. And that is why virtually every single organization that together constitute the lobby has spoken out in fury. Here is the latest from the Anti-Defamation League. It doesn’t make much sense but it demonstrates the rage. This was not supposed to happen.
Netanyahu was briefed on efforts to stop '60 Minutes' report on Israel's Christians
- Details
- Written by Barak Ravid Barak Ravid
- Published: 25 April 2012 25 April 2012
- Hits: 5838 5838
Netanyahu was briefed on efforts to stop '60 Minutes' report on Israel's Christians
PM was fully updated by Israeli ambassador to U.S. Michael Oren on his attempts to halt an investigative report on Israel's treatment of its Christian community which he thought would harm Israel's interests.
The attempts by Israeli ambassador Michael Oren to halt the broadcast of a "60 Minutes" investigative report on the Christian community in Israel and the West Bank were carried out after a series of consultations with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his political adviser Ron Dermer.
It is unclear whether Netanyahu or Dermer were the ones who instructed or suggested that Oren directly address the president of CBS in an attempt to prevent the broadcast, but the two were fully informed on the affair almost since its start.
Read more: Netanyahu was briefed on efforts to stop '60 Minutes' report on Israel's Christians