Category: In the Media - Page 106 - International Solidarity Movement

Will you marry poor me

14 January 2010

“If we had money we’d get married right away,” says Samir*, 23. He has found his bride, but not the money to hold the wedding.

The Israeli siege imposed shortly after Hamas’s election in early 2006 has ruled out marriage for many. Palestinians traditionally marry young, between 18 and 25, but more and more now pass their mid-twenties single.

With unemployment levels above 45 percent, and the price of most goods doubled or more, living, and marrying, are becoming unaffordable.

Worsening living conditions under the siege are changing relationship patterns. While salaried work has traditionally been the man’s role, many women have been adding to the family’s income – or have sometimes been the sole provider – by selling hand-stitched embroidery.

Groups such as Oxfam, the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committee, and other social organisations have provided some of the poorest women with small gardens, sheep, rabbits or chickens to tend for food and for income.

Palestinian women have long been respected for their strength in raising families under the severe conditions imposed by the occupation and by Israeli military activities. That people still marry and have families is inspiring.

Samir is close to giving up. “I work many jobs in order to bring enough money to marry,” he says. “But everything is so expensive in Gaza, and salaries have become lower. It can’t work like this.”

Sameh, 26, had decided he could not marry even before he was laid off work. “I just don’t want to get married in these circumstances. The money I earn in one month isn’t enough even for me alone. If I get married, I would want to be able to buy things for my children. I never want to tell my child ‘I can’t buy you a bicycle, let alone new shoes’.”

Sameh’s elder brothers, their wives and children, and his parents all share the same house, with separate apartments. The severity of the siege means that salaries that covered the needs of the extended family three years back are now stretched. Everyone looks out for additional work.

Mohammed is another in that long list now resigned to staying single. “I used to want to get married, but now I don’t consider it. Since I began working a few years ago, my salary has been low, just 600 dollars. At least 100 dollars goes towards phone costs. A few months ago, my pay was cut by 100 dollars. And now I am out of work.”

It is difficult to manage for himself, never mind a partner. “Years ago, if I wanted a pair of jeans, they were 60 shekels,” he says. “Now, it’s double.

“My parents used to pressure me to get married,” says Mohammed. “But now, because we aren’t a rich family, and they know how expensive weddings and living are, they’ve stopped nagging me. But eventually, I do want to get married, to live with a family. I think I’d like married life.”

The means to marry are disappearing; the pressure is not. Dima’s father died a year ago, unable to leave Gaza for treatment. Now 19, Dima will soon marry.

“There’s so much pressure on us, her extended family,” says Sameh, Dima’s uncle. “Because her father is dead, we all need to help with the wedding costs and also take on the role of her father.”

Dima is fortunate to have the opportunity to get married. Many unwed women feel even more pressure than men, particularly those above 25.

Some women have turned to matchmakers. Many do so without the knowledge of their family. Yet, other women are defying the tradition of marrying young, preferring instead to finish their education and begin their careers.

“I want to work for some years, establish myself, before I think of getting married,” says Noor, a woman in her mid-twenties. “I thought about it last year, but knew I was too young, and wanted to lead my own life first.”

Noor isn’t alone in expressing these sentiments. Leila, in her early twenties, agrees. “Why would I marry now? The situation in Gaza is too difficult,” she says, echoing also the views of her male bachelor peers.

For many who do wish to wed, the foremost reason that marriage is unthinkable is the sheer cost of the wedding. By conservative estimates, average weddings cost 10,000 to 15,000 dollars. This pays for hiring a hall, the parade to the hall, jewellery, clothes for the bride, and housing and furniture for the new couple.

Expenses like jewellery and the parade may seem frivolous, but these are long-held traditions. “Even if I wanted to cut out the wedding parade, I couldn’t,” says Sameh. “It is like an announcement to the neighbours and family that we are married now.” In a region where dating before marriage is not common, heralding the legality of a relationship is important.

“The cheapest wedding hall and party is around 3,000 dollars,” says Samir. “And we can’t hold a joint wedding with a friend; there are too many guests in each party. And besides, women need privacy so they can celebrate unveiled. The husband of one bride cannot be present at the party of another bride.”

Rafiq, 51, says he has finally saved almost enough to marry, after working the last eight years as watchman at an apartment building. “I work six days a week, from early morning till late at night. I still need to save another 3,000 dollars before I can have my wedding.”

Even for those already married, life in Gaza isn’t easy. Saber Zaneen, from Beit Hanoun, is married with two children. He remembers times when life was better.

“Families used to go their farmland to tend trees and enjoy nature. But this has nearly completely stopped, because Israeli soldiers along the border shoot at us, and because they’ve bulldozed and bombed all the trees and crops that once grew here. Now my wife and I just stay home with our kids. Watch television, visit friends and family. There’s nothing else to do.”

Mahfouz Kabariti, 51, is married with six children. He doesn’t feel the pinch of the Israeli siege nearly so much as the majority of Gaza’s Palestinians. But he still notices the difference.

“Before, we were under a different sort of siege: the occupation. But even with the Israeli soldiers and settlers here, it was still better than now, because we could move more freely than now. We could visit Jerusalem, Haifa, Jaffa, Egypt.

“Now, it’s like we are just parts of a machine. It’s a daily routine, we don’t expect yesterday to be different from tomorrow. It is hard for people, especially children, to have any hope. We go to school or work, eat, sleep, watch television, read…That’s it, this is our life.”

Fencing match

Avi Issacharoff | Ha’aretz

1 January 2010

BIL’IN-NA’ALIN – Friday, 11 A.M. There is another hour until the onset of the weekly ritual. The participants are in face-off mode. On the “Israeli” side of the fence, south of the village of Na’alin – a three-minute drive from the city of Modi’in, which is halfway between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv – many Israel Defense Forces and Border Police jeeps have taken their places, along with the officers, the binoculars and the weapons. All the entrances to the village have been blocked to ensure the enemy cannot send in reinforcements.

It’s January 1, 2010, the anniversary of the establishment of Fatah, and the movement has decided to mark the event at the traditional Friday demonstration in the village. Israeli intelligence forecasts a particularly high turnout.

About 10 minutes away, Mohammed Khatib, a 36-year-old father of four, is walking around near the mosque in Bil’in and smiling like a little boy. He is a member of the Supreme Coordinating Committee, the coordinating body of the popular committees – a term borrowed from the first intifada – which are responsible for organizing the demonstrations. He is about to leave the village, due to an order issued against him by the State of Israel, prohibiting him from being in Bil’in between noon and 6 P.M. on Fridays. During those hours, the order stipulates, he has to “report to the police station closest to his home.”

Accordingly, Khatib, who gets legal advice from Israeli lawyers, will soon travel to Ramallah, to the Palestinian police station there. “No one ever said which police, and that is the closest station to my home,” he says, still smiling.

It’s 11:30. The center of the village is filling up with foreign correspondents, foreign volunteers and Israelis. Some of the activists are from the group known as Anarchists Against the Wall. There are few Palestinians, though this does not seem to worry Khatib.

“I am not afraid that the army will succeed in ending the struggle in Bil’in,” he says. “It is true that some of the village residents do not participate, because they understand that this activity will not be stopped in any case. Even if all the demonstrators are arrested tomorrow, the protest will continue with the help of the international activists. Our effort at this time is aimed at something much larger than Bil’in or Na’alin: We want a popular nonviolent struggle in all the territories, which in the end will succeed for the simple reason that it is just. That is the right way from our point of view.”

Stones yes, firearms no

It started at the end of 2003 in the village of Mas’ha in the northern West Bank (where an Israeli demonstrator, left-wing peace activist Gil Naamati, was wounded by IDF fire) and then spread to the village of Budrus, not far from Highway 443, near the Mitkan Adam army base. It was in Budrus that the demonstrators scored their first successes by stopping the Israeli bulldozers and forcing a change in the route of the barrier. The struggle spread to Biddu, a village outside Har Adar, outside Jerusalem; to Beit Lahia, on Highway 443; and elsewhere. The demonstrators suffered casualties as the IDF responses became harsher. In February 2004, for example, two young Palestinians were killed and about 70 wounded in a single day of demonstrations.

Israelis were involved in the demonstrations from the outset. Meanwhile, casualties sustained by Palestinian civilians led to heightened support for such activism and the idea of the popular struggle increasingly entered the Palestinian consciousness. Ironically, the IDF’s aggressive policy against the demonstrators had the effect of increasing their number.

The basic underlying goal of the struggle remains unchanged: to alter the route of the separation fence, which passes through land belonging to Palestinian villagers, some of them farmers. (In September 2007, the High Court of Justice ruled that the route of the barrier in Bil’in had to be changed, but in practice nothing was done.) The demonstrators are demanding the removal of the barrier from their land, while Israeli security forces are bent on evicting the demonstrators, who are interfering with the earth-moving work or are trying to damage the wall itself.

Still, what makes Bil’in and Na’alin different? Why have these two villages come to symbolize the Palestinian struggle, to the point where even Fatah decided to hold a procession – the central event marking its anniversary celebrations – there?

The groundwork for the separation fence in Bil’in began at the end of 2004, Mohammed Khatib relates: “Our activity at that time was only symbolic, on a small scale. After all, this is a small village. The turning point came on May 4, 2005. We tied ourselves to olive trees. That sent a powerful message to Israel, but through the use of totally nonviolent means. Our aim was to create a triangle of activists: Palestinian-Israeli-international. We welcomed every Israeli who wanted to take action against the occupation. Even soldiers came to express solidarity. Everyone who took off his uniform, “ahalan wa sahalan” – “welcome.” Our goal is not the soldier who guards the fence; it is the fence itself. We have no intention of killing the fence guards and we have no problem with the army.

“Our method led a great many volunteers from abroad and Palestinians to join us,” he continues. “We were able to convey the Bil’in story in the media. We were accurate about the details. We did not make up anything. Abdullah Abu Rahma [who was arrested by Israel about a month ago] coordinated the activity with the Arab media, and I was in charge of the Israeli and foreign media.”

The most striking resemblance between the weekly demonstrations and the first intifada – “the intifada of the stones” – is in the way they took shape. They began with ordinary people who owned land and homes on the route along which the fence was built. The struggle was spearheaded not by politicians or armed members of organizations, but by people with no special connection to Fatah or Hamas. At one point some activists from Bil’in set up a body they called a “popular committee.”

The committee did not have a specific leader and was not guided by any political body; indeed, the Palestinian factions joined this struggle and sought to enjoy its fruits only after it had already proved successful. This followed the pattern of the first intifada, when popular committees in many villages or districts led the struggle, determined its character and organized actions against the occupation – with the Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas joining in only afterward and not exerting real influence until a relatively late stage.

At present, popular committees are active in a number of Palestinian villages, including Bil’in, Na’alin, Maasra (near Bethlehem), in the southern Mount Hebron area, in villages on the ridge outside Nablus, in the Jordan Rift Valley and elsewhere. Each committee has representatives of the official factions, but also activists whose only association is with the idea of the popular struggle.

“We consider every citizen who wishes to take part in the demonstrations to be a member of the popular committee,” says Dr. Rateb Abu Rahma, a leading member of the Bil’in Popular Committee Against the Wall and Settlements, and a lecturer in psychology at Al-Quds Open University. Below his home there is a kind of commune of activists from the International Solidarity Movement.

“The secret of our success is unity of the popular struggle against the fence and the settlements. The fence is not an insurance policy for the Israelis – it is a plundering of land. The settlements and the fence lie on Bil’in land and they are not legal. From our point of view, the popular struggle is preferable to violence, because only Palestinians will take part in a military struggle, whereas everyone can participate in a popular struggle.

“It is the army that starts the violence against the demonstrators,” he continues. “On Christmas Day, five youngsters dressed up as Santa Claus. We decorated a Christmas tree with empty teargas canisters. That was our message: Everywhere in the world people decorate their trees with flowers, but we did it with teargas grenades. We placed the tree next to a gate in the fence, and the army immediately started to fire teargas. Another example is Bassem Abu Rahma, who was killed from a direct hit by a teargas grenade. So which side is using violence?”

There is a great deal of stone throwing and many soldiers and Border Police are wounded.

“We are against stone throwing. It’s true that there are some who throw stones, but they are young people who often do not listen to us. We are against the use of force or any form of violence. We have adopted many ideas from outside – from foreign activists and from Israelis. The participation of Israelis – from groups such as Anarchists Against the Wall, Gush Shalom [The Israeli Peace Bloc], Yesh Din [Volunteers for Human Rights], Rabbis for Human Rights, Arab MKs – together with the nonviolent measures we have taken, make it clear that we do not intend to break the law. Regrettably, many in Israel would rather have the Palestinians perpetrate terrorist attacks, so the whole world will side with the Israeli government.”

Pastoral backdrop

Meanwhile, the demonstration in Na’alin has begun. On the hilltop, a few dozen young Palestinians look down at the wadi below, the scene of the events. Groups of masked people try to approach the fence; arrayed against them are Border Police and soldiers equipped mainly with rubber-coated bullets and teargas grenades. Every few seconds a grenade is fired, pushing the masked youths back toward the village.

“You maniac soldier – come on, you homo, let’s see what you’re made of,” the Palestinians shout in Hebrew at the troops.

One of the groups of stone throwers has paused to rest under an olive tree. When they remove their masks, it turns out that one of them is about 40 and the others are teenagers.

“Hey, son of a bitch, come over here,” one of them shouts.

Green hills, olive trees, a pastoral scene. Only the sounds of gunfire and the curses mar the landscape.

One masked person walks in the direction of the soldiers with his hands on his groin. “They aim the rubber bullets here,” he says, pointing at his crotch.

The older man lights a cigarette, and imitates the soldiers’ cries to the demonstrators to leave, in bad Arabic. The youngsters repeat the joke. Suddenly, G., a youth wearing a yellow soccer jersey, comes running over. “Look!” he shouts. “I have two teargas grenades that didn’t explode.”

Asked if he is afraid, G. says: “No. We come here every Friday, and either we come out alive or not.”

The older man adds that during the day, there is little cause for fear. “It’s a lot scarier at night. They come at 3 A.M., when everyone is asleep, and arrest you. One time undercover men came, dressed as Arabs. But it does them no good.”

What is the point of the demonstrations? Are there any practical results, we ask. “There is no result as yet,” says Mohammed, 30. “In practice there is no change. What’s important for us is to teach the coming generations that we will not give up our land.”

Some of the stone throwers are dressed for the occasion, wearing military overalls, kaffiyehs and headbands. They put on the masks again, take up their slingshots and prepare for another round against the army. A quick sprint, the stone is hurled, then a fast retreat.

Mingling with the young Palestinians are Israelis who refrain from violent activity: Sarit Michaeli, a spokesperson for the human rights organization B’Tselem, who is filming the events; Yifat, from Anarchists Against the Wall, who is at the forefront of the young people at every site; and Yonatan Polak, formerly the spokesperson for the anarchist group and now a member of the Supreme Coordinating Committee of the popular committees. Polak, 27, is the committee’s liaison with the Israeli media. He has been taking part in these demonstrations for seven years. Three times a week, he comes to Bil’in or Na’alin.

He notes that there are usually between 5 and 20 Israelis in an average demonstration such as the one at Na’alin. “The sucess story at Bil’in and Na’alin is not related to the participation of the Israelis, even if that is what all kinds of people think,” Polak says. “There is an awakening here of a popular protest, as a result of the disappointment over the armed resistance and the political path. In the past, the Palestinian factions shied away from the popular struggle, but these days they are joining in.”

Asked who starts the violence, the army or the Palestinians, Polak replies: “It varies from time to time, honestly. There is no fixed pattern. Today it was simultaneous.”

Suddenly shouts are heard, calls for first aid. A boy is bleeding from the head, hit by a rubber bullet. Some Border Police managed to outflank a group of children who were throwing stones. There are shouts of “Allahu akbar” – “God is great.” Polak identifies the wounded boy as the sheikh’s 9-year-old son, and calls him with the bad news.

Targeting the leaders

Casualties, including deaths, are not unusual at the weekly demonstrations.

“It would be hard to describe the struggle as nonviolent,” Polak says. “That is more suited to Israeli or international terminology. Nineteen demonstrators have been killed in actions like this since 2004, so it is ridiculous to talk about nonviolence in this context.”

Five Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire in Na’alin, including two boys, aged 10 and 17, and dozens have been wounded. In Bil’in, Bassem Abu Rahma was killed and many others were wounded. Another eight demonstrators in Na’alin were wounded by regular live ammunition (5.56 mm. bullets) and 28 others by 0.22 inch bullets, which have been banned for use by the military advocate general. The Yesh Din organization has submitted many complaints in an attempt to prompt investigations of the behavior of the Border Police and the soldiers in these and other cases. To date, only on indictment has been filed. However, in addition to the many casualties, since last June the IDF and the Shin Bet security service have been engaged in a concerted effort aimed at the leaders of the struggle. Thirty-one residents of Bil’in (5 percent of the population) have been arrested in this six-month period, 15 of whom are still in detention; in Na’alin, 94 residents (7 percent of the population) have been arrested since May 2008. Indictments have been filed against three members of the popular committee in Bil’in, mainly for incitement. The IDF operates in the village almost every weekend.

“They arrested Abdullah on December 10,” Rateb Abu Rahma says about his brother. “He is accused of stone throwing, incitement and being in possession of means of combat. It’s almost a joke. There was an exhibition that an Israeli held at Abdullah’s place of various weapons found in the fields of Bil’in. So they accused him of possession. He is 39, a teacher in a Christian school and a university lecturer. Is he going to use violence? He was then accused of throwing stones. They took one of the boys in the village and interrogated him. In his testimony he named dozens of people who threw stones with him, including Abdullah. So it’s obvious they read out the names to him and told him to sign.”

Indeed, the summary of the boy’s interrogation, which was obtained by Haaretz, is a ludicrous document. Page after page of “confessions,” with hardly any questions asked and mention of the names of no fewer than 68 people, alleged to have taken part in stone throwing with him. The boy has been released, but Abdullah Abu Rahma is still in detention.

Help from America

Every day, Mohammed Khatib goes to the offices of the Supreme Coordinating Committee in Ramallah, where the activity of the popular committees throughout the West Bank is coordinated. The coordinating committee also reminds one of the United National Leadership, which was at the forefront of the first intifada and maintained ties between the regions and the various factions.

Indeed, the government of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad is now underwriting some of the activities of the Supreme Coordinating Committee. A special PA ministry is in charge of liaising with the committee. Fayyad’s spokesman, Jamal Zakout, who was a member of the United National Leadership in the first intifada, is an adviser to the coordinating committee. In many senses, the grassroots level has forced the new style of struggle upon the leadership.

However, financial aid is not confined to the Palestinian community: Both the government of Spain and the United Nations are paying for activists’ legal protection and assisting in funding their publicity campaign. According to Khatib, many other consulates and bodies have rallied to the success story of Bil’in-Na’alin.

“Even the U.S. consul general visited the village,” Khatib notes. “The Americans are in direct contact with us, are following the events and have offered financial aid for humanitarian projects in the village. American and Swedish diplomats attended the trial of Abdullah Abu Rahma. Our coordinating committee is working with an international committee which is trying to help.

“It’s true that we have problems at the local level,” he continues. “We are trying to persuade the Palestinian public of the importance of our struggle. The problem is that many of them do not yet understand our dialogue with the Israelis, for example. But in the end, I feel today that I am part of a group that is changing history.”

As evening approaches, the demonstration in the village breaks up. “Only” one demonstrator was wounded today. The young people return home with teary eyes from the grenades. They will be back next week.

Israel restricts Palestinian lawyers’ access to West Bank detainees

Amira Hass | Haaretz

14 January 2010

Israel is prohibiting Palestinian lawyers and the relatives of Palestinian detainees from reaching a military tribunal via the Beitunia checkpoint west of Ramallah.

The prohibition, which has been in effect for the past three days, means that Israeli police are requiring Palestinians to use the Qalandiyah crossing 20 kilometers away, where they must produce an entry permit to Israel – which can take weeks to obtain – if they want to enter an Israeli military tribunal that is on West Bank land. The court lies 300 meters south of the Beitunia roadblock, and was built on land that is part of Beitunia.

The restriction contravenes a recent High Court of Justice decision opening Route 443 to Palestinian traffic.

The lawyers have declared a strike to protest the prohibition, and are not appearing in military court.

Military Judge Arieh Durani yesterday criticized the police for keeping the lawyers from adequately representing their clients.

“The court takes a very dim view of the authorities thwarting representation of detainees by not permitting their attorneys to cross at the checkpoint,” he said. He also imposed a NIS 1,000 fine on any lawyer who refrained from representing a client who is a minor.

Palestinians see the new rules as infringing on their rights as well as forcing them into de facto recognition of a border that is unilaterally determined by Israel. Since 1995, Israel has sought to make Qalandiyah the northern entry point of the so-called safe passage between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. It is far from the Green Line and the Latrun area, where the Palestinians wanted the entry point to be. The entire area south of Beitunia has gradually become off-limits to Palestinians since 2000.

Although the Israel Defense Forces has general responsibility for the area, the Jerusalem police and the Border Police are in charge of the checkpoint. Police first closed the checkpoint three weeks ago, telling the lawyers and relatives they had to enter through the Qalandiyah checkpoint.

But even those who go to Qalandiyah still need an entry permit to Israel, with no assurance that it will be granted. Moreover, crossing at Qalandiyah involves a long wait and additional travel expenses.

The attorneys went on strike when the restrictions were first imposed, and sent a letter of protest to Attorney General Menachem Mazuz. A few days later, the checkpoint was reopened for those heading to the military court. However, at the beginning of the week the order was imposed again.

In 2001 the IDF completely blocked the road that links Beitunia with Ramallah and the surrounding villages. When the military court was moved in 2004 from Ramallah to the Ofer facility, the checkpoint was opened so that lawyers and relatives of the accused could get to the court.

No Israeli officials took responsibility for the checkpoint restrictions.

The IDF spokesman’s office told Haaretz to seek a response from the Israel Police. The Israel Police spokesman told Haaretz that the Jerusalem police and the Border Police are responsible for the passage of merchandise, not people, and that a response should be obtained from the Defense Ministry.

Israel releases Palestinian boycott activists

Benjamin Joffe-Walt | The Media Line

14 January 2010

A prominent West Bank activist said by Palestinian groups to be the first Palestinian imprisoned for promoting an international boycott of Israel has been released after being detained by Israel for over 100 days without charge.

Mohammad Othman, a 34 year old resident of the West Bank village of Jayyous, was released Wednesday after 113 days in Israeli custody.

Palestinian advocacy groups believe Othman to be the first Palestinian imprisoned solely for advocacy of the international boycott movement against Israel.

“I was interrogated every single day for 75 days from 8am until 6.30pm and sometimes until midnight,” Othman told The Media Line. “The entire time I was held in isolation. Physically they did not touch me, but it really damages a person to be in isolation. They also played all kinds of games, telling me they will arrest my brother, my friends and the journalists writing about me.”

Othman was first taken into Israeli custody by the Israel Security Agency, commonly known as the Shin Bet, on September 22 at an Israeli border crossing terminal. Othman was attempting to return to the West Bank following a trip to Norway, where he had met with senior government officials including Finance Minister Kristen Halvorsen to try and convince the country to boycott companies involved in Jewish settlement in the West Bank. Othman took Norwegian officials on a tour of the West Bank, traveled to Norway and played a major role in convincing a Norwegian state pension fund to divest the $5.4 million it had invested in Elbit, one of Israel’s largest defense firms. Minister Halvorsen announced the decision early last month.

“They are trying to put a lot of pressure on the boycott movement,” Othman said. “They realized how much pressure it is putting on them.”

“I was interrogated by ten different commanders, nine from the Shin Bet and one from the Mossad,” he said, referring to the Israel Security Agency and Israel’s national intelligence agency, respectively. “They asked me about the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, my work, why I’m traveling around the world and why I have the contacts of ministers, prime ministers and embassies.”

Othman was held for interrogation for two months, after which he was put into administrative detention.

“After about 50 days they came up with this charge that I’m in contact with Hezbollah,” Othman said. “It’s crazy. I told them I am involved in a peaceful fight and dealing with international human rights organizations.”

“They had nothing against me but I was really worried when I was put into administrative detention,” he said. “It can be a few months or up to seven years.”

“I was often put in court without a lawyer and had to represent myself,” Othman said. “Two days ago I was sent to court again and I got the papers that I was going to be freed.”

“I couldn’t believe it,” he continued. “The judge said ‘Why aren’t you reacting?’ I said ‘Because it’s administrative detention so you can arrest me two minutes after releasing me’.”

While he was released without charge, Othman was required to pay 10,000 shekels ($2,716) bail for his release, an administrative technicality related to his initial detention for interrogation prior to his placement in administrative detention.

Officially, Israel has made no comment on the two cases and a spokesperson for the Israel Security Agency told The Media Line they were looking into the matter.

Magda Mughrabi, the Advocacy Officer at Addameer Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association, which represented Othman at some of his court hearings, argued Othman’s case exemplifies Israel’s use of administrative detention as a tactic to punish non-violent activism.

“Israeli is using detention as an arbitrary policy as opposed to something founded on strong evidence,” Magda Mughrabi, Advocacy Officer with Addameer Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association, told The Media Line. “Mohammad Othman wasn’t charged with anything.”

“Representatives of the British, Norwegian and German governments all attended the hearings and there was no substantiated evidence,” she claimed. “They issued an administrative detention order against him saying he posed a security threat to the area and his detention was necessary to neutralize the threat. Then later the judge said Mr Othman still poses a security threat but that there is no progress in his interrogation.”

“This is contradictory,” Mughrabi maintained. “Legally administrative detention can only be used for preventative purposes when there is information that there is an imminent threat to the security of the state. So if they say that his administrative detention should be shortened because there is no progress in the investigation that means they are not holding him for preventative purposes but as a substitute for prosecution because they don’t have evidence against him.”

“This is a war between the campaign and the Israeli authorities,” she added. “The human rights community has written a lot about the arbitrary use of administrative detention. It’s not used as a preventive measure but as a punitive measure when they don’t have enough evidence to prosecute someone.”

There are over 7,000 Palestinians currently held by Israel as ‘security prisoners’, around 290 of them administrative detainees and many of whom, Palestinians claim, have been arrested solely for political reasons.

Palestinian groups claim that Israel has arrested a number of non-violent activists in reprisal for their international advocacy efforts or involvement in demonstrations. Most notable has been the detention of dozens of Palestinian activists arrested in nighttime raids in the West Bank villages of Ni’ilin and Bil’in, the sites of weekly demonstrations against Israel’s separation barrier. Many of those arrested have been accused by Israel of incitement and put in administrative detention based on secret evidence. Very few have been charged.

Othman’s release came one day after Israel’s release of another prominent Palestinian activist, Jamal Juma.

The director of Stop the Wall, a Palestinian campaign opposed to Israel’s construction of a barrier around the West Bank, Juma was released Tuesday after being detained by the Israel Security Agency for 27 days without charge. Juma was arrested on December 16 less than 48 hours after being interviewed by The Media Line regarding the continued detention of Mohammad Othman.

Despite being a legal resident of Jerusalem entitled to legal rights similar to those afforded to Israeli citizens, Juma was processed in Israel’s military court system in the same legal procedures used by Israel for West Bank Palestinians like Mohammad Othman.

“This experience made it much clearer to me how much the non-violent Palestinian movement freaks them out,” Juma told The Media Line. “They see how our movement is opening the eyes of the world to the oppression of the Palestinians and they are determined to stop it but they don’t know what to do. They can’t call us terrorists so they bring people like me into jail without any real legal way to charge us.”

“They accused me of incitement and contact with terrorist organizations,” he said. “It’s so silly they even accused me of contact with the Zapatistas [laughing]. I told them ‘Do you think that when I meet 60,000 people at conferences I ask everyone there ‘Do you have a problem with Israel? Are you part of a terrorist organization?’ In the end they dropped it of course and didn’t charge me with anything at all because none of it made any sense.”

“I am only out of prison today because of international pressure, both official pressure from consulates and official bodies, as well as organizations around the world that don’t understand why Israel would arrest someone like me,” Juma said of the massive campaign launched by Palestinian activists for his release. “I really appreciate this level of solidarity.”

“You can’t imagine how much dehumanization there is in these jails,” he said of his detention. “I was interrogated constantly, put into isolation, put in a cell in which my head was in the door and my feet in the toilet. I was handcuffed for many hours, the cells are lit up 24 hours a day and the food is so bad you wouldn’t even give it to dogs.”

“They didn’t beat me or anyone I saw,” Juma added. “But this is a form of torture and the worst face of the occupation. Many prisoners almost lose their minds and all of this is done in shadow and nobody knows about it.”

Juma and other Palestinian advocates who have worked intimately with Othman say he was spurred to activism by the effect of the West Bank separation barrier on his family.

“Mohammad comes from a big and poor family in Jayyous village in the West Bank,” Juma said. “Lots of their land has been isolated behind the wall and he started his activism because of that, to show the threat the occupation presents to his family and his village.”

“He continued his activism both locally and internationally, calling on people and organizations and governments to boycott Israel for its crimes against the Palestinian people,” he said. “That’s why he became a target of the Israelis.”

The international boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel is viewed as a serious national threat by most Israelis, many of whom see boycott advocacy as paramount to sedition, and a number of Israeli analysts argue that the threat posed to Israel justifies the arrest of its leaders.

“The demonization of Israel is a form of warfare and Israel is treating it as such,”

Dr Gerald Steinberg, Chair of Political Studies at Bar Ilan University told The Media Line. “Whether it’s through this so called boycott and sanctions campaign, or attempts to have Israeli leaders like Former Foreign Minister Tsipi Livni arrested in Britain, or International Criminal Court related activites, this kind of incitement is political warfare on par with military warfare in that the goal is to destroy the state of Israel.”

“As Prime Minister Netanyahu recently stated, demonization is as dangerous to the State of Israel as the Iranian nuclear threat,” he added. “That’s the broad view of the majority of Israelis.”

Dr Ron Breiman, the former chairman of Professors for a Strong Israel one of the founders of the secular Hatikva faction of the National Union, a right wing nationalist political party in Israel, echoed Dr Steinberg’s remarks.

“Israel needs to defend itself and should arrest people like this,” he told The Media Line at the time of Othman’s arrest. “In any normal country when someone is doing harm to his own state he would be punished for that. I don’t think a European country would allow such activities within her borders and we are too forgiving of it.”

“I want democracy and I want free speech,” Dr Breiman said. “But there are limits to free speech and even in a democratic country you cannot say anything that you want, especially in a state of war.”

Free Abdallah Abu Rahmah

On the night of International Human Right Day, Thursday December 10th, at 2am, Abdallah Abu Rahmah was arrested from his home in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Seven military jeeps surrounded his house, and Israeli soldiers broke the door, extracted Abdallah from his bed, and, after briefly allowing him to say goodbye to his wife Majida and their three children — seven year-old Luma, five year-old Lian and eight month-old baby Laith, they blindfolded him and took him into custody.

Abu Rahmah did not find himself behind bars because he is a dangerous man. Abdallah, who is amongst the leaders of the Palestinian village of Bil’in, is viewed as a threat for his work in the five-year unarmed struggle to save the village’s land from Israel’s wall and expanding settlements.

Last summer Abdallah was standing shoulder to shoulder in his village with Nobel Peace laureates and internationally renowned human rights activists. Now, as you read these words, Abdallah Abu Rahmah is incarcerated in an Israeli jail.

As a member of the Popular Committee since its conception in 2004 and its coordinator, he has represented the village around the world. In June 2009, he attended the village’s precedent-setting legal case in Montreal against two Canadian companies illegally building settlements on Bil’in’s land. In December of 2008, he participated in a speaking tour in France, and on 10 December 2008, exactly a year before his arrest, Abdallah traveled to Germany on behalf of Bil’in, to accept the Carl Von Ossietzky Medal for outstanding service in the realization of basic and human rights, awarded by the International League for Human Rights.

Abdallah Abu Rahmah’s arrest is part of an escalation in Israeli attempts to break the spirit of the people of Bil’in, their popular leadership, and the popular struggle as a whole. In the past six months, 31 of Bil’in’s residents have been arrested for protesting the Wall. Recently, Adv. Gaby Lasky, who represents many of Bil’in’s detainees, was informed by the military prosecution that the army intends to use legal measures as a means of ending the demonstrations.

What can you do?

1. Contact your representatives

Ask your ambassador in Israel to send an official inquiry to the Israeli government about Abdallah. Demand that they apply pressure on Israeli officials to release Abdallah Abu Rahmah and stop targeting the non-violent popular resistance.

To write the American ambassador to Israel, click here

For a detailed list of embassies in Israel and their contact information see here. Feel free to use this sample letter.

2. Donate

The Popular Struggle Coordination Committee is in need of funds in order to pay for legal fees, the support of prisoners and their families, and the expenses of grassroots organizing. Please consider making a donation

3. Send Abdallah a letter of support

Show Abdallah that people from all over the world care about him and his cause by sending him a letter. Your support will strengthen Abdallah’s morale and be presented to his judge, proving that the international community is watching.

4. Endorse the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee

The Coordination Committee was created by key activists from popular committees across the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The Committee supports and organizes non-violent, direct actions against the Israeli military occupation. Calling on Palestinians to strengthen the grassroots organizing, the Committee has been engaging Palestinian residents and activists, Israeli and international supporters. Please consider lending your name to the struggle by endorsing the Popular Struggle Coordination Committee.

5. Organize

Organize demonstrations in front of Israeli embassies or other events in your community condemning Israel’s ongoing arrest campaign and stand in solidarity with those who remain in Israel’s prisons. Please let us know of any planned event.