Thousands of Palestinians on Thursday marked the 61st anniversary of the Naqba, the “catastrophe” that sparked an exodus of hundreds of thousands of refugees after Israel was created in 1948.
Holding Palestinian flags and photos of Arab villages razed by Israeli forces six decades ago, demonstrators marched in the centre of Ramallah in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
“The right of return is sacred”, “No peace without the right of return”, read the banners held by the marchers.
The ceremonies took place a day early because the May 15 anniversary of the Naqba falls this year on a Friday, a day off in the mostly Muslim Palestinian territories.
The demonstration was headed by political figures and religious leaders and began at the tomb of legendary Palestinian chief Yasser Arafat at the headquarters of the Palestinian Authority, today run by his successor, president Mahmud Abbas.
In the northern West Bank town of Nablus, about 2,000 people participated in a march, holding Palestinian flags tied with black ribbons as a sign of mourning.
In Aqabet Jaber refugee camp, in the oasis town of Jericho, participants unveiled a statue featuring a six-metre (20-foot) metallic key, symbolising the refugees’ attachment to the houses from which they fled or were forced out in 1948.
Around 700,000 people were exiled in this way in 1948, with the United Nations estimating that today they and their decendants number 4.6 million.
The Israeli army said in a statement that it was sealing off the occupied West Bank from midnight on Thursday until Saturday evening for the Naqba.
Palestinian interest in the intentions of the new Israeli government tends to focus on one small area in the West Bank, Ma’aleh Adumim and its environs, particularly the area known as E1 linking the settlement to East Jerusalem.
Earlier this month Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayad participated in mass Friday prayers against land expropriation in the area, and the Palestinian media was full of reports of Israeli settlement plans in Ma’aleh Adumim and E1.
The concerns are not baseless. E1 is the only area that Benjamin Netanyahu explicitly committed to developing, on the eve of February’s elections. His political rival, Labor Party chairman Ehud Barak, also publicly expressed support for building there.
Plans for expanding the Israeli presence around Ma’aleh Adumim continued apace under the Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert governments, in the interest of creating contiguous Jewish settlement from East Jerusalem to Mitzpeh Yeriho, on the outskirts of Jericho. Visitors to the area in recent weeks can see that the gradual annexation is continuing, even if its goal is far from being reached.
Still, a significant hurdle lies around the corner: the firm, declared opposition of the United States government, opposition that is likely to be expressed during Netanyahu’s meeting with President Barack Obama in Washington next week.
One of the main developments in the area is at Kedar, a small settlement of 80 families, south of Ma’aleh Adumim, that is at the center of a prolonged legal battle. The security establishment, under Sharon’s inspiration, designed the route of the separation fence so that 8,000 dunams (2,000 acres), including Kedar, would be on the Israeli side of the barrier. The route would have expropriated lands from the Palestinian village of Sawahra and forced the evacuation of hundreds of Bedouin living between Kedar and Ma’aleh Adumim.
After residents of Sawahra petitioned the High Court of Justice on the matter, The Council for Peace and Security drafted a new plan that placed Kedar on the Palestinian side of the fence. After a two-year delay, the defense establishment presented yet a third plan, this one expropriating 4,000 dunams but including Kedar on the Israeli side of the barrier.
In early June the High Court held a hearing on the petition against the new plan. Meanwhile, an Interior Ministry-appointed committee recommended uniting Kedar and Ma’aleh Adumim into a single community, a step that would facilitate authorization of the new route.
GOC Southern Command Gadi Shamni has issued orders to pave an additional road passing south of the fence’s route in Kedar, linking the Bethlehem area with Mitzpeh Yeriho. The cost of the project is estimated at hundreds of millions of shekels.
In E1, as Haaretz reported in February, infrastructure plans were completed last year for the construction of a new neighborhood, to be called Mevasseret Adumim. Construction of settlements and outposts has also continued, particularly in the northeastern part of the Ma’aleh Adumim bloc, in the settlement of Kfar Adumim and the satellites that have sprung up around it.
All of these developments share a single common denominator – by taking “a dunam here and a dunam there,” they are tightening Israel’s grip on the land. The new roads and junctions were designed to allow a separation between Israelis and Palestinians. In tandem to roads built for Israeli use, Palestinians coming from Ramallah will travel via Hizmeh and the al-Zaim Junction south toward Bethlehem, or east toward Jericho via a bypass road near Kedar.
These steps seriously diminish the already narrow possibility of reaching a final-status agreement with the Palestinians. Over the past decade Palestinian officials have hinted that they could come to terms with Ma’aleh Adumim, but that willingness is unlikely to extend to the giant “bubble” developing around the settlement.
Colonel (Res.) Shaul Arieli of the Council for Peace and Security, one of the framers of the Geneva Initiative, says that Israel’s actions can be explained in one of two ways – as the deliberate sabotage of a future final-status agreement, or as the wanton waste of taxpayer money.
According to media reports, the State Attorney’s Office has ordered the Police to review its guidelines for dispersing demonstrators. The order comes in the wake of the death of Bassem Abu Rahma, a Palestinian who was demonstrating in Bi’lin, and of injuries suffered by a number of other demonstrators recently. B’Tselem welcomes the State Attorney’s Office’s directive, which follows requests by B’Tselem to stop firing tear-gas canisters directly at persons. The real test, however, is whether the directive is implemented in the field. B’Tselem calls on the State Attorney’s Office to investigate incidents of tear-gas canisters fired at people and to prosecute the police officers and soldiers who were responsible for the prolonged and flagrant breach of regulations, and the commanders who allowed the forbidden practice to continue.
In recent weeks, B’Tselem has warned law-enforcement authorities about the life-threatening danger inherent in directly firing tear-gas canisters, a practice that has already resulted in injury to dozens of persons, some seriously. In its April letter following Abu Rahma’s death, B’Tselem demanded that the army enforce its Open-Fire Regulations, investigate incidents in which soldiers have violated the regulations, and prosecute the delinquent soldiers.
On 3 May, B’Tselem received a response from the legal advisor of the Judea and Samaria Division, Col. Sharon Afek, stating that an explicit, comprehensive directive would soon be issued prohibiting the direct firing of tear-gas canisters at people. B’Tselem also called on the Judge Advocate General to ensure that military forces cease firing tear-gas canisters directly at people.
B’Tselem also provided law-enforcement officials with video documentation of soldiers and border policemen firing directly at demonstrators, evidence that the breach of the Open-Fire Regulations was not an isolated incident, but a widespread practice known to senior officers.
B’Tselem wrote to the Judge Advocate General, Brig. Gen. Avichai Mandelblit, demanding to order a Military Police investigation into the circumstances of the death of Abu Rahma, and to make it clear to security forces that it is absolutely forbidden to fire tear-gas canisters directly at a person. B’Tselem had sent a letter in similar spirit a month earlier, following the severe injury to the American Tristan Anderson, who was struck in the forehead by a tear-gas canister. B’Tselem did not receive a reply to its letter.
Attached to the letter was a selection of video clips filmed in the villages of Ni’lin, Bi’lin, and Jayyus. The clips showed repeated firing of tear-gas canisters directly at demonstrators, indicating that, for some time, and contrary to army claims, security forces in the West Bank have used this practice.
Anti-Israel activists are stepping up efforts to dissuade Leonard Cohen from performing in Israel in September.
The activists urge supporters to “apply pressure during his tour by local groups along his path,” in their most recent appeal, which was circulated on Monday in various pro-Palestinian mailing lists.
They added that letters “and various actions” might prove “instrumental in helping him take the decision to cancel his last concert.” This, they explain, is because “it is obvious the situation in Palestine and Israel is quite clear to Leonard Cohen, to judge by his song entitled Questions for Shomrim.
The poem begins with the words “And will my people build a new Dachau and call it love, security, Jewish culture.” It also reads: “You were our singing heroes in ’48, do you dare ask yourselves what you are now” and: “now my son must die for he’s an Arab.”
The anti-Israel activists called on supporters to write to Cohen’s manager and leave messages on his official online forum. They published a list of destinations on Cohen’s tour, ending with Israel “if we are not successful.”
In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Leonard Cohen flew to Israel to perform before reserves and regular soldiers fighting in the Sinai desert.
Two main letters of protest against the concert have been circulated so far. The most recent one was co-signed by a hundred Israelis and Palestinians, who wrote that Israel’s “ruthless, criminal bashing of the Palestinians has met with little international criticism.”
Addressing Cohen and urging him to cancel, the Israelis said: “We cannot envision you cooperating with continued Israeli defiance of justice and morality; we cannot envision you playing a part in the Israeli charade of self-righteousness.” They included the poem Questions for Shomrim in their appeal.
The first letter of protest was published last month by Pro-Palestinian professors from the U.K. from the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine, who warned Cohen that he would be performing “for a public that by a very large majority had no qualms about its military forces’ onslaught” in Gaza.
The scholars – Haim Bresheeth, Mike Cushman, Hilary Rose and Jonathan Rosenhead, added: “You will perform in a state whose propaganda services will extract every ounce of mileage from your presence. They will use it to whitewash their war crimes.”
The authors of the letter explained that Cohen needs to cancel the show in Ramat Gan lest it be attended by Arab-killing Israeli soldiers who are “drinking beer” and “playing backgammon with their mates and going to discotheques.”
'Israel's fascist foreign minister is of the opinion that Gaza should've been nuked.'
Gaza has returned to its pre-massacre state of siege, confronted with the usual, conspiratorial, “international” indifference after 22 long days and dark nights, during which its brave people were left alone to face one of the strongest armies in the world — an army that has hundreds of nuclear warheads, thousands of trigger-happy soldiers armed with Merkava tanks, F-16s, Apache helicopters, naval gunships and phosphorous bombs. Gaza now does not make news. It’s people die slowly, its children malnourished, its water contaminated, its nights dark, and yet it is deprived even of a word of sympathy from the likes of Ban Ki Moon and the president of “Change; Yes We Can.”
Israel could not have carried out its genocidal war, preceded and followed by a medieval, hermetic siege, without a green light from the international community. During the massacre, one Israeli soldier commented: “That’s what is so nice, supposedly, about Gaza: You see a person on a road, walking along a path. He doesn’t have to be with a weapon, you don’t have to identify him with anything and you can just shoot him.”
When apartheid Israel decided to attack the northern part of the Gaza Strip in late February, early March of 2008, we were threatened with a greater shoah (Holocaust) by the deputy minister of war, then, Matan Vilnaii. Around 164 Palestinians, including 64 children were killed. What was the reaction of the international community? Absolutely nothing. In fact, the EU decided to reward the oppressor by issuing declarations of intentions to upgrade their trade agreements with Israel, which, needless to say, served as a green light for the current atrocities. On Sunday 18 January, Israel’s Prime Minister Olmert, a war criminal by all standards, expressed his pleasure to six European leaders, over their “extraordinary support for the state of Israel and their concern about its security”. In retrospect, the upgrading of relations between the EU and Israel in early December 2008 was a green light for the larger Gaza massacre of 2009. In spite of the war crimes committed by the IOF, and in spite of the obvious fascist make-up of the current government, the EU will continue to strengthen bilateral relations with Tel Aviv.
Within this context, the anti-apartheid freedom fighter Ronnie Kasrils says:
What [Hendrik] Verwoerd [the architect of apartheid] admired too was the impunity with which Israel exercised state violence and terror to get its way, without hindrance from its Western allies, increasingly key among them the USA. What Verwoerd and his ilk came to admire in Israel.., was the way the Western powers permitted an imperialist Israel to use its unbridled military with impunity in expanding its territory and holding back the rising tide of Arab nationalism in its neighborhood.
March 2008 was, then, a rehearsal for Gaza 2009. Israel knew that it could go on committing war crimes fully equipped with an international conspiracy of silence. The international community did not react in March 2008: why would it do otherwise in 2009? That was the Israeli logic, and so it remains. Mind you, Israel’s fascist foreign minister is of the opinion that Gaza should’ve been nuked. No wonder Adolf Hitler once said: “What luck for rulers that men do not think!”
For those who accuse us of subscribing to conspiracy theories, we have this reminder: in 2004 the Israeli Professor Arnon Soffer, Head of the IOF’s National Defense College, and an advisor to Ariel Sharon, spelled out the desired results of Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza in an interview with the Jerusalem Post:
… when 1.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today,… The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day…If we don’t kill, we will cease to exist…Unilateral separation doesn’t guarantee “peace” – it guarantees a Zionist-Jewish state with an overwhelming majority of Jews…
Then, there is the view bluntly expressed in 2002 by Israel’s then chief of staff, General Moshe Yaalon, and which I think sums up the objective of the hermetic medieval siege and the massacre:
The Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people.
Now, this is a total dehumanization of the Palestinians of Gaza. And West Bankers, here is the message for you: you’d better accept your fate as cockroaches, ready to be crushed willingly under the boot of a zealot Israeli soldier, or else.
The resemblance of Israel’s campaign of tribalistic racist hate both to that of apartheid SA and to Hitler’s murderous regime has recently been articulated by Comrade Kasrils:
Certainly we South Africans can identify the pathological cause, fuelling the hate, of Israel’s political-military elite and public in general. Neither is this difficult for anyone acquainted with colonial history to understand the way in which deliberately cultivated race hate inculcates a justification for the most atrocious and inhumane actions against even defenseless civilians – women, children, the elderly amongst them. In fact was this not the pathological racist ideology that fuelled Hitler’s war lust and implementation of the Holocaust?
In actual fact, if there is something to learn from Gaza 2009, it is that the world was absolutely wrong to think that Nazism was defeated in 1945. Nazism has won because it has finally managed to Nazify the consciousness of its own victims! Just think about the soldiers’ T-shirts episodes. The courageous Israeli journalist Gideon Levy has written that Israel today looks very much like Germany in 1933.
But now the urgent question is how to hold Israel accountable to international law and basic principles of human rights in order to forestall the imminent escalation? The most immediate and pressing questions within this context are: what the nature of international solidarity should be and how it can best support the Palestinian struggle for self-determination.
The South African apartheid regime came under repeated pressure from the international community and multilateral organizations such as the United Nations Security Council which passed countless resolutions against it because of its inhumane treatment of blacks. This gave much-needed succor to the oppressed, while we today are bereft of even this tiny comfort because the United States continues to use its veto to ensure that Israel escapes censure from the world body.
Grassroots opposition to a brutal apartheid finally forced the US and UK and other governments around the world to isolate apartheid South Africa. They would not have done so without the pressure exerted on them by their own people. Israel needs to be isolated in exactly the same way as apartheid South Africa. Today, there is a growing mass-based struggle inside Palestine, as well as other forms of struggle, exactly as there was inside apartheid South Africa. An intensified international solidarity movement with a common agenda can make the struggle for Palestine resonate in every country in the world, thus closing off the world to Israelis until they open the world to Palestinians. Our goal now, as civil society organizations, is to lift the deadly hermetic siege imposed on Gaza causing slow motion genocide; marching towards the six gates of the Gaza prison has been tried and must intensify. This is what many activists, Palestinian and international, are planning to do. Our BDS campaign modeled on the South African anti-apartheid global campaign is gaining momentum as a democratic movement based on the struggle for human rights and implementation of international law. Our struggle is NOT religious, nor ethnic, nor racial, but rather universalistic: one that guarantees the rehumanization of our people in the face of a genocidal machine run by what Moshe Dayan would have called “a mad dog.”
The Palestinians of Gaza have lost faith in the failed “peace process” and the two-state solution; hence, the desperate need for a new national program that can mobilize the masses; a program that is necessarily democratic in its nature; one that respects resistance in its different forms and, ultimately, guarantees peace with justice. The new, much-needed program, however, must make the necessary link between all Palestinian struggles: the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, Israel’s ethnically-based discrimination and rights violations of more than one million Palestinian citizens, as well as the 1948 externally displaced refugees.
What we are constantly told, is either accept Israeli occupation in its ugliest form — i.e. the ongoing presence of the apartheid wall, colonies, checkpoints, zigzag roads, color-coded number plates, house demolitions and security coordination supervised by a retired American general — or have a hermetic medieval siege imposed on us, but still die with dignity.
But, the lesson we learn from Gaza 2009, exactly like Sharpville 1960, is to harness all effort to fight the outcome of the Oslo Accords, and to form a United Front on a platform of resistance and reforms. This cannot be achieved without realizing that ministries, premierships, and presidencies in Gaza and Ramallah are a façade not unlike those inauthentic structures in the South African Independent Homelands. In a short story by SA writer, Najbuolu Ndebel, a young black woman comments on the generous offer given by the racist white government: “That’s how it is planned. That we be given a little of everything, and so prize the little we have that we forget about FREEDOM.”
This is exactly what Steve Biko, the hero of anti-apartheid struggle–who paid his life for the freedom of all South Africans– meant when he said:
Not only have the whites been guilty of being on the offensive, but by some skilful manoeuvres, they have managed to control the responses of the blacks to the provocation. Not only have they kicked the black, but they have also told him how to react to the kick. For a long time the black has been listening with patience to the advice he has been receiving on how best to respond to the kick. With painful slowness he is now beginning to show signs that it is his right and duty to respond to the kick in the way he sees fit.
And we, Palestinians, have decided to respond to the Zionist kick in the way we see fit. In Ndebel’s story quoted earlier, a black intellectual makes it clear that “[he’d] rather be a hungry dog that runs freely in the streets , than a fat, chained dog burdened with itself and the weight of the chain.” These examples used again and again in the anti-Apartheid literature sum up the lessons we learn from Gaza 2009. In a word it is resilience.
Archbishop Desmund Tutu of South Africa said, in a much quoted wisdom: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” And as I said in an earlier article, while IOF were bombing my neighborhood, the UN, EU, Arab League and the international community by and large have remained silent in the face of atrocities committed by Apartheid Israel. They are therefore on the side of Israel. Hundreds of dead corpses of children and women have failed to convince them to intervene.
We are, therefore, left with one option, an option that does not wait for the United Nations Security Council or Arab Summits: the option of people’s power, as we have been repeatedly saying. This remains the only power capable of counteracting the massive power imbalance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The horror of the racist apartheid regime in South Africa was challenged with a sustained campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions initiated in 1958 and given new urgency in 1960 after the Sharpeville Massacre. This campaign led ultimately to the collapse of white rule in 1994 and the establishment of a multi-racial, democratic state.
Similarly, the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions has been gathering momentum since 2005. Gaza 2009, like Sharpeville 1960, cannot be ignored: it demands a response from all who believe in a common humanity. Now is the time to boycott the apartheid Israeli state, to divest and to impose sanctions against it. This is the only way to ensure the creation of a secular, democratic state for all in historic Palestine regardless of race, sect and ethnicity. The Australian journalist John Pilger has this to say:
What happens in Gaza is the defining moment of our time, which either grants the impunity of war criminals the immunity of our silence, while we contort our own intellect and morality, or gives us the power to speak out.
Gaza 2009, with mass mobilization and international solidarity, is, therefore, becoming the guiding torch, not only for the Palestinian people, but also for the Arab world, towards a new Middle East, one that is, unlike Condoleezza Rice’s ME, characterized by democracy and freedom. This is the least our resistance to religious exclusivism, xenophobia, and tribalistic world view should lead to.
– Based on a speech delivered via video link at a panel on “Promoting a Culture of Resistance” at the 4th Bil’in International Conference on Grassroots Popular Resistance.
– Dr. Haidar Eid is Associate Professor in the Department of English Literature, Al-Aqsa University, Gaza Strip, Palestine. Dr. Eid is a founding member of the One Democratic State Group (ODSG) and a member of Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI). He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com.
