Jan 122008

Often when “Israeli Apartheid” is talked about the argument that you always hear is: “There are no Jews-only park benches in Israel” which is a strange argument. There are many Jews-only things in Israel and furthermore apartheid is, according to international law, not defined according to unequal access to park benches.

In its most specific meaning, the word Apartheid (Afrikaans for separation) refers to the system of laws, policies and practices implemented by the white minority in South Africa to repress and exploit the indigenous African majority. In Israel, the word Hafrada (Hebrew for separation) is used to refer to the general policy of separation the Israeli government has adopted and implemented over the Palestinians in the West Bank (WB) and Gaza Strip (GS).

In 1976, the world witnessed the signing of the International Convention for the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. According to this convention, Apartheid is a Crime against Humanity, and applies to all cases where policies are implemented “for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them”. The convention gave examples of policies that are often used to establish and maintain this domination, all of which are used by the Israeli authorities against non-Jews and particularly against Arabs.

In 1967, Israel occupied the WB and GS, ethnically cleansing a further 250,000 Palestinians from their homes after 720,000 were ethnically cleansed in 1948. Both the WB and GS are populated by large number of Palestinians and this has placed Israel in a dilemma. This is because it wants to control the land but escape responsibility for the Palestinians, so in response it created fenced-in Bantustans in GS and the WB.

Israel has built 24 foot high and 720km long (double the length of the Green Line) concrete Wall. It is clear that the wall does not run along the Green Line, which separates Israel from the WB, but rather runs through the WB. This means the annexing Palestinian land and divides the WB into small Bantustans. Furthermore it hugely restricts the movement of Palestinians within the WB.

As well as the Wall over 300 Israeli checkpoints and roadblocks divide the WB into 420 different enclaves with no freedom of movement for Palestinians between them. Settler -only highways are off limits for Palestinians who are forced to drive with different colour number plates to distinguish them from Israeli settlers.

Palestinians in the WB are subject to a different set of laws to Israeli settlers living in the same area. The military laws that apply to Palestinians in the WB regulate every aspect of life.

Curfews are regularly placed on Palestinian areas that place all residents under de-facto house arrest. The city of Nablus, for example, was under 24-hour curfew for 5 consecutive months in 2002.

In the WB/GS, Israeli soldiers and police have killed over 4,850 Palestinians since September 2000.

Since 1967, more than 650,000 Palestinians have been detained. Currently over 10,000 Palestinians from the WB/GS are being held as political prisoners, more than 2,000 without ever being charged or facing trial. The Israeli military will regularly drive through Palestinian areas and call for all Palestinian males between 15 and 50 to leave their houses and gather in a central area where they will be detained.

Torture is used against virtually every Palestinian arrested by the Israeli military or police. Regular beatings, being tied in contorted positions, denial of food and prevention of the use of the bathroom are common experiences in Israeli prisons.

Around 18,000 Palestinian homes have been demolished since 1967. These demolitions often occur without warning where residents are forced to flee their homes with whatever belongings they can carry.

But the apartheid label should not be restricted to the post-1967 occupation. There is a more fundamental form of apartheid of which the occupation is nothing more than a manifestation.

Apartheid in historic Palestine originated, and has persisted, in the ideology of creating a state in which Jews would be separated from non-Jews in their stake in the political community. It was an apartheid mentality that nourished the desire of establishing and maintaining a state with a Jewish demographic majority and character. It is apartheid law that creates a wall of discrimination between Jewish and Arab citizens of the Israeli state. It is an Apartheid mentality that prompts some Israeli Jews to view their Arabs living under Israel as a “demographic threat”.

Section 7A of the Israeli Basic Law prevents anyone running for the Israeli Knesset (parliament) if they do not recognize Israel as a Jewish state and thus bars anyone who wants to change the apartheid character of the state by parliamentary participation.

The Jewish National Fund (JNF) owns around 14% of the land in Israel, and is prohibited by its constitution from selling or leasing this land to Palestinians, around 2/3 of this land was taken from Palestinian refugees. Through its 50% representation on the council of the Israel Lands Administration (ILA), the JNF has a substantial influence over more than 93% of the land in Israel.

Some Israeli towns set criteria that prevent Arab citizens from purchasing homes or living in the town. The Israeli state regularly passes legislations that prevent Arab from reaching their lands or redefines areas as nature reserves or forests that can then be confiscated.

There are over 100,000 (9% of Palestinian citizens of Israel) Palestinian citizens of Israel living in villages that the Israeli government does not officially recognise. These villages existed prior to the establishment of Israel but were simply declared as non-existent with the adoption of the Israeli Planning and Construction Law in 1965 and do not appear on any map. Although the residents of these villages are officially Israeli citizens, they are denied basic services such as housing, water, electricity, education and health care. Furthermore the Israeli authorities regularly demolish some of these villages.

Up to 420,000 of Arabs living under Israel are internal refugees “internally displaced persons” in Israel, between 46,000 and 48,000 Arabs became displaced in 1949 within what became Israel. Over fifty years later, this group (including the children of the displaced) represents about 150,000 to 200,000 persons. If you also include the Bedouins who were ordered in 1949 to move into a close area under military rule in the Negev and now for the most part live in “unrecognized villages”, the estimate the number of displaced is 250,000-420,000.

The well-planned ethnic cleansing, in 1948, of 720,000 indigenous people was apartheid practice par excellence. It is apartheid which prevents the expelled and their descendants from returning: this apartheid denies residence to expellees from the Galilee, but grants it, not just to Israeli-born Jews, but to Jews all over the world.

Since 1948, the Israeli military and police have continually carried out massacres of Palestinians who are living under Israel, in the WB and the GS and those in neighbouring countries. For example, in 1956, Israeli police in Kufr Qassem killed 49 Palestinian citizens of Israel after a curfew was placed on the village without warning.

Another argument I often hear is “if Israel was an apartheid, Arabs in Israel would not be able to vote” which completely ignores the fact that Arabs living under Israel today are the remains of the Arab population who still live there despite all the efforts by Israel to expel them. They are merely allowed the to vote in Israeli elections because they are a minority in the Israeli political system that has their voices sidelined. The fact that Palestinians within Israel have the right to vote is nothing more than a way to hide the reality of apartheid and does not undermine the apartheid nature of the state of Israel.

The past few years have seen a significant increase of literature and analysis which has argued that Israel is apartheid state. Also figures in the anti apartheid struggle in South Africa, including figures such as Nelson Mandela, and archbishop Desmond Tutu who has repeatedly made the statement that the Israeli occupation of Palestine is analogous if not worse than South African apartheid. Even the current Israeli PM tactfully acknowledged apartheid when he said in an interview with an Israeli newspaper: “If the two-state solution collapsed we (Israel) would face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights”.

Naji Mohamed
najimohamed@actionpalestine.org

  • Share/Bookmark
May 042007

by Azmi Bishara
LA TIMES
(Link)
May 3, 2007

Amman, Jordan — I AM A PALESTINIAN from Nazareth, a citizen of Israel and was, until last month, a member of the Israeli parliament.

But now, in an ironic twist reminiscent of France’s Dreyfus affair — in which a French Jew was accused of disloyalty to the state — the government of Israel is accusing me of aiding the enemy during Israel’s failed war against Lebanon in July.

Israeli police apparently suspect me of passing information to a foreign agent and of receiving money in return. Under Israeli law, anyone — a journalist or a personal friend — can be defined as a “foreign agent” by the Israeli security apparatus. Such charges can lead to life imprisonment or even the death penalty.

The allegations are ridiculous. Needless to say, Hezbollah — Israel’s enemy in Lebanon — has independently gathered more security information about Israel than any Arab Knesset member could possibly provide. What’s more, unlike those in Israel’s parliament who have been involved in acts of violence, I have never used violence or participated in wars. My instruments of persuasion, in contrast, are simply words in books, articles and speeches.

These trumped-up charges, which I firmly reject and deny, are only the latest in a series of attempts to silence me and others involved in the struggle of the Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel to live in a state of all its citizens, not one that grants rights and privileges to Jews that it denies to non-Jews.

When Israel was established in 1948, more than 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled in fear. My family was among the minority that escaped that fate, remaining instead on the land where we had long lived. The Israeli state, established exclusively for Jews, embarked immediately on transforming us into foreigners in our own country.

For the first 18 years of Israeli statehood, we, as Israeli citizens, lived under military rule with pass laws that controlled our every movement. We watched Jewish Israeli towns spring up over destroyed Palestinian villages.

Today we make up 20% of Israel’s population. We do not drink at separate water fountains or sit at the back of the bus. We vote and can serve in the parliament. But we face legal, institutional and informal discrimination in all spheres of life.

More than 20 Israeli laws explicitly privilege Jews over non-Jews. The Law of Return, for example, grants automatic citizenship to Jews from anywhere in the world. Yet Palestinian refugees are denied the right to return to the country they were forced to leave in 1948. The Basic Law of Human Dignity and Liberty — Israel’s “Bill of Rights” — defines the state as “Jewish” rather than a state for all its citizens. Thus Israel is more for Jews living in Los Angeles or Paris than it is for native Palestinians.

Israel acknowledges itself to be a state of one particular religious group. Anyone committed to democracy will readily admit that equal citizenship cannot exist under such conditions.

Most of our children attend schools that are separate but unequal. According to recent polls, two-thirds of Israeli Jews would refuse to live next to an Arab and nearly half would not allow a Palestinian into their home.

I have certainly ruffled feathers in Israel. In addition to speaking out on the subjects above, I have also asserted the right of the Lebanese people, and of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, to resist Israel’s illegal military occupation. I do not see those who fight for freedom as my enemies.

This may discomfort Jewish Israelis, but they cannot deny us our history and identity any more than we can negate the ties that bind them to world Jewry. After all, it is not we, but Israeli Jews who immigrated to this land. Immigrants might be asked to give up their former identity in exchange for equal citizenship, but we are not immigrants.

During my years in the Knesset, the attorney general indicted me for voicing my political opinions (the charges were dropped), lobbied to have my parliamentary immunity revoked and sought unsuccessfully to disqualify my political party from participating in elections — all because I believe Israel should be a state for all its citizens and because I have spoken out against Israeli military occupation. Last year, Cabinet member Avigdor Lieberman — an immigrant from Moldova — declared that Palestinian citizens of Israel “have no place here,” that we should “take our bundles and get lost.” After I met with a leader of the Palestinian Authority from Hamas, Lieberman called for my execution.

The Israeli authorities are trying to intimidate not just me but all Palestinian citizens of Israel. But we will not be intimidated. We will not bow to permanent servitude in the land of our ancestors or to being severed from our natural connections to the Arab world. Our community leaders joined together recently to issue a blueprint for a state free of ethnic and religious discrimination in all spheres. If we turn back from our path to freedom now, we will consign future generations to the discrimination we have faced for six decades.

Americans know from their own history of institutional discrimination the tactics that have been used against civil rights leaders. These include telephone bugging, police surveillance, political delegitimization and criminalization of dissent through false accusations. Israel is continuing to use these tactics at a time when the world no longer tolerates such practices as compatible with democracy.

Why then does the U.S. government continue to fully support a country whose very identity and institutions are based on ethnic and religious discrimination that victimize its own citizens?

  • Share/Bookmark