At long, long, long last, w. incredible internet, public opinion turns against Israeli terror state

Apollonian

Guest Columnist
Israel ignoring “tectonic change” in public opinion

Link: http://www.redressonline.com/2014/10/israel-ignoring-tectonic-change-in-public-opinion/

By Uri Avnery

If the British parliament had adopted a resolution in favour of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the reaction of our media would have been like this:

“In an atmosphere of great enthusiasm, the British parliament adopted with a huge majority (274 for, a mere 12 against) a pro-Israeli motion… Over half the seats were occupied, more than usual… the opponents of Israel were in hiding and did not dare to vote against…”

Unfortunately, the British parliament voted this week on a pro-Palestinian resolution, and our media reacted almost unanimously like this:

“The hall was half empty… there was no enthusiasm… a meaningless exercise… Only 274 members voted for the resolution, which is not binding… Many members stayed away altogether…”

“Harbinger of very bad news”

Yet all our media reported on the proceedings at length, many related articles appeared in the newspapers. Quite a feat for such a negligible, unimportant, insignificant, inconsequential, trivial, petty act.

A day before, 363 Israeli Jewish citizens called upon the British parliament to adopt the resolution, which calls for the British government to recognise the state of Palestine. The signatories included a Nobel Prize laureate, several winners of the highest Israeli civilian award, two former cabinet ministers and four former members of the Knesset (including myself), diplomats and a general.

The official propaganda machine did not go into action. Knowing that the resolution would be adopted anyhow, it tried to downplay the event as far as possible. The Israeli ambassador in London could not be reached.

Was it a negligible event? In a strictly procedural sense it was. In a broader sense, far from it. For the Israeli leadership, it is the harbinger of very bad news.

A few days before, a similar news item came from Sweden. The newly elected leftist prime minister announced that his government was considering the recognition of the state of Palestine in the near future.



Even in the US, unconditional support for the Israeli government seems to be wavering.



Sweden, like Britain, was always considered a “pro-Israeli” country, loyally voting against “anti-Israel” resolutions in the UN. If such important Western nations are reconsidering their attitudes towards the policy of Israel, what does it mean?

Another unexpected blow came from the south. The Egyptian dictator, Abd-al-Fattah al-Sisi, disabused the Israeli leadership of the notion that the “moderate” Arab states would fill the ranks of our allies against the Palestinians. In a sharp speech, he warned his new-found soul-mate, Binyamin Netanyahu, that the Arab states would not cooperate with Israel before we make peace with a Palestinian state.

Thus he punctured the newly inflated balloon floated by Netanyahu – that pro-American Arab states, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Qatar, would become open allies of Israel.

In South America, public opinion has already shifted markedly against Israel. The recognition of Palestine is gaining ground in official circles, too. Even in the US, unconditional support for the Israeli government seems to be wavering.

What the hell is going on?

“Tectonic change” in public attitude

What is going on is a profound, perhaps tectonic change in the public attitude towards Israel.

For years now, Israel has been appearing in world media mainly as a country that occupies the Palestinian lands. Press photos of Israelis almost always show heavily armed and armoured soldiers confronting protesting Palestinians, often children. Few of these pictures have had an immediate dramatic impact, but the cumulative, incremental effect should not have been underestimated.

A truly alert diplomatic service would have alerted its government long ago. But our foreign service is thoroughly demoralised. Headed by Avigdor Lieberman, a brutal heavyweight bully considered by many of his colleagues around the world as a semi-fascist, the diplomatic corps is terrorised. They prefer to keep quiet.

This ongoing process reached a higher pitch with the recent Gaza war. It was not basically different from the two Gaza wars that preceded it not so long ago, but for some unfathomable reason it had a much stronger impact.

For a month and a half, day after day, people around the world were bombarded with pictures of killed human beings, maimed children, crying mothers, destroyed apartment buildings, damaged hospitals and schools, masses of homeless refugees. Thanks to the Iron Dome [anti-missile defence system], no destroyed Israeli buildings could be seen, nor hardly any dead Israeli civilians.

An ordinary decent person, whether in Stockholm or Seattle or Singapore, cannot be exposed to such a steady stream of horrible images without being affected – first unconsciously, then consciously. The picture of “The Israeli” in the mind’s eye changes slowly, almost imperceptibly. The brave pioneer standing up to the savages around him mutates into an ugly bully terrorising a helpless population.

Why do Israelis not realise this? Because We Are Always Right.

Israeli propaganda’s own goal

It has often been said before: the main danger of propaganda, any propaganda, is that its first victim is the propagandist himself. It convinces him, rather than his audience. If you twist a fact and repeat it a hundred times, you are bound to believe it.

Take the assertion that we were compelled to bomb UN installations in the Gaza Strip because Hamas was using them to launch rockets at our towns and villages. Kindergartens, schools, hospitals and mosques were targeted by our artillery, planes, drones and warships. Ninety-nine per cent of Israelis believe that this was necessary. They were shocked when the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, who visited Gaza this week, claimed that this was totally inadmissible.

Doesn’t the secretary-general know that ours is the Most Moral Army in the World?

Another assertion is that these buildings were used by Hamas to hide their arms. A person of my age reminded us this week in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that we did exactly the same during our fight against the British government of Palestine and Arab attackers: our arms were hidden in kindergartens, schools, hospitals and synagogues. In many places there are now proud memorial plaques as a reminder.

In the eyes of the average Israeli, the extensive killing and destruction during the recent campaign was completely justified. He is quite incapable of understanding the world-wide outrage. For lack of another reason, he attributes it to anti-Semitism.

After one of the Lebanon wars (I forget which) I received an unusual message: an army general invited me to give a lecture to his assembled officer corps about the impact of the war on the world media. (He probably wanted to impress his officers with his enlightened attitude.)

I told the officers that the modern battlefield has changed, that modern wars are fought in the full glare of the world media, that today’s soldiers have to take this into account while planning and fighting. They listened respectfully and asked relevant questions, but I wondered if they were really absorbing the lesson.

Soldiering is a profession like any other. Any professional person, be he (or she) a lawyer or a street-cleaner, adopts a set of attitudes suitable to it.

“What the general thinks, Israel thinks”

A general thinks in real terms: how many troops for the job, how many cannons. What is necessary to break the enemy’s resistance? How to reduce his own casualties?

He does not think about photos in the New York Times.

In the Gaza campaign, children were not killed nor houses destroyed arbitrarily. Everything had a military reason. People had to be killed in order to reduce the risk to the lives of our soldiers. (Better a hundred Palestinians killed than one Israeli soldier.) People had to be terrorised to make them turn against Hamas. Neighbourhoods had to be destroyed to allow our troops to advance, and also to teach the population a lesson they will remember for years, thus postponing the next war.

All this makes military sense to a general. He is fighting a war, for God’s sake, and cannot be bothered with non-military considerations, such as the impact on world public opinion. And anyway, after the holocaust…

What the general thinks, Israel thinks.

Israel is not a military dictatorship. General Al-Sisi may be Netanyahu’s best friend, but Netanyahu is not a general. Israel likes doing business, especially arms business, with military dictators all around the world, but in Israel itself the military obeys the elected civilian government.

True, but…

Dominant military mindset

But the state of Israel was born in the middle of a hard-fought war, the outcome of which was by no means assured at that moment. The army was then, and is now, the centre of Israel’s national life. It may be said that the army is the only truly unifying element in Israeli society. It is where males and females, Ashkenazi and Oriental, secular and religious (except the Orthodox), wealthy and poor, old-timer and new immigrant meet and are indoctrinated in the same spirit.

Most Israeli Jews are former soldiers. Most officers, who leave the army in their mid-40s, spread out in the administrative, economic, political and academic elite. The result is that the military mindset is dominant in Israel.

This being so, Israelis are quite unable to comprehend the turn of world public opinion. What do they want from us, these Swedes and Britons and Japanese? Do they believe that we enjoy killing children, destroying homes? (As Golda Meir memorably once declared: “We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children, but we shall never forgive them for compelling us to kill their children!”)

The founders of Israel were very conscious of world public opinion. True, David Ben-Gurion once declared the “it is not important what the goyim [gentiles] are saying, what is important is what the Jews are doing!” but in real life Ben-Gurion was very conscious of the need to win over world opinion. So was his adversary, the right-wing Zionist leader Vladimir Jabotinsky, who once told Menachem Begin that if he despairs of the conscience of the world, he should “jump into the Vistula”.

World public opinion is important. More than that, it is vital. The British parliament’s resolution may be non-binding, but it expresses public opinion, which will sooner or later decide government action on arms sales, Security Council resolutions, European Union decisions and what not. As Thomas Jefferson said: “If the people lead, then eventually the leaders will follow.”

The same Jefferson recommended “a decent respect for the opinion of mankind”.
 
Israel is losing its friends in the world

Link: http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2014/10/19/510714israel-is-losing-its-friends-in-the-world/

When Netanyahu warns about Iran’s nuclear threat, even those who worry about Tehran’s intentions, respond with a weary shrug.

By Philip Stephens
Gulf News


Britain’s parliament voted the other day to recognize the state of Palestine. The decision will not change anything on the ground in the West Bank or Gaza. Nor is it binding on British Prime Minister David Cameron’s coalition government. Yet, this was an important moment and not just because of Britain’s deep historical connections with Palestine. The debate opened a window on what Israel’s friends now think about the enduring impasse in the Middle East.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not had a good year. He was blamed by the US administration for wrecking its latest attempt to reassemble a peace process. In truth, there were obstinacies and obstacles on both sides, but publicly and privately, US officials identified Israel’s land grabs in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank as the principal cause of the breakdown.

Only this month, Philip Hammond, Britain’s Foreign Secretary, said he “deplored” plans for more than 2,000 additional homes for Israeli colonists in occupied East Jerusalem. France’s foreign minister Laurent Fabius said it put in question Israel’s oft-stated commitment to negotiated peace. Europeans have come to see colony expansion as a strategy calculated to destroy fast-fading hopes for a two-state agreement.

The summer war against Hamas had the solid support of most Israelis. For its friends abroad, the manner and scale of the military assault on Gaza was baffling and counterproductive. It attracted widespread international opprobrium for no identifiable strategic gain. The death of 2,000, mostly civilian Palestinians, and the bombing of United Nations schools were rightly judged to be disproportionate. Israel lost 70 soldiers. For what gain? Yuval Diskin, once head of the Shin Bet security service, told Germany’s Der Spiegel that Israel had turned itself into “an instrument in the hands of Hamas”.

A temporary military success was more than offset by the political gains that accrued to Hamas and the damage inflicted on the Palestinian National Authority headed by President Mahmoud Abbas. European governments had backed Abbas’s initiative to forge a joint administration with Hamas as a prelude to serious peace talks. Now they speculate that the Gaza operation was Netanyahu’s attempt to wreck any accommodation.

Draining patience

These episodes have not undercut the fundamental commitment of allies to Israel’s right to live in peace and security. They have drained patience and trust and led many to believe Netanyahu prefers a permanent state of war to a difficult peace. Yet, the alternative to two states, as I have heard often during visits to Israel, is one state that comes to resemble apartheid South Africa.

Israel has lost its international audience. When Netanyahu warns about the nuclear threat from Iran, even those who worry deeply about Tehran’s intentions respond with a weary shrug. The warnings are seen as a diversion — an effort to distract from his refusal to accept a Palestinian state rather than a clear-headed assessment of a present danger. This cannot be good for Israel.

Such was the backdrop to last week’s vote in the House of Commons. The occasion added lustre to the reputation of the politicians — something too rare these days. The hyperbole and rancour of everyday partisanship made way for reasoned argument. Israel had lobbied hard against the motion. It was soon obvious it had lost its best friends.

Sir Richard Ottaway, the Conservative MP, explained that his wife’s family had been instrumental in the fight for the creation of Israel: “I was a friend of Israel long before I became a Tory.” And yet, “to be a friend of Israel is not to be an enemy of Palestine”. Voicing anger at the land grabs, he concluded with sadness: “I have to say to the government of Israel that if they are losing people like me, they will be losing a lot of people.”

The Israeli argument, echoed as it was by a handful of supportive MPs, is that the process of recognizing Palestine as a state, which began in the United Nations General Assembly two years ago, is a brake on peace. Statehood is a prize to be “earned”. To concede it now would be to reduce the pressure for Palestinians to make tough compromises.

Tel Aviv’s intransigence

There was never great logic in this. As several MPs pointed out, the formulation offers Israel an extraordinary veto over the choices of other sovereign states. Even if this once made tactical sense, the proposition has been robbed of reason by Netanyahu: Palestinians cannot be denied statehood because of Israel’s intransigence.

Jack Straw, a former Labour foreign secretary, caught the irony. If pressure needed to be applied on anyone, he said, then it should be on Netanyahu. On Palestinian statehood, Straw quoted the words in 2011 of William Hague, then Cameron’s foreign secretary: “The UK judges that the Palestinian Authority largely fulfils the criteria for UN membership, including statehood.”

The vote was 274 for recognition and 12 against. Cameron had told 100 or so government ministers to abstain. He has an election next year. Other MPs stayed away. But 136 of the 193 members of the UN, including most recently Sweden, have now accepted Palestine for what it is: A state. Britain will surely follow soon enough. Netanyahu may rage at the prospect, but Israel should have nothing to fear. The surest guarantee of its security is peaceful coexistence with a Palestinian state.

Original source: — Financial Times

Philip Stephens is an associate editor of the Financial Times, where he writes a comment piece for the paper each Tuesday and Thursday. He was educated at Wimbledon College and at Oxford University, where he took an honours degree in modern history. He joined Reuters as a correspondent in London and Brussels before moving to the Financial Times newspaper in 1983. There he has worked as economics editor, political editor and editor of the UK edition. He wrote the book Politics and the Pound, a study of the management of exchange rates by the British Government, and its relations with Europe since 1979. He also wrote a biography of Tony Blair, when the latter was British Prime Minister.


Related articles:
◾Tables turned — Israel on the run
◾Agent Cameron still hasn’t got the message on Palestine
◾UK MPs blow a ‘raspberry’ at Netanyahoo and his serfs
 
Israel is losing its grip on evangelical Christians

Younger generation open to Palestinian side of conflict.

By The Forward and Nathan Guttman | Mar. 11, 2014 | 4:40 PM

Support for Israel is weakening among evangelical Christians, prompting a new struggle for the hearts and minds of younger members of America’s largest pro-Israel demographic group.

While hard numbers are not available, evangelical leaders on both sides of the divide on Israel agree that members of the millennial generation do not share their parents’ passion for the Jewish state; many are seeking some form of evenhandedness when approaching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“What is happening is that the hard line of Christian Zionists was not successfully passed forward to the next generation, because it was based on theological themes that are now being questioned by younger evangelicals,” said David Gushee, professor of Christian ethics and director of the Center for Theology and Public Life at Mercer University in Atlanta.

The grip of Christian Zionists over young evangelicals has been loosening for several years, according to observers within the community. But in recent weeks, the leading evangelical pro-Israel organization, Christians United for Israel, has set off alarm bells in articles and interviews decrying the inroads made by pro-Palestinian activists into the evangelical community. CUFI’s leaders are calling for a new strategy to block them.

“The only way of solving a problem is when people know about it,” said CUFI’s executive director, David Brog, who has been leading the effort to win back millennial evangelicals. “This is the best way to rally our troops.”

Brog penned a lengthy article, published in the spring edition of Middle East Quarterly, in which he detailed what he views as a growing phenomenon and the reasons behind it. Titled “The End of Evangelical Support for Israel?” the article laments that “questioning Christian support for the Jewish state is fast becoming a key way for millennials to demonstrate Christian compassion and bona fides.” Brog argues that younger evangelicals are now “in play” and their support for Israel can no longer be taken for granted.

This conclusion is based primarily on gut feelings and anecdotal data. In June 2011, the Pew Research Center conducted a survey among evangelical leaders convened in Cape Town, South Africa, for the third Lausanne Congress of World Evangelization. The findings indicated lower support for Israel than previously believed. A majority of American evangelical leaders (49%) expressed neutrality when asked if they sympathize more with Israelis or with Palestinians. Thirty percent expressed support for Israelis, 13% for the Palestinians.

The survey polled only leaders who participated in this international conference and did not offer insight into the views of rank-and-file evangelicals. But it highlighted the fact that only a minority within the evangelical leadership today hold strong pro-Israel views when it comes to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and attendant conflict with the Palestinians.

Still, Christian Zionism is by far the largest organized voice on Middle East issues among evangelicals. CUFI, led by the Rev. John Hagee, founder of Cornerstone Church, in San Antonio, has 1.6 million registered supporters and a staff of 25 full-time employees. With an operating budget of more than $7 million, CUFI organizes dozens of pro-Israel events throughout the country and an annual Washington conference that brings together evangelical activists and politicians.

CUFI’s leaders are now trying to mobilize funders and supporters to confront the shift among younger members of their community. The challenge they face is made up of individuals, campus activists and professors, small organizations and even documentary films that depict Israel as encroaching on Christian freedom of faith in the Holy Land.

On university campuses, pro-Palestinian Christians have seen some success in the face of CUFI’s more established 120-chapter campus operation. Activists in Illinois’s Wheaton College, a leading Christian school, protested a planned CUFI event on campus in 2009; in Tulsa, Okla., Oral Roberts University has appointed a harsh critic of Israel to its board of trustees, and at Bethel University, in Minnesota, President Jay Barnes visited Israel and the Palestinian territories on a trip that changed participants’ views on the conflict. Barnes’s wife, Barbara Barnes, published a poem after the trip, in which she wrote: “Apartheid has become a way of life. I believe God mourns.”

American evangelicals sympathetic to the Palestinians are also bringing co-religionists to Israel and the West Bank for tours and conferences. This week, Bethlehem Bible College and the Bethlehem-based Holy Land Trust are hosting their third “Christ at the Checkpoint” conference. Speakers at the gathering, which presents a Palestinian perspective on Israel’s occupation of the West Bank for Christians, include Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish, the Gaza physician who worked closely with both Arabs and Israeli Jews until his three daughters were killed in their home by Israeli tank fire during the 2008 Gaza military campaign; William Wilson, the president of Oral Roberts University; and Gary Burge, a theology professor at Wheaton College and author of the book, “Whose Promise? What Christians Are Not Being Told About Israel and the Palestinians.”

The conference’s 12-point “manifesto” strongly condemns “all forms of violence” and warns against the “stereotyping of all faith forms that betray God’s commandment to love our neighbors and enemies.” It also rejects “any exclusive claim to the land of the Bible in the name of God” and states that “racial ethnicity alone does not guarantee the benefits of the Abrahamic Covenant.”

For some on Christian college campuses, the appeal of pro-Palestinian views may be part of a general trend among young evangelicals to question the conservative ways of their parents’ generation. Some students are pursuing a theological understanding of their religion that is more progressive on social issues. Polls conducted in recent years indicate that young white evangelicals are less conservative on issues of same-sex marriage, abortion and contraception. They are also less aligned with the Republican Party. This same trend of political diversification may be taking place on international issues.

CUFI’s concern, as voiced by Brog in his article, is about the younger generation of evangelical leaders; unlike such figures as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, they are not vocal about the issue of Israel. He describes the new generation of evangelical opinion makers as a “largely well-coiffed and fashionably dressed bunch dedicated to marketing Christianity to a skeptical generation by making it cool, compassionate, and less overtly political.”

One of the organizations gaining the most attention on this issue is the Telos Group, a Washington-based not-for-profit set up five years ago that describes itself as “pro-Israeli, pro-Palestinian, pro-American, and pro-peace.” In an interview on Glenn Beck’s “TheBlaze TV,” Brog singled out Telos, saying: “This is not your parents’ anti-Israel group. These guys are savvy, these guys are smart.”

Telos, which focuses a significant part of its work on faith communities, has to date taken 43 groups on tours of Israel and the Palestinian territories. President and co-founder Gregory Khalil said the group intentionally engages with a variety of Israelis and Palestinians on their trips. “I actually think David Brog could learn a lot about Israel if he would join one of our trips,” Khalil said, arguing that Brog mischaracterized the work of Telos.

But while the budding debate in the evangelical world over Israel is real, its proportions may be overstated. “We’re a tiny organization,” Khalil said of his group, which has only two staff members. Other publications and groups cited by CUFI as pro-Palestinian are also much smaller than CUFI’s own pro-Israel operation.

CUFI is not waiting for them to grow larger. In January, at a Jewish fundraising event, the group presented its plan to take two groups a year of young evangelical opinion leaders to Israel. “We need to use the same tool to fight back,” CUFI declared in its pitch for Jewish donor support. The group is also launching speaking tours on campuses, and intends to invest in videos and social media activity that will monitor Christian influencers and “confront them when they cross the line.”

The glaring precedent that pro-Israel evangelicals cite to justify their approach is the path taken by the mainline Protestant churches. In the past, many were sympathetic to Israel, or at worst neutral. But some have since become a stronghold of pro-Palestinian views in the American Christian world. A few groups, such as the Presbyterians, have been leading the way in calls for divestment and boycott against Israel.

But Gushee argued that evangelicals are unlikely to take this path. The mainline Protestant churches today may be aggressively anti-Israel, he said, but the shift among evangelicals “is not from pro-Israel to anti-Israel, but from pro-Israel to a more balanced approach.”
 
Students from across the Universities of California call on regents to divest from Israeli human rights abuses

Students for Justice in Palestine on March 15, 2018 6 Comments

Link: http://mondoweiss.net/2018/03/students-universities-california/

Members of the unified coalition made up of union workers, service workers, and students protesting the UC Regents use of tuition hikes, marginalization against vulnerable campus community members, and blatant investments in Israeli apartheid. (Photo: Catharine Krebs)

Yesterday, students, campus workers, and allies from across the University of California system were in Los Angeles to call on the UC Regents to listen to student voices and divest university funds from corporations that profit from human rights abuses against the Palestinian people. Following the UC Regents’ signing of the United Nations’ Principles for Responsible Investments in 2014 and clear votes in support of divestment by the University of California Student Association (UCSA), UC Graduate Student Worker Union (UAW 2865), and Student Governments on eight out of nine UC campuses, students are demanding the UC Regents ensure that the UCs reflect the values we all hold dear: freedom, justice, and equality.

The UCs are invested in the following corporations profiting from rights abuses, as documented by reputable human rights organizations: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Caterpillar, Cemex, HP, General Electric, 3M, Perrigo Company, Atlas Copco, Ford and Hyundai. Lockheed Martin, for example, manufactures Apache helicopters that have killed Palestinian civilians, including children, and Caterpillar supplies bulldozers to the Israeli military to demolish the homes of Palestinian families to make way for illegal Israeli settlements. Instead of investing in corporations that harm communities, universities should be investing in corporations that do business ethically.

Members representing the UCDivest campaign leading the march down UCLA campus. (Photo: Catharine Krebs)

Given the current political climate, it is critical that universities do all they can to support students and hear their concerns. Students, university workers, and allies are tired of their voices being ignored, despite widespread calls for action. The fact that eight of the nine UC campuses as well as the Graduate Student Worker Union and University of California Student Association have voted to support this campaign shows that there is overwhelming support for divestment and Palestinian rights at nearly every democratically elected decision-making body of the UC system.

The challenge now is to persuade the unelected body of UC Regents to heed the voices of the UC system and act to support human rights. Our money is our responsibility, and we are liable for the ways in which the UC invests out tuition dollars, especially if these investments impede upon the fundamental human rights of other people, including the families of Palestinian students on campus. If not us, who else will take responsibility for where our money is going and who it is hurting?

On Wednesday, March 14th, we delivered our demands directly to the UC Regents, as well as engaged in a day of education and movement building to strengthen the UC wide call for divestment. We were there, building lines of solidarity and for the future goals of our united communities.

After student pressure, the UC relented to the call for divestment from companies supporting Apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, from companies involved in human rights violations in Sudan in the 2000s, and from some of the worst corporate polluters and destroyers of the environment in the 2010s. We expect that the UC will see the call to respect Palestinian rights in the same terms as those prior calls and cease to invest in corporations whose activity is tied to the violation of human rights in Palestine and around the world. There is no other way to abide by the Principles for Responsible Investments which they signed onto, and no other way to respond to the democratic will of the student governments of the UC system.

We expect the University of California Regents to take action to demonstrate they truly support responsible investment. They have an opportunity to show they value human rights and freedom for all peoples.
 
76 Members of Congress write to Netanyahu over Israel demolitions

Link: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/2...s-write-to-netanyahu-over-israel-demolitions/

May 23, 2018 at 1:27 pm | Published in: Asia & Americas, Israel, Middle East, News, Palestine, US

Seventy-six Members of Congress have co-signed a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urging him to end the demolitions and evictions of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

According to J Street, a Washington DC-based liberal Zionist pressure group, “the letter notes that the destruction and displacement of these communities pose a serious threat to the human rights of Palestinians, to the prospects for a two-state solution and to Israel’s future as a Jewish and democratic state.”

“This is the latest sign that US lawmakers are increasingly concerned by the alarming consequences of the Israeli government’s policies in the West Bank,” said Dylan Williams, J Street’s Vice President of Government Affairs.

Demolitions, evictions and settlement expansion clearly imperil the prospects for a peaceful two-state solution.

In the letter, the members write: “The forcible eviction of Palestinian communities and the expansion of settlements in areas of the West Bank, which would become part of a future Palestinian state, abandon our two countries’ shared values of justice and respect for human rights.”

READ:Israel demolition order for medical facilities in Hebron

The letter also “cites over 300 rabbis, organised by J Street and other American Jewish groups, who wrote to Netanyahu in January opposing demolitions”.
 
Cal State, East Bay student govt unanimously passes BDS resolution
Activism

California State University, East Bay Divestment on June 5, 2018 6

Link: http://mondoweiss.net/2018/06/student-unanimously-resolution/

Students at Cal State University Long Beach celebrate the student government passing a resolution to divest university funds from corporations working in Israel and the settlements, May 10, 2017. ( Photo: Stephen Carr / Daily News / SCNG )

Associated Students, Incorporated (ASI) Board of Directors of California State University, East Bay voted unanimously in favor of a resolution in support of divestment from corporations that profit from the occupation of Palestine.

The resolution, which was authored and introduced by a coalition of diverse student organizations and individuals at CSU East Bay, spearheaded by the Muslim Student Association, calls upon the university’s trustees to review their investments and divest from any companies found to be complicit in the violation of international law. Some corporations were specifically mentioned, such as Caterpillar, Hewlett Packard, G4S, and Motorola Solutions, for being directly involved in allowing the Israeli government to maintain and enforce the occupation and construct Jewish-only settlements, walls and barriers, and checkpoints.

Under international law, Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories, which include the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, is illegal and inhumane. The occupation restricts the movement and freedom of Palestinians in these territories, and monitors and controls Palestinian lives and livelihoods as well as removing them from the lands they live on through the use of the separation barrier, checkpoints, and Jewish-only settlements in the West Bank which are also considered illegal under international law, as well as a military blockade surrounding the Gaza Strip. The corporations named in the divestment resolution each contribute to and enable the military occupation by providing materials, equipment, and services. The resolution cited the ASI Board of Directors’ mission to effectively and responsibly represent its diverse student population and promote student welfare, as the occupation of Palestinian territory directly affects students of the university, many of whom have family living in the occupied areas and who are affected by its dangerous and inhumane nature.

Calls for divestment from corporations complicit in the illegal occupation have been common across the United States over the past several years, and join other non-violent forms of resistance to the occupation that were called upon by Palestinian civil society in 2005. The vote in favor of the resolution by the ASI Board of Directors today follows other such votes on university campuses across the nation, including other CSU schools San Jose State University and CSU Long Beach, paving the way for a potential future such decision by the trustees of the California State University System.
 
In a Victory for BDS, Argentina’s National Soccer Team Cancels a Game in Israel

In a mammoth victory for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, the squad of Lionel Messi will not be playing in Jerusalem.

By Dave ZirinTwitter
June 6, 2018

Link: https://www.thenation.com/article/v...nas-national-soccer-team-cancels-game-israel/

The group Jewish Voice for Peace called it “a watershed moment“ and “the biggest victory for BDS [the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement].” Israeli defense minister Avignor Lieberman seethed that this week has seen a win for “Israeli-hating inciters.”

What spurred such an impassioned reaction on both sides? It wasn’t Lorde canceling a concert and it wasn’t Natalie Portman refusing an award. This time it is the Argentina National Soccer Team saying no to the Israeli state. With three days notice, the renowned squad has canceled a friendly World Cup warm-up match in Jerusalem, a game that sold out last month within 20 minutes of tickets’ going on sale. Now no one will be watching anything.

Argentina canceled the match amid increasing international pressure for the team to boycott the game after last month’s massacre of more than 60 Palestinians in Gaza by the Israeli Defense Forces. These Gazans were protesting the fateful decision by Donald Trump to relocate the United States embassy in Jerusalem. That decision was why the call for Argentina to boycott the match intensified: because Israel’s right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu chose to move the game from Haifa to Jerusalem’s Teddy Kollek Stadium. In immediate response, the head of the Palestinian football association, Jibril Rajoub, led the call for Argentina to boycott, saying that Israel had “politicized” the match by the highly symbolic Jeruslame move. Rajoub also called upon Palestinian fans to burn the posters of Argentine star Lionel Messi in protest if they participated. “Messi is a symbol of peace and love,” Rajoub said. “We ask him not to participate in laundering the crimes of the occupation.”

Argentina then decided not to participate, with the country’s foreign minister, Jorge Faurie, saying that several players “were not willing to play in the game,” although he did not specify why.

Both Israel and Argentina cited “threats” against players, but, other than the intensifying calls to protest, it is not apparent what threats they are referring to.

Gonzalo Higuain, a forward for Argentina, after the decision to abide by the boycott said to ESPN, “In the end, they’ve done right thing, and this is behind us. Health and common sense come first. We felt that it wasn’t right to go.”

The significance of this BDS victory cannot be overstated. Human Rights attorney and assistant professor at George Mason University Noura Erakat said to me, “This is major. Though it may not be the first sports boycott, since Sri Lankan and Indian teams have refused to play Israel before, one of the most visible teams and renowned players in global futbol has refused to normalize Israel’s national institutions at a critical political juncture. This indicates the mainstreaming of the Palestinian freedom struggle and a rejection of US/Israeli promises of even more violent and exclusionary futures.”

To give a sense of how “major” this is, it has been reported that Netanyahu reached out to Argentine President Mauricio Macri to have him pressure the team to change their minds, but he was unable to salvage the game.

Not surprisingly, Israel’s hard-line leaders are apoplectic. Lieberman, who last month justified the massacres by saying “there are no innocent people” in Gaza, raged on Twitter, “It’s unfortunate the soccer knights of Argentina did not withstand the pressure of the Israeli-hating inciters, whose only goal is to harm our basic right to self-defense and bring about the destruction of Israel. We will not yield before a pack of anti-Semitic terrorist supporters.”

After last month’s killings, the shameful argument that any protest against Israeli human-rights violations is inherently anti-Semitic, especially the peaceful calls for BDS in response to these crimes, simply carries no moral weight. The Argentina national team is one of the most high-profile squads on earth. This truly is a watershed moment: a moment when the highest pinnacle of the sports world said no to war, occupation, and being used as a prop to support a nation in the aftermath of a massacre.
 
120 countries at UN condemn Israel over Gaza violence

Link: https://au.news.yahoo.com/un-votes-condemning-israel-over-gaza-violence-012333501--spt.html

by Carole LANDRY
Agence-France Presse13 June 2018

At least 129 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire during protests near the border with Gaza that began at the end of March

The UN General Assembly on Wednesday adopted by a strong majority of 120 countries an Arab-backed resolution condemning Israel for Palestinian deaths in Gaza and rejected a US bid to blame Hamas for the violence.

The resolution deplores Israel's use of "excessive, disproportionate and indiscriminate force" against Palestinian civilians and calls for protection measures for Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.

At least 129 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire during protests near the border with Gaza that began at the end of March. No Israelis have died.

Presented by Algeria and Turkey on behalf of Arab and Muslim countries, the measure won a decisive 120 votes in the 193-member assembly, with 8 votes against and 45 abstentions.

US Ambassador Nikki Haley dismissed the resolution as "one-sided" and accused Arab countries of trying to score political points at home by seeking to condemn Israel at the United Nations.

"For some, attacking Israel is their favorite political sport. That's why we are here today," Haley told the assembly.

An amendment presented by the United States that condemned Hamas for "inciting violence" along the border with Gaza failed to garner the two-third majority needed for adoption.

Arab countries backing the measure turned to the General Assembly after the United States used its veto in the Security Council to block the resolution on June 1.

Unlike the Security Council, resolutions adopted by the assembly are non-binding and there is no veto.

- UN chief to propose protection -

The resolution tasks UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres with the drafting of proposals for an "international protection mechanism" for the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank.

These could range from setting up an observer mission to a full-blown peacekeeping force, but action on any option would require backing from the Security Council, where the United States has veto power.

"We are asking for a simple thing," Palestinian Ambassador Riyad Mansour told the assembly. "We want our civilian population to be protected."

Turkey's Ambassador Feridun Hadi Sinirlioglu defended the resolution, saying it was "about taking sides with international law" and showing the Palestinians that the world "does care about their suffering."

Taking the podium, Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon assailed the measure as an "attempt to take away our basic right to self-defense." He warned ambassadors that by supporting the resolution "you are empowering Hamas."

France was among 12 EU countries that backed the resolution, but Britain abstained along with Italy, Poland and 13 other EU member-states. Russia and China voted in favor.

Australia, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, the Solomon Islands and Togo joined the United States and Israel in voting against the resolution.

The US amendment condemning Hamas received 62 votes in favor, with 58 against and 42 abstentions. The United States sought to challenge the ruling requiring a two-thirds majority for approval but that was defeated in a separate vote.

"We had more countries on the right side than the wrong side," Haley said in a statement,

The General Assembly last held a similarly contentious vote on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in December, when it rejected President Donald Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move the US embassy there.

Haley had warned at the time that Washington was "taking names" of countries that supported the resolution. That vote was 128 to 9, with 35 abstentions.

Backed by Arab countries, the Palestinians had lobbied to win as many votes on the Gaza resolution as those cast in support of the measure condemning the US decision on Jerusalem.

Israel and Hamas have fought three wars in Gaza and the United Nations has warned that a fourth conflict could be easily ignited.

At least 129 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire during protests near the border with Gaza that began at the end of March
 
Ireland’s Senate approves bill to boycott Israel goods

Link: https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/67070/irelands-senate-approves-bill-to-boycott-israel.html

Published: July 12, 2018
Source: Middle East Monitor

The Irish Senate has voted to approve a bill that would see the country boycott goods from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, paving the way for the country to become the first EU nation to enforce a boycott.

The bill passed yesterday with 25 lawmakers voting in its favour, with 20 against it and 14 others abstaining. The legislation would bar “the import and sales of goods, services and natural resources originating in illegal settlements in occupied territories”, but still needs to pass in both houses of parliament before becoming law.

At Israel’s urging, the Irish government requested in January that the vote be postponed, and sought to soften the language of the bill, but was unable to come to a compromise. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu summoned Irish Ambassador Alison Kelly in response, arguing that a bill to boycott settlement produce could easily expand into support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.

Yesterday’s bill passed primarily due to votes from opposition and independent legislators. It had originally been proposed by independent Senator Frances Black who spoke before the vote and brought Palestinian farmers to be present in the Seanad for the occasion.

She said:

In the occupied territories, people are forcibly kicked out of their homes, fertile farming land is seized, and the fruit and vegetables produced are then sold on Irish shelves to pay for it all. These settlements are war crimes, and it’s time for Ireland to show some leadership and refuse to support them.

However, the bill lacks support from the incumbent party of government Fine Gael, with Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Simon Coveney claiming that the ban was logistically impossible due to Ireland’s trade ties as part of the EU.

Whilst estimates put the value of settlement-made exports to Ireland at between only $580,000 to $1.1 million annually, advocates say the bill could encourage other European states to join the boycott.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry has slammed the decision stating that the “Irish Senate has given its support to a populist, dangerous and extremist anti-Israel boycott initiative that hurts the chances of dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians.”

The Israeli embassy in Ireland had also claimed last week that a draft bill calling for a ban on the sale of goods made in illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory would “empower terrorists”. It added that such bills “further the divisions between Israel and the Palestinians”, without clarifying what this precisely meant.

Senior Palestinian negotiator Saed Erekat praised and thanked Ireland for backing the decision: “Today the Irish Seanad has sent a clear message to the international community and particularly to the rest of the European Union: the mere talking about the two-state solution is not enough without taking concrete measures.”

“I would like to make use of this occasion to thank everyone that was involved in the approval of this law, from political parties to Palestinian and Irish civil society, and particularly to Senator Frances Black for her courage to introduce this motion that advances the cause of justice in Palestine,” he concluded.


Related:

Gaza stops importing fruit from Israel [middleeastmonitor.com]

Palestinian cultural groups urge Eurovision to boycott Israel [middleeastmonitor.com]

Alliance of 140 global political parties endorses BDS, urges military embargo on Israel [middleeastmonitor.com]
 
Hasbara is dead

Philip Weiss on July 10, 2018 87 Comments

Link: https://mondoweiss.net/2018/07/hasbara-is-dead/

DMaybe it was when Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would respond to flaming kites from Gaza with an “iron fist.” Or maybe when 13 senators bucked the Israel lobby to call for an easing of the siege on Gaza. Or maybe when five young American Jewish women walked off their “Birthright” trip saying they needed to see the occupation.

Or maybe it was the election in a New York Democratic congressional primary of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez even after she described Israel’s actions in Gaza as a “massacre.” Or maybe it was the two Israeli government ministers who issued statements justifying the deportation of an American who supports boycott against Israel, with one minister saying, “This is a Jew who tried to abuse this fact.”

Hasbara has died. The Israeli effort to “explain” its actions to the world– that era is over. Israel has given up trying to explain itself to fair-minded people. Because the fair-minded have all made up their minds; the slaughter in Gaza has seen to that. And Israel doesn’t think they are fair anyway.

No, its explanations are reserved now for the hard-core supporters. The hasbara is pure propaganda, aimed at rallying the base. And everyone else is tuning out.

It didn’t used to be this way. Hasbara was a successful euphemism because Israeli propaganda was treated as being of a higher order, and so got wide pickup in the mainstream press and from American politicians. Even when segments of Europe and the left were against Israel, the Jewish state could count on a generous hearing in the hallways of power. Leading journalists such as Jeffrey Goldberg, Tom Friedman, Wolf Blitzer and Terry Gross were happy to carry water for Israel’s side of any controversy and malign those who questioned it, and Dennis Ross was on NPR morning noon and night.

These days the streetwise are steering clear. Goldberg spent a chummy hour with Ben Rhodes at Politics & Prose on June 15 and didn’t touch the Israel/Palestine topic. “Not one Democrat has defended Israel over Gaza massacre,” was a headline in Electronic Intifada.

Some of this is Trump. Along with Sheldon Adelson, he has made Israel a rightwing cause in the U.S. and compelled any writer/player on the lib-left to support an anti-racist program in which Israel can only be an embarrassment. Jeffrey Goldberg now has a leadership role in the opposition, as Atlantic editor, so he can’t afford the baggage (as he charts his course toward anti-Zionism).

Then there’s Israel’s embrace of apartheid and massacre as its only answer to its constitutional problem, the Palestinians. There is no vision in Israeli leadership, and after four Gaza massacres, everyone knows it. At a July 4th party a guest who used to love Israel admitted it may not be around 30 years from now. Netanyahu is said to harbor the same doubts.

The Jewish defection is key, of course. Jews have a privileged position in the global discourse of Israel, and the Jewish monolith is crumbling. The young Jews of IfNotNow are conducting a full-scale assault on the Jewish establishment. “Israel doesn’t have a public relations crisis; it has a moral crisis,” IfNotNow says (quoting Avrum Burg), while a Jewish leader howls to a synagogue full of older Jews: “Where did we go wrong in our homes and our schools!?”

Rebecca Vilkomerson of the burgeoning group Jewish Voice for Peace observes that everyone from her daughter’s New York public high school to Bette Midler are openly critical of the massacre, even as Israelis endorse it overwhelmingly, and when the New York Times said dozens of Palestinians “died” in protests in Gaza, Judd Apatow had enough.

“Have died.” Shame on you. This is like calling Trump’s lies “factual innacuracies.” Please tell me an intern is running your twitter feed.

The Democratic political establishment is even beginning to steer clear of this mess. Vilkomerson (to the Real News):

I think with the exception of [Chuck] Schumer, no Democrats have been defending Israel’s actions. In fact, quite a number, in fact over a dozen, have spoken out against what Israel has done over the course of the last six weeks. And you contrast that with 2014 [when Israel killed over 2200 in Gaza, including 500 children], when I think it was something like 78 senators signed a statement supporting the Gaza war. So there has been a shift. in terms of Congress and who’s willing to speak out and being able to speak out. And that there’s enough backing from their own constituents to speak out that they’re not going to be punished by AIPAC or other organizations…

This puts the Israeli government in a new position. It is just another rightwing authoritarian country with a story to tell about why change isn’t necessary but force is that talking heads in the U.S. are going to ignore or make fun of.

Hasbara always relied on a passive American press and active advocates for the Israeli line who got airtime. Time was when Michael Oren could go on CNN to say that Palestinians staged fake deaths for sympathy, and even the Atlantic followed suit. When Abba Eban could say that Palestinians never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity, and Palestinians could never live it down. When Alan Dershowitz slammed Jimmy Carter by referencing “Auschwitz borders,” and US presidents talked about Israel’s narrow waist, and a historian coined the word “Pallywood,” and Time Warner executive Gary Ginsberg wrote speeches for Netanyahu, and Jim Clancy lost his job at CNN for accusing pro-Israel activists of practicing “Hasbara.”

Those dynamics have changed. The advocates have become more and more rightwing, and the press corps is less accepting. The New York Times is still on board, with its murderers row of Bret Stephens, Shmuel Rosner and Bari Weiss, but fewer and fewer intelligent people elsewhere are buying Israel’s story. Even David Brooks is getting cold feet, citing Israeli “ethnocentrism” and “segregation.”

The LA Times lately took an uncharacteristically hard line on legislation aimed at circumscribing criticism of Israel on campus. “Enough already. Not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitism,” it wrote. The Labour Party in Britain has also declined to endorse a definition of anti-Semitism that includes harsh criticism of Zionism, Israel, and its lobby, and after years of sitting on its hands the Episcopal Church is finally moving to end its “complicity” with occupation.

Zionism is becoming an ever more problematic brand, even for erstwhile liberal Zionists. Dahlia Scheindlin is talking about a confederated state. So is Bernard Avishai. Publications that once toed the line seem to have had enough of the bull****, notably The New Yorker. While other writers are considering an idea that cost a Yale chaplain his job during the last slaughter: Israel is fostering anti-Semitism. Tony Klug told J Street that Israel’s actions are putting world Jewry in a “precarious” position, and Sarah Helm of the Guardian and New York Review of Books wrote, “Israel’s own increasingly shocking policies towards Palestinians does more to fuel anti semitism than anything.”

Hasbara is today the preserve of the converted: right wingers talking to rightwingers. Settler/author Yossi Klein Halevi lately gave an AIPAC-sponsored talk to a Connecticut synagogue and mentioned the Gaza slaughter just once, and he seemed confounded.

Until the outbreak of violence on Gaza border, [my] plan was to do a book tour in American mosques, and I don’t know where that stands now. The temperature in the American Muslim community now is very high. And we’re going to have to wait for things to cool down at least for a few months before I can revisit that.

He still has hopes of talking to them, though.

I don’t think most Palestinians or Muslims know our narrative.

Ah but that’s the problem. We all know the story too well now, and we’ve had enough.
 
Americans Are Increasingly Critical of Israel

New polling shows that the U.S. public’s views on Israel’s policies are shifting.

By Shibley Telhami | December 11, 2018, 2:44 PM

Link: https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/11/americans-are-increasingly-critical-of-israel/

U.S. President Donald Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu walk outside the Oval Office of the White House on March 5. (Olivier Douliery-Pool/Getty Images)

U.S. President Donald Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu walk outside the Oval Office of the White House on March 5. (Olivier Douliery-Pool/Getty Images)

The firing of Professor Marc Lamont Hill as a CNN contributor after his speech at a United Nations event commemorating the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People has generated considerable debate about free speech that goes beyond the case itself—what is legitimate criticism of Israel, and what constitutes anti-Semitism. A recent University of Maryland public-opinion poll indicates that many aspects of Hill’s views are widely shared among the American public—and that these views are not reflective of anti-Semitic attitudes, or even of hostility toward Israel as such. On these issues, there is a gap between the mainstream media and U.S. politicians on the one hand, and the American public on the other.

While many issues were raised about Hill, the part of his speech that received the most criticism was his call for a “free Palestine from the river to the sea,” which was seen by some as calling for the end of Israel. Hill himself clarified almost immediately that “my reference to ‘river to the sea’ was not a call to destroy anything or anyone. It was a call for justice, both in Israel and in the West Bank/Gaza.” In an op-ed he penned later, he acknowledged that the language he chose may have contributed to the misperception that he was advocating violence against Jewish people—and apologized for that.

But, perceptions aside, are Professor Hill’s views exceptional?

The first issue to consider is advocacy for a one-state solution, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, with equal citizenship for all, which would in effect threaten Israel’s status as a Jewish-majority state, as Arabs might soon outnumber Jews on that territory. In fact, this solution has considerable support among the American public, as revealed in a University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll, fielded by Nielson Scarborough, which was conducted in September and October among a nationally representative sample of 2,352 Americans, with a 2 percent margin of error. When asked what outcome they want U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to seek in mediating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Americans are split between one state with equal citizenship and two states coexisting side by side: 35 percent say they want a one-state solution outright, while 36 percent advocate a two-state solution, 11 percent support maintaining the occupation, and 8 percent back annexation without equal citizenship. Among those between 18 and 34 years old, support for one state climbs to 42 percent.

Furthermore, most of those who advocate a two-state solution tend to choose one state with equal citizenship if the two-state solution were no longer possible; the last time the survey asked this question, in November 2017, 55 percent of two-state solution backers said they would switch to one state in such circumstances. Bolstering this result is Americans’ views on the Jewishness and democracy of Israel: If the two-state solution were no longer possible, 64 percent of Americans would choose the democracy of Israel, even if it meant that Israel would cease to be a politically Jewish state, over the Jewishness of Israel, if the latter meant that Palestinians would not be fully equal.

When one considers that many Israelis and Palestinians, as well as many Middle East experts, already believe that a two-state solution is no longer possible, especially given the large expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, it’s not hard to see why more people would be drawn to a one-state solution—or see the advocacy for two states as legitimizing the unjust status quo through the promise of something unattainable.

Second, while most Americans have probably never heard of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement that Hill backs, our poll shows that a large number of Americans support imposing sanctions or more serious measures if Israeli settlements in the West Bank continue to expand: 40 percent of Americans support such measures, including a majority of Democrats (56 percent). This comes as senators, including Democrats, are proposing, despite continued ACLU opposition, to delegitimize and criminalize voluntary boycotts of Israel or settlements through the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, while not differentiating between Israeli settlements in the West Bank from those in Israel proper.

Third, there is a growing sense that the Israeli government has “too much influence” on U.S. politics and policies: 38 percent of all Americans (including 55 percent of Democrats, and 44 percent of those under 35 years old), say the Israeli government has too much influence on the U.S. government, compared with 9 percent who say it has “too little influence” and 48 percent who say it has “about the right level of influence.” While the number of Jewish participants in the sample (115) is too small to generalize with confidence, it is notable that their views fall along the same lines of the national trend: 37 percent say Israel has too much influence, 54 percent say it has the right level, and 7 percent say it has too little influence.

These results indicate neither a rise in anti-Semitism nor even a rise in hostility toward Israel as such. As analysis of previous polls has shown, many who espouse these opinions base them on a principled worldview that emphasizes human rights and international law.

Keep in mind that, in a polarized America with deep political antagonism, it’s hardly surprising that Americans would have sharply divided views on Israelis and Palestinians. What many read as a rising anti-Israeli sentiment among Democrats is mischaracterized; it reflects anger toward Israeli policies—and increasingly, with the values projected by the current Israeli government.

Read More [ck site link, above]
 
How did the Israel boycott campaign grow in 2018?

Link: https://electronicintifada.net/blog...il&utm_term=0_e802a7602d-81b424e5dd-290660781

Nora Barrows-Friedman Activism and BDS Beat 31 December 2018

Marching near the British Parliament, protesters hold a large banner that says "Free Palestine, Stop Arming Israel, Stop the Killing"
2018 was a banner year for Palestine rights advocacy. (Alisdare Hickson/Flickr)

2018 was a year of victories by human rights activists despite heavy pressure, attacks and propaganda efforts by Israel and its lobby groups to whitewash its image.

Starting off the year, it was revealed that US President Donald Trump’s alliance with white supremacist groups and anti-Semitic figures has pushed support for Israel to a low point, especially among young American Jews.

By October, it was confirmed in another survey that support for Israel is coming primarily from Trump’s base, a hotbed of right-wing, white nationalist and Christian Zionist views, while support from other Americans continues to erode.

Early on in the year, AIPAC, Israel’s powerful lobby group on Capitol Hill, was forced to admit that it was facing mounting problems in its efforts to shore up support for Israel among progressive American leaders.

However, AIPAC, along with the Anti-Defamation League and similar advocacy groups, continued to push for federal legislation – the Israel Anti-Boycott Act – that seeks to criminalize supporters of the boycott movement, even as the ADL determined behind closed doors that such bills are ineffective and unconstitutional:

But there were signals that even Israel’s hardline supporters in Congress began pushing back.

Just in the past few weeks, Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Dianne Feinstein of California urged top congressional leaders to pull the Israel Anti-Boycott Act from an omnibus spending package, citing blatant First Amendment violations.

Following Israel’s premeditated massacre of Palestinians in Gaza on 30 March, The Electronic Intifada’s Ali Abunimah noted that not one Democrat in either houses of the US Congress spoke up to defend Israel’s actions, a notable difference in policy of elected leaders who have reflexively done so in the past.

It reflected a recognition of Israel’s increasingly toxic brand, especially among the Democratic base.

Israel’s attacks on BDS activists were sometimes absurd – like when a Mossad-backed Israeli lawfare group sued two New Zealand activists for successfully encouraging pop star Lorde to cancel her Tel Aviv gig at the end of 2017.

The activists named in that lawsuit – which legal experts said could not be enforced – used the publicity generated by the case to raise money to support mental healthcare in Gaza and bring more attention to the humanitarian crisis across Palestine.

The Electronic Intifada’s release of a censored documentary produced by Al Jazeera on the Israel lobby’s tactics in the US helped reveal the efforts of Israel and its lobbyists to spy on, smear and intimidate US citizens who support Palestinian human rights, especially the BDS movement.

Despite Israel’s attacks, smears and threats, boycott activists continued to make enormous gains – much to the dismay of Israeli leaders.

“We are exposing Israel’s crimes and apartheid policies and building pressure to end them,” noted prominent activists in the BDS movement in their annual roundup of boycott highlights.

Here are some of the top BDS victories as covered by The Electronic Intifada over the last year.

Israel remains a toxic brand

Performers continued to ditch their Israel gigs in 2018, following sustained appeals by human rights activists in Palestine and all over the globe.

Shakira and Gilberto Gil led a list of notable cancellations, while dozens of DJs and music producers took public pledges not to perform in the apartheid state.

Over the summer, Israel’s Meteor Festival fizzled without its headliner Lana Del Rey, who pulled out of her gig just days before the festival began, stating that she wanted to “treat all my fans equally.”

Sixteen other Meteor Festival acts, including Of Montreal, dropped out of the festival following sustained appeals by Palestinian and international activists to respect the boycott call.

Israeli-American actor Natalie Portman refused to receive an award in Jerusalem in April, ostensibly over Israel’s massacres of Palestinians, much to the scorn and shock of Israeli leaders.

In June, 11 LGBTQ filmmakers refused to let Israel use them to pinkwash its crimes, joining the boycott of TLVFest – the Tel Aviv International LGBT Film Festival.

Artists also boycotted the Istanbul Film Festival after it was revealed that Israel was sponsoring it.

The cultural boycott also saw gains in the sports world, as Argentina’s football team canceled a high-profile match in June with Israel after an intense global campaign that kicked off in Argentina and swept Latin America and Spain. Fans and activists urged Argentina, and the team’s star, Lionel Messi, not to help Israel whitewash its massacres of unarmed civilians in Gaza.

Earlier in the year, a motorcycle racing event sponsored by Honda in Israel was canceled following pressure by BDS activists.

Other Israel propaganda efforts ended in failure, with international chefs pulling out of the Round Tables festival in the fall while an Israeli diplomatic source admitted that the hundreds of cultural events included in the Saison France-Israël (France-Israel Season) “had zero success regarding Israel’s image in France, or that of France here.”

Meanwhile across Europe, activists continue to pressure television broadcasters not to allow Israel to host next year’s Eurovision Song Contest as a part of its whitewashing campaign.

Protesters have held regular demonstrations outside performances by Netta Barzilai, Israel’s 2018 Eurovision winner who has been deployed as part of the country’s officially backed international propaganda efforts.

Churches, corporations, unions ditch Israel

In December, banking giant HSBC confirmed it was divesting from the Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems following a grassroots campaign.

The company has already been excluded from pension and investment funds around the world over its involvement in supplying surveillance systems and other technology to Israel’s separation wall and settlements in the occupied West Bank.

Saying it was the first British church to take such a step, the Quaker Church announced in November it would not invest any centrally held funds in companies that profit from Israel’s human rights violations.

Joining other Christian denominations in the US, the Episcopal Church voted to adopt an investment screen to avoid profiting from human rights abuses against Palestinians. It also resolved to safeguard the rights of Palestinian children and Palestinians in Gaza, support Palestinian self-determination and to call for continued US aid to Palestinian refugees.

Another resolution demands equal access to Jerusalem and opposes the Trump administration’s move of the US embassy to the city.

In August, trade union workers and boycott activists in the Arab world forced Israel’s shipping line Zim to indefinitely halt its routes to Tunisia.

Tunisia’s main labor federation, the UGTT, called on its members to prevent the Israel-linked ship Cornelius A from landing in Tunisia, and backed demands for an official inquiry into clandestine trade with Israel.

Jordanian workers refused to supply materials for a Jordan-Israel gas pipeline, while French firm Systra committed to pulling out of plans to expand Israel’s light rail project.

And in November, vacation rental giant Airbnb announced it was dropping its listings from Israeli settlement properties in the occupied West Bank. All Israeli settlements in occupied territory are illegal under international law.

Though there has been some confusion recently around if – and when – the policy change will be implemented or if the company, under Israeli pressure, will backtrack on its announcement, it helped highlight corporate complicity with Israeli war crimes.

Local governments back the boycott

Despite Israeli lobby efforts to interfere in local and national politics, city councils in Europe and Latin America passed strong resolutions in support of the BDS campaign, in a growing wave of resistance to Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians.

In June, Monaghan became the fifth county or city council in Ireland to declare its support for BDS. It followed Dublin’s vote in April to endorse a boycott against Israel, becoming the first European capital to do so, and its subsequent dropping of a contract with HP, a computer firm that has long been complicit in Israel’s military occupation.

Around the same time, the city council of Valdivia in Chile passed a motion to endorse the BDS campaign and declared the city an “apartheid-free zone.”

A wave of similar “apartheid-free zone” measures passed in more than 30 cities in Spain.

In May, Bologna, Italy’s seventh largest city, also called for a military embargo on Israel.

In June, Norway passed a motion that supported individual cities’ rights to boycott Israeli settlements, dealing a blow to right-wing politicians who attempted to appeal boycotts passed in the cities of Trondheim and Tromsø.

In the UK, members of the Labour Party voted overwhelmingly to support an arms sales freeze against Israel.

Anti-BDS laws blocked, challenged

In 2018, US laws attempting to muzzle the right to boycott were blocked.

Federal courts ruled against anti-BDS laws in Arizona and Kansas, while lawsuits were filed in Texas and Arkansas courts against mandated Israel loyalty oaths.

In February, human rights activists in the New Jersey town of Maplewood helped defeat a local resolution that would have condemned the BDS movement. The resolution was introduced to the town council by representatives of Israel advocacy groups which had lobbied other nearby towns to adopt similar resolutions.

And activists in Missouri and Massachusetts successfully campaigned to block state anti-BDS measures.

In Germany – which has been hostile to BDS activism and has ruled to conflate Palestine rights advocacy with anti-Semitism – local boycott activists won a significant victory in September that could set a legal precedent across the country.

The Oldenburg municipal court ruled that a previous decision by the city council to cancel a BDS event in 2016 was unlawful and violated freedoms of expression and assembly. It was the first time that a German administrative court had declared it unlawful to disallow a BDS event.

Students pass sweeping resolutions protecting Palestinian rights

Resisting Israel lobby pressure, shadowy blacklisting websites and targeted harassment campaigns, student activists across the US, Canada and Europe stood strong in support of Palestinian rights and urged university administrations to divest from Israel’s crimes of occupation and apartheid.

In May, students at California State University, East Bay voted unanimously in favor of a resolution calling for divestment from companies found to be complicit in Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights, including Caterpillar, HP, G4S and Motorola.

And student senators at the University of Oregon passed a resolution to ensure that student funds are divested from 10 companies that profit from Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights.

A referendum to support divestment passed at Barnard College in New York City. The vote passed in spite of recent and historic attempts by the administration and Israel lobby groups to bully and smear students and faculty supportive of Palestinian rights at Barnard and its partner, Columbia University.

Students at New York University also voted in a landslide in favor of divestment in early December, with more than 60 campus groups and 35 members of faculty supporting the measure.

At the University of Minnesota, students passed a referendum urging the administration to act on its socially responsible investment policy and divest from companies that profit from Israel’s human rights abuses as well as from private prisons, immigrant detention centers and corporations that violate the sovereignty of indigenous communities.

The Canadian Federation of Students, the largest student organization in Canada, voted in November to support the BDS movement, to condemn Israel’s ongoing occupation and atrocities in Gaza and to provide financial donations to various Palestine solidarity organizations.

The federation, which represents more than 500,000 students across Canada, also said it would support local chapters to begin weapons divestment campaigns targeted towards their individual university administrations.

The Union of Students in Ireland, representing 374,000 students in higher education, voted to join the BDS movement and condemned Israel’s “brutal” military occupation and human rights violations.

The union resolved to boycott Israeli institutions which are “complicit in normalizing, providing intellectual cover for and supporting settler-colonialism” and to lobby Irish universities to divest from companies that profit from Israel’s rights violations. It also affirmed the right of return for Palestinian refugees expelled by Israel.

The vote followed a March measure passed by students at Trinity College Dublin to support the BDS campaign.

Students leaders at the University of Pisa in Italy also adopted a motion in a near-unanimous vote in the Spring, calling for attention by the academic community toward Israel’s apartheid policies and to support the academic boycott campaign.

In November, Leeds became the first UK university to divest from firms involved in the Israeli arms trade, after a boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign by Palestine solidarity activists.

Professors also continued to show their support for Palestinian rights in 2018.

In March, a union representing faculty of the Los Rios College Federation in California voted nearly unanimously to back divestment by their pension fund from companies that profit from Israel’s occupation.

Two instructors at the University of Michigan resisted Israel lobby attacks and defended their decision not to write recommendation letters for students wishing to join discriminatory study abroad programs in Israel.

And faculty at Pitzer College in California called for the suspension of study abroad in Israel programs with the University of Haifa, citing Israel’s policies of discrimination based on ancestry and political speech. The faculty also backed students’ rights to support the BDS campaign.

Here’s to the victories of 2018, as activists organize for more to come in 2019.

 
Ireland passes BDS bill banning Israel settlement goods

Link: https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/70540/ireland-passes-bds-bill-banning-israel-settlement.html

Published: January 25, 2019
Source: Middle East Monitor

Ireland has advanced a bill which will prevent the sale of goods from Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

The lower house of the Irish parliament – the Dail – yesterday voted in favour of a bill which will ban the purchase of all goods and services from Israel’s West Bank settlements, which are considered illegal under international law. The bill was previously passed through the parliament’s upper house – the Seanad – before proceeding to the lower house and receiving a 78-45 majority in favour, Al Jazeera explained.

The bill – officially known as the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill – still needs to pass several more stages before being signed into Irish law, but it is expected to progress given its broad base of support from Irish opposition parties.

Once approved, the law would see fines of up to €250,000 ($284,000) or five years in jail be handed down for those found guilty of importing or selling any goods or services originating in the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem or West Bank settlements, the Jerusalem Post reported.

Though estimates put the value of settlement-made exports to Ireland at between only $580,000 and $1.1 million annually, the symbolic value of the bill and its potential to influence other European countries to follow suit has been hailed as a victory by the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. Mustafa Barghouti, the secretary-general of the Palestinian National Initiative party, said the bill is a “great victory for the BDS movement” and vowed that “we will seek to pass similar laws in a number of European countries in the near future”.

READ: Israel accuses EU of funding NGOs that support BDS

Irish politicians also welcomed the move, with Irish Senator Frances Black tweeting: “Ireland will always stand for international law + human rights, & we’re one step closer to making history. Onwards!” She added: “We have now united every opposition party behind this bill, because it is *not* a radical ask: we want to give effect to basic provisions of int [international] law & human rights.”

However Israel has reacted with anger at the bill, summoning the Irish Ambassador to Israel, Alison Kelly, to be reprimanded.

In a statement, the Prime Minister’s office said that “Israel is outraged over the legislation against it in the Dail which is indicative of hypocrisy and anti-Semitism”. It added: “Instead of Ireland condemning Syria for slaughtering hundreds of thousands of civilians, Turkey for the occupation of northern Cyprus and the terrorist organizations for murdering thousands of Israelis, it attacks Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. What a disgrace.”

Meanwhile Israel’s Foreign Ministry called the vote “an expression of pure hostility on the part of its initiators,” adding: “This is a clear expression of obsessive discrimination that should be rejected with disgust.”

Ireland has been a long-time supporter of the BDS movement. In October, Ireland’s national broadcaster RTÉ announced that it will not sanction any staff members who refuse to travel to Israel for the Eurovision Song Contest, due to be held in Tel Aviv in May. RTÉ’s decision came after the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign (IPSC) called for a boycott of the competition “due to Israel’s oppression of the Palestinian people”.

Other Irish organisations have also expressed support for BDS, with the Dublin City Council voting in April to back the movement. In March, students at one of the country’s most prestigious universities – Trinity College Dublin – voted to support BDS, meaning the Students Union will support the movement and “comply with the principles of BDS in all union shops, trade, business and other union operations”.

Related Articles:

Thursday, July 12, 2018 - Ireland’s Senate approves bill to boycott Israel goods

The Irish Senate has voted to approve a bill that would see the country boycott goods from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, paving the way for the country to become the first EU nation to enforce a boycott.
 
Irish parliament passes bill to ban Israeli settlement goods

Link: https://electronicintifada.net/blog...il&utm_term=0_e802a7602d-8c623fa848-290660781

Ali Abunimah Rights and Accountability 24 January 2019

A bill to outlaw trade in goods from Israeli settlements has been passed by the lower house of Ireland’s parliament, a major step on its journey into law.

On Thursday, the Dáil overwhelmingly approved the Occupied Territories Bill by a vote of 78-45, dealing a big defeat to the government of Leo Varadkar, the Irish prime minister.

Frances Black, the independent senator who initiated the legislation last year, greeted the result as “amazing,” adding that “Ireland will always stand for international law and human rights, and we’re one step closer to making history.”

In December, the upper house gave its final approval to the bill, making the Seanad the first house of parliament in the world to pass legislation banning the import of goods from Israeli settlements in occupied territory, which are illegal under international law, according to Sadaka, an Irish group that helped craft the bill.

Passage in the Dáil was assured as Fianna Fáil, the second largest grouping in parliament, had given its backing to the bill, along with other opposition parties:

Thursday’s vote is not final, however. The bill must still go to committee and further debate before it can be voted onto the statute books.

Irish solidarity groups welcomed the vote:

The victory is all the more significant since Irish politicians faced fierce lobbying from the US Congress not to pass the legislation.

“Signal to apartheid Israel”

During his speech introducing the bill to the Dáil on Wednesday, Fianna Fáil lawmaker Niall Collins paid tribute to human rights and labor groups including Palestine’s Al-Haq, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, Trócaire, Christian Aid and Sadaka for their work on the legislation.

“If passed, Ireland and her parliament will be sending a strong message, that it condemns the occupation of territories which are deemed illegal under international law,” Collins said.

“Repeated condemnation of Israeli actions by the EU and many in the international community has failed to deter Israel from continuing its settlements project,” Collins said, arguing that action was needed to bring change.

Citing the successful use of sanctions against apartheid South Africa, Collins said that similar tactics could help bring justice for Palestinians.

“We should be brave and bold enough to learn from the experiences of the past and believe that we can bring others with us,” Collins added, urging Irish people not to be cowed by threats of retaliation, such as a withdrawal of US investments.

“While we value the jobs that corporate America brings, it must clean up its act in terms of corporate responsibility, morality and social responsibility in many regards,” Collins said. “We cannot give it a free pass on everything simply because it provides us with jobs.”

Opposing the bill, government minister Ciaran Cannon claimed that banning Israeli settlement goods would be a “betrayal of our principles as members of the European Union.”

But such arguments held little sway.

“We need to send a signal to apartheid Israel that its policy of murder and occupation can no longer go unhindered under international law,” lawmaker Gino Kenny of the People Before Profit party told the house.

Watch Niall Collins’ speech introducing the bill in the video above.
 
Poll: Only 22.2% in US Sympathize More With Israelis

Despite Gallup claims, most Americans have "no opinion"

by Grant Smith/ Posted on March 13, 2019

Link: https://original.antiwar.com/smith-...nly-22-2-in-us-sympathize-more-with-israelis/

[chart at site link, above]

On March 6 Gallup claimed 59% of Americans sympathized more with the Israelis and only 21% sympathized more with the Palestinians. The poll was part of a multi-question survey fielded by telephone. Gallup’s question was, "In the Middle East situation, are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians?"

Gallup said this high purported level of sympathy for Israel was nevertheless below its 64% peak reported by Gallup in 2018. According to Gallup, US sympathy for Israel has now reached its lowest level since 2009.

For the second year IRmep fielded Gallup’s precisely worded sympathy question through the Google Surveys online platform between March 6-8 and once again received vastly different results.

IRmep Poll: In the Middle East situation, are your sympathies more with the Israelis or more with the Palestinians?

Source: IRmep representative poll of 1,003 American adults through Google Surveys on March 6-8.

A majority of Americans, 52.5%, far from expressing overwhelming – but declining – sympathy for Israel, claim that they hold "No opinion" on the matter. Only 22.2% of Americans said they sympathized more with the Israelis. This amount is less than the total number (25.3%) of Americans answering "Neither" "Both" and "Palestinians. The "Palestinians" response was 6.8%.

According to the single-question IRmep poll – conducted through the highly accurate Google Surveys platform – the number of Americans expressing "no opinion" on the matter has increased 3% since 2018. One reason may be growing discomfort with Israeli actions such as its indiscriminate use of deadly force in 2018 against Palestinian protesters in Gaza.

Another reason for the growth in "no opinion" responses may be reconsideration of long-held beliefs about the nature of Israel and its lobby among Americans. For example, the IRmep poll was fielded as the US Congress and Israel affinity groups reacted strongly to freshman Congresswoman Ilhan Omar’s (D, MN) references to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) role in steering campaign contributions to pro-Israel candidates and promotion of state anti-BDS laws that require "loyalty" oaths not to boycott Israel in order for Americans to retain jobs and government contracts. Americans may have increasing uncertainty after witnessing the Israel lobby and its echo chamber’s harsh public reactions to such statements – duly repeated by most of Congress – which seem to verify claims about the lobby’s undue, massive and largely negative influence

In 2018 Gallup’s sensational claims of overwhelming, ever-increasing American sympathy for Israel experienced intense scrutiny when Gallup’s polling was first examined by IRmep and later The Forward. Both examined why the for-profit Gallup’s historic results are so drastically different than Pew Research – a not-for-profit polling organization – which has long fielded a similarly-worded phone survey.

Gallup suffered yet another blow to its credibility when IRmep released under the Freedom of Information Act Gallup studies produced under federal government contracts. Gallup was forced to pay a $10.5 million fine for making false claims and other corrupt practices in its polling contract work. Upon review of the government contract work, it seems plausible that Gallup may have sought over the years to unduly benefit from releasing and publicizing false polling results that touted high support for Israel early each year, in order to set the public opinion stage for AIPAC’s annual policy conference – the biggest annual US gathering of Israel supporters. Conference attendees leverage claims of overwhelming American public support to lobby members of Congress to pass the AIPAC legislative agenda during the week of the AIPAC conference. "Sympathy for Israel" numbers are also used as a proxy for ostensibly high popular support for giving foreign aid to Israel. However polls conducted over the past five years consistently reveal most Americans believe US foreign aid to Israel is either "too much" or "much too much."

Pew Research has not yet released 2019 figures about the level of American sympathy for Israel. In February Pew publicly grappled with transitioning away from increasingly obsolete telephone surveys of the kind still conducted by Gallup and moving to more modern and accurate online polling. One key problem Pew Research admits is that its online polling results will certainly contrast with legacy phone polling results and appear to be "apples to oranges" comparisons. Pew Research currently proposes indicating the transition in polling technology by separating phone poll data from online poll data with a dotted line in time series charts.

IRmep poll methodology and information about RMSE as a sampling error benchmark. Raw data and demographic filters are available from Google.

Grant F. Smith is the director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington and the author of the 2016 book, Big Israel: How Israel’s Lobby moves America which is now available as an audiobook. IRmep is co-sponsor of the annual The Israel Lobby & American Policy Conference at the National Press Club, which takes place two days before the AIPAC policy conference.
 
4/26/19 Grant Smith on the Shifting of American Support for Israel

by Scott | Apr 30, 2019 | Interviews

Link: https://scotthorton.org/interviews/...-the-shifting-of-american-support-for-israel/

Grant Smith comes back on the show to explain the polling around American support for Palestine. Last month Gallup quietly revealed that support for Palestine among Americans is now higher than support for Israel. In the past these polls, which always claimed Americans favored Israel, have been used to justify Israel’s privileged status in American foreign policy—so it’s no wonder powerful forces want to keep results like this quiet.

Discussed on the show:

•“Gallup Quietly Admits ‘Israeli vs. Palestinian’ Sympathy Polls Are Misleading” (Antiwar.com)

•“TRANSCEND MEDIA SERVICE » Global Language Dictionary – The Israel Project 2009” (transcend.org)

•“Lock and Load” (Brookings)
 
Israel’s Fraying Image and Its Implications

Chas Freeman 2013-05-22 Israel, Speeches, U.S. Foreign Policy

Link: https://chasfreeman.net/israels-fraying-image-and-its-implications/

Israel’s Fraying Image and Its Implications
Remarks to a Seminar convened by The National Interest
to Discuss an Article by Jacob Heilbrunn

Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. (USFS, Ret.)
22 May 2013, Washington, D.C

It is a privilege to have been asked to join this discussion of Jacob Heilbrunn’s account of Israel’s fraying image. His article seems to me implicitly to raise two grim questions.

The first question is how long Israel can survive as a democracy or at all. The Jewish state has left the humane vision of early Zionism and its own beginnings far behind it. Israel now rules over a disenfranchised Muslim and Christian majority whom it would like to expel and a significant minority of disrespected secular and progressive Jews who are stealing away to the safer and more tolerant environs of the United States and other Western countries. Israel has befriended none of its Arab neighbors. It has spurned or subverted all their offers to accept and make peace with it except when compelled to address these by American diplomacy. The Jewish state has now largely alienated its former friends and supporters in Europe. Its all-important American patron and protector suffers from budgetary bloat, political constipation, diplomatic enervation, and strategic myopia.

The second question is what difference Israel’s increasing international isolation or withering away might make to Americans, including but not limited to Jewish Americans.

Let me very briefly speak to some of the issues that create these questions.

For a large majority of those over whom the Israeli state rules directly or indirectly, Israel is already not a democracy. It consists of four categories of residents: Jewish Israelis who, as the ruling caste, are full participants in its political economy; Palestinian Arab Israelis, who are citizens with restricted rights and reduced benefits; Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank, who are treated as stateless prisoners in their own land; and Palestinian Arabs in the Gaza ghetto, who are an urban proletariat besieged and tormented at will by the Israeli armed forces. The operational demands of this multi-layered, militarily-enforced system of ethno-religious separation have resulted in the steady contraction of freedoms in Israel proper.

Judaism is a religion distinguished by its emphasis on justice and humanity. American Jews, in particular, have a well-deserved reputation as reliable champions of the oppressed, opponents of racial discrimination, and advocates of the rule of law. But far from exhibiting these traditional Jewish values – which are also those of contemporary America – Israel increasingly exemplifies their opposites. Israel is now known around the world for the Kafkaesque tyranny of its checkpoint army in the Occupied Territories, its periodic maiming and slaughter of Lebanese and Gazan civilians, its blatant racial and religious bigotry, the zealotry and scofflaw behavior of its settlers, its theology of ethnic cleansing, and its exclusionary religious dogmatism.

Despite an ever more extensive effort at hasbara – the very sophisticated Israeli art of narrative control and propaganda – it is hardly surprising that Israel’s formerly positive image is, as Mr. Heilbrunn reports, badly “fraying.” The gap between Israeli realities and the image projected by hasbara has grown beyond the capacity of hypocrisy to bridge it. Israel’s self-destructive approach to the existential issues it faces challenges the consciences of growing numbers of Americans – both Jewish and non-Jewish – and raises serious questions about the extent to which Israel supports, ignores, or undermines American interests in its region. Many have come to see the United States less as the protector of the Jewish state than as the enabler of its most self-injurious behavior and the endower of the many forms of moral hazard from which it has come to suffer.

The United States has assumed the role of protecting power for Israel, which depends heavily on the ability of American Jews to mobilize subsidies, diplomatic and legal protection, weapons transfers, and other forms of material support in Washington. This task is made easier by the sympathy for Zionism of a large but silent and mostly passive evangelical Christian minority as well as lingering American admiration for Israelis as the pioneers of a vibrant new society in the Holy Land. It is noteworthy, however, that those actually lobbying for Israel are almost without exception Jewish. Their efforts exploit the unscrupulous venality and appeasement of politically powerful donors that are essential to political survival in modern America to assure reflexive fealty to Israel’s rightwing and its policies. When it’s not denying its own existence, the Israel Lobby boasts that it is the most effective special-interest advocate in the country. Official America’s passionate attachment to Israel has become a very salient part of U.S. political pathology. It epitomizes the ability of a small but determined minority to extract tax resources for its cause while blocking efforts to question these exactions.

Americans tend to resent aggressively manipulative behavior and have little patience with sycophancy. The ostentatious obsequiousness in evidence during Prime Minister Netanyahu’s address to Congress two years ago and the pledges of fealty to Israel of last year’s presidential campaign were a major turn-off for many. Mr. Netanyahu has openly expressed his arrogant presumption that he can manipulate America at will. Still, thoughtful Israelis and Zionists of conscience in the United States are now justifiably concerned about declining empathy with Israel in the United States, including especially among American Jews. In most European countries, despite rising Islamophobia, sympathy for Israel has already fallen well below that for the Palestinians. Elsewhere outside North America, it has all but vanished. An international campaign of boycott, disinvestment, and sanctions along the lines of that mounted against apartheid South Africa is gathering force.

Those who have lost the support of more than a passionate minority are often driven to defame and vilify those who disagree with them. Intimidation is necessary only when one cannot make a persuasive case for one’s position. As the case for the coincidence of American interests and values with those of Israel has lost credibility, the lengths to which Israel’s partisans go to denounce those who raise questions about Israel’s behavior have reached levels that invite ridicule, parody, melancholy, and disgust. The Hagel hearings evoked all four among many, plus widespread foreign derision and contempt. Mr. Hagel’s “rope-a-dope” defense may not have been elegant but it was as effective against bullying assault as nonviolent resistance usually is in the presence of observers with a commitment to decency. The American people have such a commitment and reacted as might be expected to their Senators’ overwrought busking for political payoffs.

Outside the United States, where narratives made in Israel do not rule the airwaves, the Jewish state has lost favor and is now widely denigrated. Israel’s bellicosity and contempt for international law evoke particular apprehension. Every war that Israel has engaged in since its creation has been initiated by it with the single exception of the Yom Kippur / Ramadan War of 1973, which was begun by Egypt. Israel is currently threatening to launch an unprovoked attack on Iran that it admits cannot succeed unless it can manipulate America into yet another Middle Eastern war. Many, if not most outside the United States see Israel as a major source of regional instability and – through the terrorism this generates – a threat to the domestic tranquility of any country that aligns with it.

To survive over the long term, Israel needs internationally recognized borders and peace with its neighbors, including the Palestinians. Achieving this has for decades been the major objective of U.S. diplomacy in the Middle East. But no effort to convince Israel to do what it must to make peace goes unpunished. Jimmy Carter’s tough brokering of normal relations between Israel, Egypt, and, ultimately, Jordan led to his disavowal by his own party. Barack Obama’s attempt to secure Israel’s acceptance in the Middle East led to his humiliation by Israel’s Prime Minister and his U.S. yahoos and flacks. The Jewish state loses no opportunity to demonstrate that it wants land more than it wants peace. As a result, there has been no American-led “peace process” worthy of the name in this century. Israel continues to ignore the oft-reiterated Arab and Islamic offer to normalize relations with it if it just does what it promised in the Camp David accords it would do: withdraw from the occupied territories and facilitate Palestinian self-determination.

Israel has clearly chosen to stake its future on its ability, with the support of the United States, to maintain perpetual military supremacy in its region. Yet, this is a formula with a convincing record of prior failure in the Middle East. It is preposterous to imagine that American military power can indefinitely offset Israel’s lack of diplomatic survival strategy or willingness to accommodate the Arabs who permeate and surround it. Successive externally-supported crusader kingdoms, having failed to achieve the acceptance of their Muslim neighbors, were eventually overrun by these neighbors. The power and influence of the United States, while still great, are declining at least as rapidly as American enthusiasm for following Israel into the endless warfare it sees as necessary to sustain a Jewish state in the Middle East.

The United States has made and continues to make an enormous commitment to the defense and welfare of the Jewish state. Yet it has no strategy to cope with the tragic existential challenges Zionist hubris and overweening territorial ambition have now forged for Israel. It is the nature of tragedy for the chorus to look on helplessly as a heroic figure with many admirable qualities is overwhelmed by faulty self-perception and judgment. The hammerlock that the Israeli right has on American discourse about the Middle East assures that America will remain an onlooker rather than an effective actor on matters affecting Israel, unable to protect Israel’s long-term interests or its own.

The outlook is therefore for continuing deterioration in Israel’s image and moral standing. This promises to catalyze discord in the United States as well as the progressive enfeeblement of American influence in the region and around the globe. Image problems are often symptoms of deeper existential challenges. By the time that Israel recognizes the need to make compromises for peace in the interest of its own survival, it may well be too late to bring this off. It would not be the first time in history that Jewish zealotry and suspicion of the bona fides of non-Jews resulted in the disappearance of a Jewish state in the Middle East. The collateral damage to the United States and to world Jewry from such a failure is hard to overstate. That is why the question of American enablement of shortsightedly self-destructive Israeli behavior needs public debate, not suppression by self-proclaimed defenders of Israel operating as thought police. And it is why Mr. Heilbrunn’s essay needs to be taken seriously not just as an investigation of an unpalatable reality but as a harbinger of very serious problems before both Israel and the United States.
 
It’s Time to Talk About Australia’s Anti-Semitism Problem

BY Eliyahu Lann | Mar 5, 2020 | Opinion    

Link: https://jewishjournal.com/commentar...ism-is-spreading-like-a-disease-in-australia/

Home made placard from Melbourne protest December 30, 2008 about Israel's attack on Gaza. The photo was taken on the lawn of the State Library.

My father flinches if you call him “Jew.”

He was traumatized by his family’s experience as Russian Jews in Stamford Hill, a neighborhood in inner London that has the largest Chasidic population in Europe. My upbringing was without mention of my family’s Sephardic life in ghettos. It was without understanding how anti-Semitism destroyed my family’s Judaism.

I was raised on a Shabbat dinner of Holocaust denial.

My family migrated from the United Kingdom in 2012 to South Australia, a state with a Holocaust denial institute — the Adelaide Institute in the state’s capital — and synagogues being converted into night clubs. I attended a high school that featured swastikas and other anti-Semitic paraphernalia littering buildings, supervised by an administration that took no measures to police it. Naively, I assumed that universities, which are believed to be a utopia of acceptance, would be free of such anti-Semitic qualities.

But there, I was introduced to left-wing “anti-Zionism, not anti-Semitism.”

University anti-Semitism has become an epidemic. Socialist Alternative at La Trobe University in Melbourne garnered news coverage for plastering posters of Jewish students on campus, inciting violence and causing the Australasian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS) to stop staging events out of fear. Recently, Honi Soit, a student-run newspaper at the University of Sydney, made a call of retribution against Jews for “killing Jesus.”

However, anti-Semitism is not limited to university campuses. Anti-Semitism is increasing Australia-wide. During 2019, Australia saw a 30% increase in anti-Semitic incidents, according to the annual report by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ). That 30% hike doesn’t include anti-Semitic incidents that go unreported, and with a distressing rate of failed convictions, the number of unreported incidents could be extortionate.

Although the rise of the extremist right-wing group Antipodean Resistance poses a threat to Jews because it calls for the legalization of Jewish execution; the normalization of anti-Semitism through political parties such as the Greens presents lasting damage to the Australian Jewish community.

The normalization of anti-Semitic rhetoric is caused by the redefinition of modern discourse enabling anti-Semitic views to be considered normal. This is how anti-Zionism has entered mainstream politics.

This anti-Semitic radicalization that the modern left has adopted has its origins in the former Soviet Union’s anti-Zionism.

The Greens Party is notable for its anti-Semitism that ranges from staffers promoting the idea that Israel is committing genocide, to Greens candidates marginalizing the Holocaust, and citing Nazi Leaders. The New South Wales Greens Party has a documented history of organizational anti-Semitism against the Jewish community. Greens Party members decline to attend events arranged by the Jewish community to promote acceptance and tolerance. Although nonpolitical, Greens Party members for years have declined to attend Shabbat dinners held by the Jewish community. These dinners are designed to promote intercommunity relations that have featured guests that include Labor and Liberal politicians at the state and federal levels, councilors, leaders from the local Anglican church and leaders of the Sikh community.

The New South Wales (NSW) Young Greens members also decline to attend conferences held at NSW Parliament house by the AUJS, which Labor and Liberal students attend. This statewide boycott of Jewish events, political and nonpolitical, is textbook anti-Semitism. By declining to contribute to the dialogue, they are distancing themselves further from the Jewish community. Similar to British and American Jews, progressive Australian Jews are becoming politically homeless as their parties abandon them.

Left-wing anti-Semitism is not confined to the Greens. In 2019, former Member of Parliament Melissa Parke from Fremantle compared Israel’s settlements to China’s island-building activity in the South China Sea, denounced Israel’s influence in Australian politics, and made unverified allegations about Israel. While at a Friends of Palestine rally in Perth, Western Australia, she stated: “It is not wrong to say the Israel lobby has excessive influence in the Australian political system.” While giving her speech, a protester yelled: “But why did you cave into the Zionist lobby? We have to f—— wipe them out!” Parke withdrew her candidacy after her anti-Semitic comments were made public. Parke, an advocate of Palestinian rights, has compared Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to South Africa’s former system of apartheid.

The platform that political parties are given to spread anti-Semitic rhetoric has led to the radicalization of Australians. What is concerning is that there are fewer Australians joining organizations, with more adopting hateful ideology. Adopting ideology is more complex to identify or track because there are no networks or details of members available. This anti-Semitic radicalization that the modern left has adopted has its origins in the former Soviet Union’s anti-Zionism.

Australia was deeply involved in the Soviet Jewry movement, fighting for the rights of Soviet Jews to emigrate during a time of state-sponsored anti-Semitism, so much so that 1 in 4 Australian Jews are from the Soviet bloc.

I challenge Australian anti-Zionists: find a Jew from the former Soviet Union.

Ask that person what anti-Zionism is.
 
Anti-Zionist Propaganda, Conspiracy Theories Fueling Rise of Antisemitism in Italy, New Report Shows

Link: https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/03/...se-of-antisemitism-in-italy-new-report-shows/

‘Stamp on the Jews’ — antisemitic graffiti on an Italian street. Photo: Osservatorio Antisemitismo.

Anti-Jewish incidents in Italy climbed sharply in 2019, the latest report from the country’s main antisemitism monitor revealed on Friday.

Data gathered by the Milan-based “Osservatorio Antisemitismo” (Antisemitism Observatory) showed that there were 251 incidents of hatred targeting Jews last year, compared with 197 such incidents in 2018.

About 30,000 Jews live in Italy, concentrated in a handful of major cities.

The majority of the 2019 incidents — 173 — involved antisemitic posts online that were reported to the Observatory. In other categories, there were 31 incidents of verbal abuse, 23 instances of antisemitic graffiti and two violent assaults, one involving a woman in Rome who was slapped and spat upon by her assailant, and the other a man in the northern town of Prunetto who was punched and insulted with anti-Jewish epithets.

Stefano Gatti — the editor of the Observatory’s report — told the Italian Jewish news outlet Bet Magazine Mosaico that part of the reason for the increase was a greater willingness among victims to report attacks.

Equally, Gatti emphasized that the available data was likely an “underestimate” of the scale of the problem, “because they only include explicit complaints and not cases that are unknown or unreported.”

Asked to explain the broader context around the rise of antisemitism in Italy, Gatti pointed to the visibility of anti-Zionist propaganda demonizing the State of Israel and the related popularity of conspiracy theories centered upon Jews.

Two of the incidents recorded by the Observatory in 2019 — the cancellation of a concert in Sardinia by the Israeli musician Eyal Lerner and a public campaign for the boycott of Israeli goods — were characterized as antisemitism promoted by Italian supporters of the effort to subject the Jewish state to boycotts, divestment and sanctions.

“In the pro-Palestinian rhetoric, the themes, myths and symbols of anti-Judaism re-emerge,” Gatti commented. “Deicide, the blood libel, exclusivism, hatred for the rest of humanity: Anti-Zionist propaganda is hybridized with anti-Jewish myths.”

Gatti also identified the key conspiracies that “framed antisemitism in 2019,” he said.

Among the memes seen frequently on social media was the so-called “Kalergi plan” — an outlandish conspiracy theory pushed by neo-Nazis that first emerged in 2005, and which holds that there was a Jewish plot to destroy the white population in Europe through immigration.

The author of this alleged “plot” — which has been likened by some to the notorious antisemitic fabrication, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” — was said to have been Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austrian aristocrat and advocate of European integration who died in 1972.

In a separate interview with the newspaper La Stampa, Betti Guetta — the director of the Antisemitism Observatory — said that while the 2019 report contained “worrying signals,” there were also positive developments to report.

These included the establishment of the Segre Commission — a probe into racism and antisemitism led by veteran senator Liliana Segre, a Holocaust survivor who last year received death threats from far-right agitators.

Guetta also noted “the appointment of Milena Santerini as the national coordinator for the fight against antisemitism, and the ratification by Italy of the definition of antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Association (IHRA).”

“These are very important signs that demonstrate the commitment of our country to fight these forms of hatred,” she said.
 
The Louis Farrakhan problem

As anti-Semitism surges around the world, the Jewish community does not have the luxury of remaining silent.

Link: https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-louis-farrakhan-problem/

(July 13, 2020 / JNS) Louis Farrakhan is an anti-Semite. He’s called Jews “termites” and “Satan” and Hitler a “very great man.” He says, “the Jewish media has normalized sexual degeneracy, profanity, and all kinds of sin.” He promotes the anti-Semitic lunacy that Jews knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks and were advised not to show up to work that day. He is also a revered figure in the American black community.

There are photos of Rep. Maxine Waters embracing Farrakhan. Rapper Snoop Dogg released an anti-Facebook diatribe when the social network banned Farrakhan. Snoop Dogg said of Farrakhan, “I’m with him. I stand with him.” Rapper, actor and producer Ice Cube has posted photos of himself with Farrakhan on his social media page. Ice Cube has also posted anti-Semitic images.

Famous entertainer and business mogul Diddy featured Farrkhan’s July 4th tirade on his media network, Revolt TV. In his speech, Farrakhan said this about Anti-Defamation League leader Jonathan Greenblatt: “Mr. Greenblatt, you are Satan. … I will not even give you the honor of calling you a Jew. You are not a Jew.” He also said, “Israel, let me tell you, your day is here now … the God of justice has something for you, Israel. You’re troubling some waters and you won’t be there long if God gets after you.”

Popular TV host Nick Cannon recently asked, “Why is it that Minister Farrakhan gets such a bad rap when every time I’ve heard him speak it’s been positive?”

Former NFL tight end and current Fox Sports host Shannon Sharpe is a friend and admirer of Farrakhan. He recently defended Farrakhan on his show from accusations of anti-Semitism. Sharpe’s defense was that Farrakhan told him he’s not an anti-Semite. Incredible. Could you imagine someone defending David Duke from accusations of anti-Semitism by saying, “Well, David Duke told me he’s not an anti-Semite”?

NFL wide receiver DeSean Jackson, posted a quote on his Instagram page, falsely attributed to Hitler, promoting the anti-Semitic trope that Jews seek world domination. In another post, DeSean complimented Farrakhan, writing, “This man powerful.” When Jackson was criticized over the post, former NBA player Stephen Jackson came to DeSean’s defense. So did Eagles wide receiver Malik Jackson, who claims Farrakhan “speaks the truth.” Former Women’s March leader Tamika Mallory called Farrakhan “the GOAT [Greatest of All Time].”

This admiration of Farrakhan by popular cultural figures gives him the kosher stamp of approval. Millions of Americans take what he says seriously. This is an obvious problem which people do not want to discuss for obvious reasons. It’s a deadly problem. Last year, the machete-wielding psycho who went on a murderous rampage in a New York rabbi’s home was apparently an avid fan of Farrakhan. During the past few years, Orthodox Jews in New York have been the target of numerous attacks by black perpetrators. How many of them were influenced by Farrakhan?

It’s no wonder the official Black Lives Matter statement of principles includes condemnation of only one foreign country: Israel. Black Lives Matter rallies have desecrated synagogues and chanted anti-Israel slurs.

Where are the black leaders and politicians calling out Farrakhan and his malign influence in their community? Where are the Obamas? Where is Eric Holder? Where is Kamala Harris? Where is Stacy Abrams? Where is Lebron James? Where is Don Lemon? For that matter, where are the Jewish leaders? Besides the Zionist Organization of America’s Mort Klein and a few others, there’s been silence. Should anti-Semitism only be condemned when it can be blamed on white supremacists?

An obscure food brand is undergoing a massive boycott because its Latino owner expressed support for Trump. Will any of Farrakhan’s supporters be boycotted?

We must condemn all intolerance. There cannot be a double standard. If being perceived as someone who supports racism is enough to get you “canceled,” then supporting the country’s most popular and dangerous anti-Semite should, as well.

In this time of skyrocketing anti-Semitism around the world—and with knowledge of what Jew-hatred has led to in the past—the Jewish community does not have the luxury of remaining silent about anti-Semitism for fear of being politically incorrect or somehow distracting from the Black Lives Matter movement. History is not kind to societies that ignore or excuse hatred towards Jews.
 
Back
Top