Showing posts with label palestinian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label palestinian. Show all posts

Saturday, February 5, 2011

Interview with Omar Barghouti and Hind Awwad from the Palestinians Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign

Dear friends,
please find below my recent interview with Omar Barghouti and Hind Awwad from the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign in Ramallah. The interview has been published in Direct Action. I will also be uploading soon a video version of the interview in the near future, which will also be available on the Live from Occupied Palestine blog.

In solidarity, Kim

***

Home » Issue 29: February 2011
Direct Action
Palestinians speak on growing boycott of Israel
http://directaction.org.au/issue29/palestinians_speak_on_growing_boycott_of_israel

By Kim Bullimore, in Ramallah, occupied Palestine

In 2005, more than 170 Palestinian civil society organisations issued an international call for the boycott of Israel. Inspired by the struggle of South Africans against apartheid, the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign is conducted in the framework of international solidarity and resistance to injustice and oppression. It calls for non-violent punitive measures to be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognise the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with international law. Over the past five years, the BDS campaign has gone from strength to strength internationally, with trade unions, student groups and other sectors announcing support. Kim Bullimore spoke with Omar Barghouti and Hind Awwad in Ramallah about the growing international campaign. Barghouti is a Palestinian political and cultural analyst and a founding member of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI). Awwad is the national coordinator of the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions National Committee (BNC).


Omar Barghouti

“After five years of BDS, we feel that we have reached our ‘South Africa moment’”, Omar Barghouti told Direct Action. “We are on the offensive, and Zionist and anti-BDS groups are definitely on the defensive everywhere.”

Barghouti notes: “A few years ago we would have looked at where we are now as a dream that cannot come true except after many, many years. But after five years we have campaigns which are advocating BDS [and] working on BDS from the US to Australia, from Norway to South Africa, India, Pakistan, Brazil, Argentina and so on. So now we have very successful campaigns in corporate responsibility, divestment campaigns.”

According to Barghouti, who is one of the founders of the PACBI, since Israel’s all-out assault on the Gaza Strip in 2008-09, the BDS campaign, particularly the academic and cultural boycott, has grown by leaps and bounds. “Since Gaza and especially after the flotilla attack, academic and cultural boycott campaigns have spread throughout the world. Big performers, major artists like the Pixies, [Elvis] Costello, Gill Scott Heron and others have cancelled performances in Israel. We are getting more and more and the list of groups is growing; every month we are getting new performers that are cancelling.”

Barghouti points out that the cancellation of performances in Israel by such artists means that “millions and millions of fans of those big artists have been introduced to the boycott. So now BDS is a name that is known in the mainstream media, in Israel, the US and Europe and probably in Australia as well. So we think there is a lot of progress being made.”

Barghouti continued that the next step is to “increase the coordination of all BDS activists in specific campaigns”. He noted that not only is the BNC coordinating many global campaigns for BDS, but that “we are spreading BDS through local conferences and regional conferences.

“Our latest regional conference was in India, and it attracted many from South Asia and was an extremely important moment for us to spread BDS in that part of the world. The next will be Latin America. We will have a regional conference in Latin America in 2011, and that will be our biggest ‘new hit’, so to speak. So we are branching out. And of course the conference that happened in Australia last October was extremely important. So we hope there will be more coordination with BDS activists in Australia.”


Hind Awwad

Hind Awwad, the BNC’s national coordinator in Ramallah, explained that there is currently overwhelming consensus for BDS within all sectors of Palestinian society. “Within the three sectors of Palestinian society — this being Palestinians present in the 1967 areas, the 48 areas [Israel] and Palestinians in the diaspora — there is overwhelming consensus on BDS or the full boycott of Israel. This includes academic and cultural boycott.” She points out: “This consensus is represented by the BDS National Committee, which is a wide coalition of the largest mass civil society organisations within Palestinian society”. At present, the BNC represents the “largest coalition of Palestinian civil society organisations”.

Asked about the argument by Zionists and anti-BDS groups that BDS hurts Palestinians, particularly Palestinian workers, Awwad pointed out that when the BDS call was issued in 2005 it was endorsed by all major Palestinian trade unions, farmer unions and agricultural unions. In addition, the three major Palestinian trade union federations are now part of the BNC. “So there is consensus among Palestinian workers and agricultural farmers on the need for BDS”, she said.

Awwad added that the argument that BDS hurts Palestinians “is a very patronising argument. It makes it seem like Palestinians are not mature enough to decide what they want. The overwhelming consensus within Palestinian civil society is very clear on the need for full BDS. We are mature enough to make our own decisions; we are mature enough to know what we want and to know what tactics to use to wage our struggle, our resistance to Israel’s oppression.”
International companies

Both Barghouti and Awwad note that a range of international companies are profiting from Israel’s occupation. Awwad said: “Within the Industrial zones that Israel is setting up, there are international corporations that are complicit in maintaining these zones and thereby they are directly aiding Israel’s occupation”. She noted that such companies are legitimate targets within the framework of the BDS campaign “due to their involvement in the Israeli occupation and due to their violations of international law”.

Asked about BDS campaigns against international companies profiting from Israel’s occupation, Barghouti cited the campaign against Veolia and Alstrom as one of the biggest success stories. The two French conglomerates are currently involved in building the Jerusalem light rail, intended to connect Israel’s illegal colonies to the city of Jerusalem. However, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, which outlines the rights and responsibilities of an occupying power, it is illegal for an occupying power to transfer its civilian population into the territories it occupies. The Jerusalem light rail will aid in the transfer of sections of Israel’s population into the territories it illegally seized in 1967.

Barghouti said, “We have targeted those two companies because they were involved in this patently illegal project”. Since the campaign began in November 2008, “Veolia specifically has lost contracts worth billions of dollars, close to 10 billion in fact, and we think a lot of that can be attributed to BDS campaigns in Sweden, the UK, Ireland, France, Melbourne and other places”.

Barghouti also noted that two other BDS campaigns that have grown in strength internationally are the campaigns to strip the Jewish National Fund (JNF), a key Israeli and Zionist organisation, of its charitable status and the campaign against the Israeli state-owned company Agrexco. Barghouti said the primary reason for targeting the JNF was because “it’s a colonial entity, a very racist entity implicated in Israel’s war crimes and violations of international law”, while Agrexco is being targeted because it is Israel’s major exporter of settlement products and produce.

Barghouti noted that the campaign against Agrexco has been particularly successful in France, where close to 100 NGOs and five national political parties are working jointly on the campaign. The campaign is also strong in the UK, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Belgium and many other countries. Barghouti encouraged Australian BDS activists also to get involved in the Agrexco campaign.
Palestinian Authority

On the boycott against Israeli settlement goods launched by the Palestinian Authority (PA), Awwad noted that while this was a welcome move, it does not go far enough. “While this campaign is certainly a step in the right direction, I think it is a step that is incomplete and has come way too late.” Awwad noted that a boycott focused solely on Israel’s illegal settlements in reality lets the Israeli government off the hook. “According to international law, Israel is the liable party for the settlements. The settlements are not a legal entity on their own. So, if we are to hold Israel accountable for its settlements and occupation industry, we should target Israel as a whole, not just the settlements.”

Awwad pointed out that the PA campaign has come as a result of the overwhelming growth in the global boycott campaign. “The PA felt that they were behind on a boycott of Israel, that they had to take up some part of the boycott or some part of BDS that they could work on, given the agreements they have with Israel.” Awwad said that the constraints imposed on the PA by the Paris Protocol and the Oslo Agreement made it choose to focus on this part of the BDS campaign. She noted, however, that “the standards for Palestinian civil society of course remain much higher than the PA … with a full boycott of Israel, not just the settlements”.

Two important developments in the BDS campaign in 2010 were the increased support in both South Africa and Israel. According to Barghouti, “the developments in South Africa ... have been phenomenal.

“Now we have an Artists Against Apartheid in South Africa, and to us this is extremely relevant symbolically and practically. There are major campaigns supported by very key figures like Archbishop Desmond Tutu and major figures in the ANC, major cultural figures and many prominent academics are involved in the campaigns for BDS.”

Barghouti said that one particularly important campaign in South Africa was that at the University of Johannesburg to sever links with Ben Gurion University. “We hope that this may well be our very first success in the terms of academic boycott, not just passing a resolution supporting academic boycott as we have done for several years in the UK”, he said. “The new thing is that that the University of Johannesburg may actually sever links with Ben Gurion University, under pressure from its own academics, as well as many, many academics in South Africa. Two hundred and eighty academics, very prominent, some vice-chancellors of universities have signed this petition calling for severing the links. Archbishop Desmond Tutu has put his name to the cultural boycott. It is really spreading.”



On support in Israel for BDS, Barghouti pointed out that the campaign had grown in strength since Israel’s all out bombardment of Gaza in 2008-09. The BDS campaign, he said, had been “launched inside Israel, predominately [by] Israeli Jewish citizens, conscientious citizens, academics, intellectuals, artists, students and other activists and queer activists. This campaign is really growing and attracting a lot of attention.” According to Barghouti, “The Israeli BDS group, called Boycott from Within, is helping us tremendously in many, many ways”.

Barghouti also cited the important contribution to the BDS campaign by Israeli groups such as the Alternative Information Centre and the Women’s Coalition for Peace. Barghouti noted that the Women’s Coalition for Peace was playing a particularly important role, having established the “Who Profits from the Occupation” web site. Barghouti noted that the site “documents almost all international and Israeli companies profiting from the occupation. This has been an extremely valuable resource for BDS activists everywhere, who want to select companies to target and want to select those involved in the occupation.” Barghouti added that while “BDS talks about comprehensive Palestinian human rights: ending the occupation, as well as ending apartheid and racial discrimination in Israel and most importantly the right of return for refugees …the occupation is clearly the most convenient and easiest practical target.”

Barghouti went on to say that there are Israeli activists working on the cultural boycott campaign, academic campaign and product boycotts and “they are involved in all the networks that the BNC is coordinating globally”.

[Kim Bullimore is a member of the National Committee of the Revolutionary Socialist Party and a volunteer with the international human rights and solidarity group, the International Women's Peace Service, in Palestine]

Saturday, July 5, 2008

Only Arabs are terrorists...

On 2 July, Husam Taysir Dwayat, aged 30, took the bulldozer he was driving and rampaged through West Jerusalem’s Jaffa St, killing 3 people and injuring at least 66 others. Dwayat, a Palestinian Arab, who had worked for a number of years as a part of a construction team, held a Jerusalemite ID, which gave him Israeli residential rights but not Israeli citizenship. Dwayat's murderous rampage eventually came to an end when he was shot and killed by an off duty Israeli soldier, who is now being hailed a hero.

Dwayat's actions were heinous and murderous, but was he a terrorist? Israel’s media quickly labeled him one and continues to do so, as have the majority of Israel’s political establishment including the Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, the Defense Minister, Ehud Barak and the Vice Premier Haim Ramon.

In 2007, the US State Department annual Country Reports on Terrorism defined terrorism as being the “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by sub national groups or clandestine agents”[1]. For the past 6 years, this is the definition that has been consistently used by the US State Department, with the key point being that “terrorism” is politically motivate, thus distinguishing it from murder or other aggressive acts.

According to the Israeli police, however, Dwayat had no record of being involved in political activity and that the announcements by a number of previously unknown political groups claiming that Dwayat was a member were false [2]. According to the Israeli police, his family, neighbours and his Jewish ex-girlfriend, however, Dwayat did have a criminal record, including charges and arrests for drug felonies, theft and physical assault.

Dwayat’s Jewish girlfriend of six and half years, with whom he had a child, informed the Israeli media that far from hating Jews, he had never shown any ill will to Jews and had no political affiliations. In an interview with Haaretz TV online, Dwayat’s ex-girlfriend said that he “didn’t have any problems with Jews”, going on to say “I don’t think the attack had any nationalist motivations” [3]

So if Dwayat’s murderous act was not politically motivated, if he was not acting as part of a “sub national groups or clandestine agents”, why is he being labeled by the Israeli media, politicians and other state officials “a terrorist”? Why if he acted alone, in what Israeli security forces and police believe to be an unpremeditated act, is Dwayat being marked as a terrorist?

The answer is, of course, simple. Dwayat was a Palestinian Arab, so quid pro quo, he must be a terrorist. This fact and this fact alone is the reason for him being labeled a terrorist.

The anti-Arab racism in this labeling of Dwayat is clearly evident when you ask two simple questions:

(a) If the person who had carried out the bulldozer attack had been identified as Jewish would he have been automatically deemed a terrorist? The answer is almost certainly no.

(b) If the person had been a non-Jewish but also non-Arab, would he have been labeled automatically a terrorist. Again, the likely answer again would have been no.

But Dwayat was a Palestinian Arab, and a Muslim to boot. So of course, he must be a terrorist.

In the days after the murderous act, all three Israeli political leaders, raised the flags of demagoguery and popularism, attempting to out do each other calling for the collective punishment of not only Dwayat’s family but also all the Palestinian people.

On Friday, July 4, Barak ordered the Israeli security forces to issue injunctions calling for the demolition of not only Dwayat’s family home but also the family home of Alaa Abu Dhaim who carried out the attack which killed 8 students studying at Mercaz Haray Yeshiva which conducted a joint religious and military training program.

The day before, on July 3, Olmert had reiterated his call to demolish Dwayat’s family home in East Jerusalem saying “This attack which came from within Israel, into Israel. It creates a string of scenarios we never thought we would have to deal with in the past. We have invested thousands in the construction of the security fence. While it has been effective, it turns out that a fence cannot give us the answer to the problem of terror which comes from our side” [4].

Olmert went on to say that Dwayat’s family should also be stripped of any social security benefits, saying “I think we need to be tougher in some of the means we use against perpetrators of terror... If we have to destroy houses, then we must do so, if we have to stop their social benefits then we must do so. There cannot be a case where they massacre us and at the same time they get all the privileges that our society provides”

However, far from destroying the family homes of all apparent terrorists with Israeli citizenship or residency and stripping their families of Israeli social security benefits, such punitive actions are only being directed at one ethnic group – Palestinian Arabs - revealing once again both the strident anti-Arab racism of the Israeli Zionist state and its apartheid nature.

This is starkly revealed when considering the Israeli state reaction to the terrorist attack carried out three years earlier, by Eden Natan-Zada, a 19 year old Jewish soldier.

On August 4, 2005, Natan-Zada, carried out a pre-mediated terrorist attack in Shfaram in Northern Israel. The attack resulted in the murder of 4 Israeli citizens and the wounding of at least 10 others before the terrorist was killed.

Natan-Zada, who was politically opposed to then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s disengagement plan from Gaza, was an army deserter who had sought sanctuary in the illegal Israeli settlement of Tappauch in the Occupied West Bank. Natan-Zada was a member of the illegal Israeli settler group, Kach, who are followers of the anti-Arab racist, Rabbi Meir Kahane [5]. Kach, along with Kahane Chai founded by Kahane's son, are the only two Jewish groups listed as terrorist organisations by both the US and Israeli governments. In Israel, Kach and Kahane Chai were outlawed in 1994 after another of Kach’s members, Baruch Goldstein, massacred 29 Palestinian men, women and children at prayer in the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Occupied Hebron.

While at the time Ariel Sharon acknowledge Natan-Zada’s act as one of terrorism, there was never any call by Sharon or Olmert or Barak (who were elected politicians at the time) or any other Israeli politician for the demolition of Natan-Zada’s family home or for his family to be stripped of any of their social security benefits, despite the young soldier’s pre-mediated and politically motivated massacre of four Israeli citizens.

One of the reasons for this can be found in the simple fact that the Israelis killed by Natan-Zada were not Jews but Palestinian Arabs who held Israeli citizenship. A little over three weeks after Sharon publicly stated that Natan-Zada was a terrorist, an Israeli inter-ministerial committee in the Department of defense declared that Natan-Zada's murderous attack was not "terrorist" because he was a serving soldier (this was despite the fact that he was an army deserter)[6]. As a result, those killed by Natan-Zada were denied not only recognition of being victims of terrorism but also their families were denied the right to ongoing state compensation, which the families of Israeli Jews killed in terror attacks receive.

Nazia Hayek, the brother of one of the four people killed by Natan-Zada said at the time that financial compensation was not their main interest as it would not bring back his brother. Instead, according to Hayek, the ruling which stated that Natan-Zada's act was "neither terror or an act of hostility" sent a message to all extremists that "it was permissible to kill Arabs and [it] does not count as terror"[7]

Like Baruch Goldstein, Natan-Zada far from being reviled as the terrorist he clearly was, instead like Goldstein before him, he was cannonised by the Israeli right wing. While Israeli police moved quickly to remove the mourning tent erect for Dwayat by his family in the wake of the Jerusalem bulldozer attack, in the wake of Natan Zada's murderous attack it was reported that the illegal settlement of Tappauch built a library in his honour. Similarly, Goldstein was also honoured with celebrations in his names and shrines was built in his honour (which took the Israeli police more than 6 years to remove).

In addition, unlike the solider who shot and killed Dwayat, the Palestinian Arab Israelis who neutralised Natan-Zada, killing him in order to prevent him from killing more innocent people, were not hailed heroes by the Israeli state. Instead, they have been persecuted and hounded.

In June 2008, the Israeli Haifa District Prosecution subpoenaed 12 Shfraram residents to attend a pre-trailing hearing about the 2005 killing of Natan-Zada [8]. Previously in 2006, six Palestinians with Israeli citizenship had also been arrested for the murder of Natan-Zada and held under house arrest. It was only with threats of mass rioting by the residents of Shfraram and surrounding villages and towns that they were they eventually released.

Over the past decade, numerous studies conducted by Israeli organisations have revealed increasing levels of discrimination and racism against so-called Israeli Arabs by both the Israeli state and by Jewish Israeli citizens.

In 2007, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) released a report which revealed that the incidents of anti-Arab racist attacks had increased by 26% and that the expression of anti-Arab views had doubled in the last couple of years. The poll conducted by ACRI revealed that 50% of Jewish Israelis did not believe Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel should have equal rights and that the Israeli government should encourage "emigration" of Palestinian Arabs from Israel. According to the poll, almost 75% of Jewish Israeli youth also believed that Palestinians and Arabs were less intelligent and less clean than Jews [9]. ACRI noted that media played a significant role in "intensifying the Arab image as negative and terrorising". At the time of the report, Arab Knesset member, Mohammed Barakeh, from Hadash (the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality) said the poll was "the natural outcome" of the anti-Arab policies held by successive Israeli governments

A similar poll conducted by Geocartography Institute.in March of 2007, revealed that 75% of the 500 Jewish men and women who participated in the poll would not live in the same building as an Arab, while 60% would not allow an Arab into their home and 50% believed marrying an Arab was "national treason" [10].

The automatic declaration of Dwayat as a terrorist by Olmert, Barak and the Israeli media, simply because he was a Palestinian Arab rather then because he carried out a politically motivated act reveals that the "us" that Olmert spoke about on July 3 does not include the Palestinian Arab citizens or residents of Israel. This along with Olmert and Barak's immediate call to conduct punitive collective punishment (which is illegal under international law) against Dwayat's family reveals starkly the apartheid nature of the Israeli state.

If Palestinian Arabs were part of Olmert's Israeli "us" and Israel was not engaging in widespread apartheid policies, then Dwayat would not have been automatically labeled a terrorist and the punitive policy against his family would also not been enacted, just as such punitive punishment was never enacted against the Jewish family of Eden Natan-Zada.

It seems in Israel, however, only Palestinian Arabs can be terrorists in the eyes of the Israeli Zionist state and many of its Jewish citizens.


[1] 2007 Country Reports on Terrorism, US State Department
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2007/103715.htm

[2] Haaretz service (2 July, 2008) Barak: Israel must respond immediately to Jerusalem attack, Haaretz
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/998330.html

[3] and [4] Haaretz, Barak orders demolition of Jerusalem, yeshiva terrorist’s homes, 4 July, 2008, Haaretz http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/998668.html

[5] Cook,J., (14 June, 2006) For Arabs only: Israeli law and order http://www.counterpunch.org/cook06142006.html

[6] and [7] Khoury, J., Eldar A., and Sinai, R., (30 August, 2005) MK submits bill to include Jewish attacks under terror law, Haaretz, http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=7659

[8] Raved, A., (15 July, 2008) Haifa prosecution considering new indictments in the death of Eden Natan Zada, YNet http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3555829,00.html

[9] Israeli anti-Arab racism 'rises' (10 December, 2007, BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7136068.stm
and
Zino,A., (8 December, 2007) Racism in Israel on the rise, YNET
http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3480345,00.html

[10]Nahmais, R., (27 March 2007) Marriage to an Arab is national treason.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3381978,00.html