by Moriel Rothman-ZecherJuly 2, 201209:34

A Word to International Solidarity Activists: Israelis- including Israeli Leftists- Exist

This morning, I started my day by browsing through reports on Susya in an effort to assemble a mini-resource guide for folks interested in keeping updated. I came across an article about the demonstration last week on PNN, Palestine News Network, which is generally a solid publication. In explaining the demonstration, the author, James Lloyd, wrote that “an estimated 200 international demonstrators gathered together in the village to support the locals there.”

“Hmm,” I thought, “there were a lot of international demonstrators there, but 200? That sounds like too many. I wonder what his estimate of Israeli demonstrators will be.”

I read on. And on. The article concluded as follows:

“The protest was, itself, a sheer sight to behold. The solidarity between the internationals and the locals there could really be witnessed. It was inspiring to see such a large community coming out to protest against the housing demolitions and show support for the local community who are under distress.”

And only then did I realize what James Lloyd’s estimate of Israeli demonstrators was:

Zero.

There were no Israeli demonstrators in Susya last week.

There are a few possible ways to explain Mr. Lloyd’s failure to mention that the vast majority of the non-Palestinian demonstrators in Susya last week were, indeed, Israelis:

1. He didn’t know, and assumed that all of the non-Palestinians were internationals. If that is the case, Mr. Lloyd would be advised to do a little bit of research before coming to report on politics in a region he is not from (I do not know Mr. Lloyd, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say he is not Palestinian).

2. Mr. Lloyd is using the term “internationals” to mean non-Palestinians. This seems unlikely, though, in that he readily uses the term “Israelis” to describe the soldiers and settlers.

3. Mr. Lloyd has developed, intentionally or not, a sort of blindness that prevents him from seeing this conflict as anything other than Israelis versus Palestinians, or as Bad People versus Good People. Unfortunately, this is the interpretation that strikes me as most likely. In the middle of his article, Mr. Lloyd writes that “the targeting of the area by the Israelis goes back to the 1980s.” The Israelis. All of them. All of us. Surely it couldn’t have been Israelis who organized the buses filled with hundreds of activists to go support Susya at the demonstration, Israelis from Ta’ayush who go out every week to support the residents of the South Hebron Hills, Israelis who built the “solar panels” that Mr. Lloyd mentions in his list of what will be destroyed in Susya. Surely not. Israelis are against Palestinians. What was moving about this demonstration, for Mr. Lloyd, was not that Israelis and Palestinians (supposed, by many, himself perhaps included, to be enemies) stood together to protest injustice, but rather that “The solidarity between the internationals and the locals there could really be witnessed.” I have to wonder, out loud, whether some part of Mr. Lloyd is not talking about international and Palestinian solidarity against Israelis (and it’s important to note that in the speeches given, in Arabic, by Palestinians in Susya, we were thanked for coming as Israelis, and as friends. I also have to wonder out loud whether Mr. Lloyd even knows Arabic).

Again, I do not know James Lloyd, I do not know where is coming from, and I do not know what has shaped his lens on the situation here. But I do know that throughout my time as a solidarity activist and at demonstrations in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, this is not the first or the second or even the fifth time I have heard or witnessed international solidarity activists deny or devalue the existence of Israeli leftists, Israelis working in solidarity with Palestinians, and sometimes Israelis in general.

This is not to say that this has been my experience from all international solidarity activists, by any means. Many indeed come here with humility, with a genuine desire for peace and justice for all people, with a principled opposition to the cruelty of the occupation and to racism (which I, of course, share). But it is a word of reminder to those international activists who sometimes slip up: Israelis exist. Israeli leftists exist. “The Israelis” is not a legitimate concept, when some of them are shooting tear gas and others are inhaling it alongside their Palestinian allies and friends. Solidarity with Palestinians cannot mean solidarity against Israelis. I recognize that there is a wide range of reasons international folks come to protest in Palestine, ranging from genuine care, to personal connections, to curiosity, to the desire to witness what is a hut-button news conflict, to the desire to be an activist in a place where activism is not all that dangerous. I share a lot of these motivations. Maybe all of them. They are all fine, as is being opposed to Israel’s government, or boycotting Israel’s economy, or writing op-eds against Israel’s military policy.

What is not fine is when opposition to Israeli policy morphs into a blinding opposition to Israelis. At best, such thinking is deeply ignorant, and at worst it is hateful.

8Comments

Add yours

1

Moriel Rothman on July 7, 2012 at 18:19

Dolev, thank you for sharing those stories- I imagine, unfortunately, that most of us active on the Left here have many similar tales… For example, your stories reminded me of another time, in al-Wallajeh, where I was with a group of British activists, of sorts, and one of them asked our Palestinian guide: “I am pretty sure I know the answer to this question, but do any Israeli Jews ever come to support you?” And then the surprise on her face when our guide said yes, of course, every week Israelis come to support us. So, yes, I think to us Israelis, everything is complicated :). That doesn’t mean folks shouldn’t talk positions, and develop opinions, but I think, like you and others pointed out, that those positions and opinions need to come from a place of humility, curiosity, and genuine care for the future of all people living in this region, Palestinians and Israelis and others.
2

Dolev on July 6, 2012 at 20:08

Thanks Moriel! You articulated (in a very articulate way) something that have bothered me too for a long time. I have to say that I don’t have a very clear idea as to where this attitude is coming from, and it may have multiple reasons. I think part of the story is that some internationals (and I emphasize: some. One should be cautious of generalizations!) are drawn by the a-symmetry of the occupation, and just do not grasp the complexity of the conflict and may not be interested in grasping it. Yehiel’s allusion to the football stadium reminded me a time when I heard some internationals talking about the demos in Nabi Saleh – it did indeed sound like they were talking about a soccer match. I am also reminded of another time when we were in Sheikh Jarrah and started explaining the story there to some internationals, and we failed to give a simple, easy-to-swallow answer to something one Italian woman activist muttered “to you Israelis, everything is complicated”.
3

How to Get Detained by the IDF without Being Aggressive, Provocative or even Loud | The Leftern Wall on July 6, 2012 at 16:32

[…] group in general, struck/strike me as the exact opposite of the sort of international activists I wrote critically of last week, humble, loving, nonviolent, dedicated (one of the volunteers, who told me she plans to stay for […]
4

Moriel Rothman on July 2, 2012 at 14:44

I wasn’t avoiding ’48- I just think, in certain way, it is less “stand out” (ie. it’s pretty similar to the way the US was formed) than the ’67 occupation, which is what I see as the more insane part of the equation. But Neglected? Palestine? As compared to the Congo or Sri Lanka?
5

Amitai on July 2, 2012 at 14:19

Sure thing, send it over, always happy to read a good zine.
I understand and in some ways share your concerns.
You did well pointing out a silly number (1945) in my argument. I stand corrected. My point is that there is a definite difference between “no Jews, no diseases” type of racism (as exemplified by Hitler) and anti-Israeli culturism (exemplified by Mr. Lloyd). u get it. Again, drawing the line between the two is important, because Israeli Hasbara (PR) creates the connection in order to justify the “no Arabs, no terrorism” type of cynicism (racism. And culturism. And anti-Semitism).
As for a number that protrudes from your comment, I recognize that the ’67 occupation is probably not as bad as the Chinese occupation of Tibet. Yet in this context the number I redraw is 1948. We should all be aware that the ethnic cleansing of Palestine hasn’t been as bloody as what’s going on in the Congo, but it is one of the most neglected atrocities, going on to this day, associated with the very essence of Israel and Israeliness. I think we gotta face our hypocricy (and i might be speaking for myself more than anybody), as it perpetuates the ajanebness. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I felt you intentionally avoided this number (1948).
6

Moriel Rothman on July 2, 2012 at 12:52

Amitiai- I partially agree with you and partially disagree. On one hand, I don’t think we have any disagreement as to how horrible the ’67 occupation is, although I’m perhaps a bit less sympathetic to those who claim that it’s one of the worst human rights issues in the world- I just really don’t think that claim holds water, neither in terms of numbers of people killed, or in terms of daily suffering, or in a lot of other ways. Folks really need to study conflicts in Guatemala and the DRC and Tibet and Sri Lanka before they come out with statements about which conflict is the worst. That said, in terms of geopolitical significance, yes, this conflict has huge symbolic weight. Unlike you, though, I am bothered when Palestinians call us “ajanib,” which, to me, indicates a desire that we eventually “go back home” and an unwillingness to recognize that we are all going to have to live together here, in some way or another. And I also think your statement of pre-1945 European anti-semitism indicates a real weakness in your argument. What, the Holocaust ended and along with it everyone who was anti-semitic changed their minds, and anti-semitism just evaporated? I would certainly not rush into calling folks like Lloyd anti-Semites, but I think we have to be very careful of acting like there is no more anti-semitism. If you have energy, I can send you an awesome ‘Zine written by a jewish Palestine-Solidarity activism about how real and alive anti-Semitism is called “The Past didn’t go anywhere.”
7

Amitai on July 2, 2012 at 12:33

word, mori, interesting stuff. i also felt ambivalent stumbling upon pictures of myself titled “international activist protesting against the Israeli Occupation.” in terms of my personal understanding and sociopolitical identity, i try to make the distinction between Israeli culture, a product of a colonialist project but nonetheless a defining social force, and the Israeli state. The latter i see as an illegitimate violent entity, much like any state, but particularly antagonistic in certain geographical areas like Gaza or the WB, and especially at certain historical periods like 1948. I therefore understand the hatred it generates. I am not surprised and not offended when Palestinians call us, Israeli activists (or, activists of Israeli culture), “ajaneb” (foreigners).

Unlike Yehiel, I definitely do not tie this to “our history in Europe”. The phenomenon of internationals like James Lloyd ignoring our Israeliness is a result of certain Palestinian propaganda. It is not related to pre-1945 European anti-Semitism. I think this type of attitude perpetuates Israel’s false sense of victimhood. We see how it has been used by Israeli governments to justify their atrocities throughout history and up to this day.
8

yehielgrenimann1 on July 2, 2012 at 10:31

Moriel, I share some of your feelings on this. I was upset at the non-existence in Mr. Llyod’s report of the many busloads of israelis who came with RHR’s help to Susiya last Friday to protest the injustice to Palestinians there. At the risk of sounding like a typically suspicious Jew and Israeli, and speaking from long and sometimes painful experience with internationals who support the Palestinian cause, particularly from Europe, the likely background to this reporting is either extreme anti – Zionism (i.e. Jews are not a people, they have no claim to a national existence of their own, regardless of history Israel has no right to exist, etc – a position many Palestinians share unfortunately.) or more simply put, racist hatred of Jews/Israelis. ( I wonder what their attitude is to Moslem and Christian Israelis?) This view of Israel and Jews is sick, considering our history in Europe. It contributes to the intractability of the conflict here by encouraging Palestinian hatred and false hopes and feeding into Israeli cynicism and unwillingness to hear criticisms of the occupation. Anyone who hates Israelis rather than loving peace and justice, anyone who doesn’t want to work for change which is positive but rather wants “action” and “to take sides” belongs in a football stadium somewhere not in the complex reality of this tragic and bitter conflict here. I agree Palestinians need outside help in dealing with Israeli power and repression, but this is not helpful.