I’ve had this happen to me twice this week already.
There I am tweeting away when someone addresses me in a nice polite tone with “don’t you feel bad living in an apartheid state?”
I’ll try and address that here, in the form of tweet-long (ok a bit longer) questions and answers. Let me just start by saying this: I do NOT support the current Israeli government. I do NOT support the occupation. Let’s get that out of the way and now explain why I don’t think Israel is an apartheid state (at least not yet).
Q: Don’t you have different classes of citizenship in Israel?
A: No. About 20% of the population within Israel (not including the Occupied Territories) is Arab/Palestinian. They have the same ID card as me and the same laws apply to them.
Q: But don’t you have discrimination against Arabs within Israel all the same?
A: Yes. There is way too much discrimination. It’s not embedded in any law though. The equivalent wouldn’t be South Africa’s historic Apartheid, but rather discrimination against minorities anywhere in the world. I think the First Lady of the USA wrote her dissertation about that? Discrimination and racism are horrible and we need to fight them. They are not unique to Israel though. And don’t get me started on discrimination against women – world wide.
Q: But what about the checkpoints? and about roads built for Jews-Only?
A: These do not exist within Israel itself. Arab citizens of Israel are free to travel everywhere and anywhere, same as any Jewish citizen. Checkpoints and blocked areas exist only in the West Bank – aka the Occupied Territories. Over there, there are limitations on free movement. Israelis/Jews are not allowed into Arab cities, and vice versa.
Q: Still, what about those checkpoints – why doesn’t Israel allow freedom of travel to all?
A: I don’t like the checkpoints. I doubt that anyone does. Unfortunately, there are constant attempts by Palestinian organizations to carry out terror attacks in Israel and the checkpoints do have a role in preventing those. Checkpoints along the border, in the sense of border control measures actually make sense. There is a lot wrong with the checkpoints in their current implementation though – well worth another post. For now, let’s just say that it has little to do with Apartheid – did they even have checkpoints in South Africa back then?
Q: But isn’t the difference in legal status between Jews and Arabs in the West Bank the same as Apartheid?
A: Technically, Apartheid was a legal system based on racial segregation. The laws in old South Africa defined 4 racial classes with different rights (or lack of rights). The laws of Israel, as they apply to the State of Israel, are not the least bit racist. I don’t know of a single law, other than the law of Return, that mentions a person’s national/ethnic/racial identity. On the contrary – in our Declaration of Independence it clearly states that Israel will ensure “complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex”. It’s a different story in the West Bank – but that is not Israel per se.
Q: But still, you have millions of Palestinians with no basic rights living under Israeli rule?
A: True enough and a huge problem. It is why I think both Israel and the Palestinians should do everything in their power to end the occupation and reach a secure peaceful solution. IMO, this solution should include a Palestinian State where Palestinians will have full rights as citizens. I truly believe that if Israel follows the “solution” of the right-wing of annexing the West Bank, this will in effect turn Israel either into a bi-national state or a real apartheid state. It hasn’t happened yet though. And it’s still a long way down the road – I hope. It’s one scenario out of many and apocalyptical in nature.
My Bottom Line
We have two separate issues here: Israel proper (where 20% of the popluation is Arab) and the West Bank (where the absolute majority of the poplulation is Palestinians under Israeli military rule).
Yes, there is a huge problem in the West Bank. No, it’s not about race – it’s a long and multi-faceted conflict.
Yes, there is discrimination against minorities within Israel itself. Not inherently different from discrimination against minorities elsewhere in the world. Show me where there is a
This is not an apartheid state. So far, the people who asked me about it seemed to know very little about the legal standing of Arab citizens in Israel. Arab citizens have full legal rights. They live side by side with Jewish citizens. They go to the same universities, work as engineers in the same hi-tech Israeli companies, work as doctors, nurses and pharmacists in our hospital and clinics.
So, criticize Israeli policies. I sure do, when it comes to the current government – but leave apartheid out of it. To compare the discrimination against Arabs within Israel with the racial segregation of apartheid is disrespectful to the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.
on Aug 26th, 2009 at 6:38 am
Apartheid is a system or practice whereby people of different races, castes etc. are separated.
Israel occupies, controls and administers the West Bank. The laws that apply to Palestinians in the West Bank are different to the laws that apply to the Israeli Jews illegally settled there. Settlements exist for Jews and Jews only. Roads exist for Jews and Jews only. This level of segregation is apartheid.
Who has initiated, perpetrated and enforced this system of segragation? Israel. In this sense, Israel is an apartheid state.
One can argue that the West Bank’s apartheid system is put in place in the name of Israel’s security, but that doesn’t change the reality of the situation: that it is an apartheid system.
on Aug 26th, 2009 at 7:39 am
Why do you say the laws apply only to Palestinians? Israelis have limited movement too in the West Bank. We’re not allowed into Palestinian cities, you know.
It’s a war zone – war zones have limitations on the freedom of movement.
There are areas where settlers and Palestinians mix, like in Hebron. Because we’re talking about factions that are at war – it’s basically not a good idea. This is why the military separates them as much as possible – limiting both sides.
There are NO laws that apply there which discriminate against Palestinians. None. Zero. Laws are made by the Israeli parliament and there are none that have different definitions for Arabs or Palestinians. Show me just one, please (and ignore the law of return – it’s irrelevant for this discussion).
What you do have in the West Bank is military procedures and commands. Yes, those do often segregate and try to separate the Jewish and Palestinian populations. See above. Let those two mix together and the whole region explodes.
Look, I don’t like what’s going on in the West Bank. I don’t think the settlements should be there at all. My point is, this is not racial segregation at all. This isn’t based on race, and is nothing like South African Apartheid system.
on Aug 26th, 2009 at 8:04 am
Israel is not an apartheid state.
I disagree with your statement about arab discrimination in Israel. Unlike in South Africa, some palestinians here have given a REASON for there to be extra caution (ex: checkpoints) in the area (think suicide bombings, kidnapping of soldiers, and other attacks aimed at murdering Israeli civilians). In fact, just like in the US where affirmative action has gotten to a point where white people are beginning to be discriminated against, Israeli arabs are now reaping benefits from the Israeli government. Just ask any Israeli university student- Arab students are granted more scholarship opportunities and offered lower rates in school-related activites.
Israel is not an apartheid state. Those that support that ludicrous idea are clearly very misinformed.
on Aug 26th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Roads exist for Jews and Jews only.
Wrong! Israeli licence plates! Not jewish! Israelis come in many colours and religions.
on Aug 28th, 2009 at 7:27 am
at present I live in the UK and see how hard is to imagined from the news how the life are really in Israel.
Let’s start with the fact that israel is not a dangerous place – there are about 10 or 20 times more people get killed r heat in road accidents . ( avarge of 500 people died in a year where population is about 10 milion people. similar to the UK 6000 people died where population is about 61 milion)
No one in the UK is scared when he cross the road or drive.
And violent crime is far higher rate in the UK.
But far more important to say and explain that there is a real problem in the territories.
I remember being there and I saw extreme Pavarotti there is also lots of hate that is is being fed from extremer from very far countries – so hate is being fed at school that financed from extreme organizations- Makes you wonder why can not they support with food or real education.
I just listened to the israelies news: at the beging few palastinins were arrested with weapon trying to get into israel to try and murder. the next part was on an accident that a worker in the territories got electric shock and the israeli police is checking it .
First it shows that Israel got some Equality and It is fairly safe place – in many places in the world far more crime on the news.
Like many other people in Israel I do feel sorry for the Palestinians, Mainly as they are not provided with any hope to improve their life – no one shows them that it is possible.
If the world would support them in getting out of Pavarotti and try improve their lives instead of waisting it on hate and fighting.
I was working and employing Palestinians and few times shared my lunch and my drinks with them. I think Gazza got one of the most beautiful sandy beaches in the world and a great potential to improve their life but at the moment there is too much violent between them with too much weapon- I hop the world will be able to help them – just like the Irish got help and managed to rebuilt their economy
One thing for sure the chance that a jewish israeli will be employed by a muslim is not higher than the opposite situation.
But that is just like myself in the Uk can feel how many places will not employ me for being a foreign. ( even so married to a native English).
In all public places there is equality in Israel.
There are many doctors Arabs Muslims doctors working in Jewish populations.
well God bless them All
on Aug 29th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
I think Its not Apartheid system.
But What about Gaza blockade?
on Aug 30th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Some points good, some less so. Residents of East Jerusalem have few rights, do not have proper passports or nationality. They are consistently refused building permits when Jewish settlers are allowed to bulldoze and claim their land. So that makes at least four areas of issue: Israel “Proper”, East Jerusalem, West Bank, Gaza.
Within the West Bank, the Jewish Settlements are built on occupied land and are accessed by settler-only roads. Given that these often bisect the remaining land of the villagers on which the settlements have been taken, there is significant reason for saying that the Arab community in the West Bank is hard done by. Apartheid is a strong term, but arguably reflective of the conditions there.
Checkpoints are a problem because they interfere with movement and trade. They are discriminatory in the sense that they disproportionally affect the Arabs and the settlers (who are able to pass without problem).
The situation in Israel is different. The situation in East Jerusalem is different again.
on Aug 30th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
@joe – apartheid was based on race. They defined races, by skin color (like America before the 1950′s) and applied different rules to them arguing that one race was essentially inferior to another. Where do you see that in our conflict?
There are totally different issues at stake here. Checkpoints interfere with movement and trade just like any border crossing. I was stopped when entering the US and they searched our bags for food and stuff. Many Israelis are outright refused entry to the US – for no reason whatsoever (none stated anyway). Yes, there is ingrained ethnic screening in checkpoints in the West Bank because they’re not looking for apples like in the entrance to the US – they’re looking for explosives, and often find them. Personally, I’d make it so that settlers would stand in lines and be searched as any Palestinian, just in the name of equality. The army can’t be bothered with that, I guess, at this point. They just want to get the work done and their work is to prevent terror.
Am I happy with the the checkpoints operate? most certainly not. I think there’s a LOT to be done about the way Palestinians are treated there (and that is an understatement). Is it apartheid? not by a long shot. It’s just another nasty side effect of the occupation.
As for the roads for settlers-only – they are for Israeli citizens basically, and again, the idea is to separate in order to protect. Send them through the regular roads and they get stones and gunshots. I think the settlers presence there is wrong and immoral – but I can’t blame the army for coming up with these solutions to protect lives. It has ZERO to do with racial discrimination though, and that was my point. As R. here noted – Arab Israelis (Arabs who are Israeli citizens) are free to travel them as any other Israeli citizen.
To recap -
My point is the occupation sucks. It is the source of many evils and gradually destroys Israel’s moral stance. I think this is absolutely true. However, Apartheid, in the racial South African meaning, it is most certainly NOT.
on Aug 30th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
The settlers should not be in the West Bank, period. The settlers should not be in East Jerusalem, period. Can you not see how having your land taken and then seeing a road built which you have to give-way to – but not use – feels like? Can you not understand how people object to seeing people in their swimming pools when you are living in poverty?
Campaigners from South Africa have been to the West Bank and say that what they saw was as bad – and sometimes worse – than what they experienced in South Africa. They do not hesitate to call it apartheid.
on Aug 31st, 2009 at 11:07 am
Joe, whether or not your realize it, you are agreeing with Anne. She very specifically mentions how painful it is for her to see this occupation in the West bank. Indeed, she sees it as the sand in the machine, as does the rest of the world.
If we want to use different colors to express our anger, and look at it from another 100 ways to convince ourselves and others what we already know – well, we aren’t solving much, are we?
on Aug 31st, 2009 at 3:22 pm
I believe we have to call a spade a spade. The situation in the West Bank can fairly be compared to apartheid.
on Sep 1st, 2009 at 4:43 am
Also worth reading this from Haaretz regarding the difference in funding for East and West Jerusalem schools. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1111538.html
on Sep 1st, 2009 at 6:17 pm
@israelimom When I said that different laws apply to ‘Israeli Jews illegally settled there’ compared to the Arabs (indigenous people), I was referring to the fact that the illegal Jewish settlers live under Israeli law, and the indigenous Arabs live under PA law.
The settlers are not in Israel, they are in Palestine. You can’t have your cake and eat it, if you want to live in somebody else’s country you abide by their laws.
Also, I don’t think it’s fair to call them warring ‘factions’. That suggests equal parties, which couldn’t be further from the truth. The huge might of the Israeli military machine is crushing and suffocating the Palestinians militarily and economically. This isn’t a two-sided ‘war’; it is a brutal, illegal military occupation and economic blockade (in the case of Gaza), and the inevitable resistance.
You can’t steal a man’s house and expect to live in peace.
on Sep 1st, 2009 at 7:10 pm
It is worth remembering that those whites, who ran South Africa, were unaffected by apartheid and saw nothing wrong in the way that their country was administered. Your analysis / defence of the status quo reflects that view almost entirely.
What is conveniently forgotten is that Israel is the occupying power of the so called Territories and the Gaza Strip. Effectively Israel, as things stand now has achieved a “one state solution”. As the occupying power – is it totally responsible for all that happens in the occupied territories as well as the part of the land which it has walled off to protect the “colonising inhabitants”.
So there is no getting away from the fact that Israel is responsible for administering two sets of rules and laws that affect two different groups of people. One is the indigenous peoples, mainly Arab and Muslim and the other is a group of people, the vast majority of whom have arrived from elsewhere on the planet and or varying ethnic origins but who in the main are believers in Judaism.
The newcomers have the power, as with the white South Africans, while many of the indigenous population has been expelled to other countries and “has no right or return” – or has been forced into a mixture of police / army controlled ghettos, concentration camps, towns and villages, from which they cannot move without permissions. These permissions are the equivalent of the South African pass laws.
Freedom of movement is not allowed and neither is freedom of association. There are routine extrajudicial killings going on committed by the “wider colonists / police / army and rarely is any one is held to account. Same as in South Africa where a black life had much less value that a white life – ditto a Muslim Arab and a follower of Judaism
You just cannot separate the walled in part of the territory from the rest and then say Israel has no responsibilities – it is all one entity administered by one religious sect, who are totally responsible for all that goes in ALL the land that it administers and occupies.
Take the blinkers off.
The apartheid nature of Zionism will be its undoing.
The wisest have retained dual nationality – just in case.
on Sep 2nd, 2009 at 3:39 am
@lucidnitram you are talking about the occupied territories when you say Arabs live under different laws. Within Israel, things are different. I couldn’t agree more about the need to subject the settlers to the same rules as the occupied Palestinians there.
@Willsx69
If this was a race-based apartheid regime, how come Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews have the same rights and freedoms? Explain that one to me, please. You’re comparing to S. Africa apartheid – where Blacks and Whites couldn’t share a bus together, go to the same swimming pool or the same beach. Hello??? ever been to Israel? Arabs and Jews use the same transportation, go to the same beaches, share the same clinics (as doctors and patients), go the same gyms, same supermarkets, same MacDonald’s (both as sellers and customers). How is that like South Africa’s apartheid???
What I don’t get is why the word “occupation” isn’t bad enough for people anymore? The occupation sucks – big time.
Everything you’ve described is about the West Bank. Is it really much different then areas of Iraq held by the US army? It’s a HORRIBLE situation to be living in for over 40 years – but it’s not an apartheid state. It’s not even a state, is it? I think Israel is responsible for what’s going on there, but it doesn’t mean that Israel IS that place. When you call Israel and apartheid state you either don’t know what living in Israel is like, or you don’t know what South African Apartheid was like.
As for Gaza, Israel withdrew from Gaza and is no longer an occupying force there.
The blockade is kept by Egypt too and supported by many nations. The Hamas government there is shunned by the entire world and for good reason too – they’re a violent fanatic regime (just say the word, and I’ll give you some links about their wonderful record of internal human rights violations).
So, yes, human rights are severely limited in Gaza. I’m talking people beaten on the streets and their bones broken for not following the rules of Hamas and such. Go on, blame that one on Israel… I’m sure you will, btw.
To recap –
Occupation = very bad. Settlers = very bad. Hamas = very bad.
And no… Israel is not an Apartheid state. An occupier of another people, which is bad enough.
p.s. one last thing – there were never Palestine laws per se. Before 1967 it was Jordanian rule. Before 1948 it was British Mandate laws.
on Sep 2nd, 2009 at 6:06 am
I can’t seem to get my point across. When one says ‘apartheid’, one refers to the occupied territories of the West Bank; a striking example of segregation. When one says ‘apartheid state’, one refers to the state that created, controls, and is responsible for that apartheid system. Simple, really.
I totally agree about the poor human rights record of Hamas. In my eyes, all human beings are equal. The Israeli government and all those who defend its racist policies clearly see differently.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 10:30 am
Again you’re trying to draw disrictions between the piece of land where the priviledged live and that where the others live – its all one “state” of a sort.
As for Arpartheid – dont take my worlds for it – both Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandella have described it as even worse than Apartheid South Sfrica, where the disposessed were killed on a much lesser scale proportionally.
Egypt keep the border closed because it does not want to become respoensibel for a mess that Israel has created – and as for leaving Gaza – forget it – that was a complete fraud.
How can you leave somewhere and maintain complete control over whar happens on the land, sea and in the air. Leavingw as nothing but a con trick.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 10:57 am
I guess we basically disagree about everything, Will. You have this image of a big fence dividing up privileged Jews and poor Arabs. It is so not the case, with Arab and Jewish citizens having full rights within Israel, and a mess going on in what is occupied territory. Maybe you should visit sometime and see for yourself.
I liked the excuse you provided Egypt with. That’s a new one. Most people just claim Egypt is a puppet in the hands of Israel and the USA… I just figure the Egyptian government is smart enough to see that Hamas and Islamic radicalism is bad news for Egypt and THAT’s why they want nothing to do with it.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 11:01 am
@lucidnitram
I do see your point. I’m saying Apartheid is the wrong terminology to apply here. Even in the occupied territories, segregation is not racially based. That is my point. When you say Apartheid you’re talking about race-based rules. We don’t have those. Simple. Call it something else, argue about whether it’s worse than apartheid even, fair enough. Just don’t call it apartheid when it’s not, is my whole point. Segregation does not equal apartheid, and in this case comes from a totally different background.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 12:17 pm
What is the difference between occupation and annexation other than that annexation is strictly forbidden by international law and any territorial claim based on annexation will not be recognized by the international community while occupation is problematic, but governed by rules of ius in bello? The main difference is that the territory in question is while being occupied not incorporated into the main state, the occupying state does not gain executive power, what means the population in the territory is not subject to the laws of the state, but it’s the military that rules and has to abide to the rules of the Geneva Convention IV.
Hence, once Israel abides to international law and the settled rules of occupation it is obliged to make a difference between the laws applied in the West Bank/ Judea and Samaria and Israel proper. – I don’t mention Gaza as Israel withdrew completely from this territory in 2005. – To accuse Israel because of that of apartheid-like policies is wrong and whoever does catches Israel in a game of catch21.
(Yet, the argumentation above also implies that by international law it is wrong to apply Israeli law in the settlements and for settlers. On the other hand, the question of the fate of settlements especially of the big ones like Maale Adumim with tens of thousands of inhabitants is still an open one and subject to land swap solutions in a final agreement. Up to then however, rules of occupation should be applied there too, sorry.)
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 2:19 pm
You may be correct in stating that there are no blatantly “racist” laws in principle, but in practice, the application of laws are directly discriminatory towards Palestinians, either Palestinian Israelis, or those in the West Bank. Yes, I agree, they are different, but as others have said, they cannot be separated.
Still, you don’t have to look to the OPT to find instances of ethnically-based discrimination. Palestinians pay over 30% of Israeli taxes, and see only 8% reinvested into their communities. Have you driven through Issawiya, Silwan, Ras Al-Amud? The contrast between levels of civic infrastructure from the French Hill to Issawiya (under a mile apart) is shocking. Someone already mentioned the report of under-funding schools in East Jerusalem. How about building permits? ID cards (which must be renewed every year by Palestinians and don’t allow them an Israeli passport nor to vote in Israeli elections. Marriage laws are discriminatory as well, since a Jew or an Arab Israeli can marry whomever they choose, provided they are not from the West Bank or Gaza. Checkpoints, while they may be necessary for security reasons, lead to racial profiling over true security. Granted, this happens generally with security forces around the world, but in this case, it is institutionalized, and many times these checkpoints serve no other purpose but to “establish and maintain domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them..” (direct quote from the “International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid”)
Finally, one of the most obvious points of discrimination is in the inability for Palestinian Israelis to buy homes in West Jerusalem, while Jews are allowed to buy land in East Jerusalem. Land rights are incredibly discriminatory, if not on paper, at least in practice. When was the last time you heard of a Jewish home being demolished or evicted by the Israeli authorities?
Is this Apartheid as it was in South Africa? Perhaps not exactly, but there is no crime that is exactly the same. The real point is, it has South African Apartheid qualities, and there is nothing wrong in calling a “spade a spade” as joe mentioned.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Ryan, of course there is a lot of discrimination. That does not make it apartheid. Are you telling me there’s no discrimination against black people in the US? or is the US an apartheid state too? Are you saying there are no black neighborhoods vs. white neighborhoods, or that these look the same? Ever driven through a black ghetto slums in the US? And that’s in a country where they have a black president, and where the only difference between whites and blacks is race (not language, religion or different national aspirations).
Discrimination is not apartheid. You’re calling a diamond a spade, if you like the analogy :p Way too much discrimination in Israel, and racism too, but it is NOT apartheid. To say that it is, is just a propaganda ploy, not much different than calling Gaza a concentration camp. It’s people using very strong images from a totally different context to drive other people into action when they don’t really understand what’s going on.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 2:38 pm
The problem with your analogy is that while discrimination of minorities may occur in the US, it is not a practice of the state as it is in Israel. Israel has either supported, or directly acted in discriminatory ways against the Palestinian population. In the U.S. we consistently act in ways that will protect and provide equals rights to all minority groups. We fail, many times, but we have a lot of protections in place that cannot be found in Israeli society.
My point here is not to prove the term “Apartheid” within Israel (I think it applies more correctly to the OPT), I just want to point out that your comment about “… Arab and Jewish citizens having full rights within Israel…” is disingenuous, if not completely false. There are ethnically-discriminatory policies and practices that are being supported or propagated by the state of Israel, and that’s in the “democratic” part of the state. I hate to be inflammatory, but perhaps “racist” would be a better term?
Now, the territories under military control…? That’s another story altogether. One that I have no problem labeling Apartheid.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pm
The anomaly of the West Bank and the situation in Gaza are the festering wounds which Israel would be smart to find solutions for. Many of these insane conundrums are kept alive on purpose by persons with vested interests. In that sense, it is politics from Time Immemorial. The games are played on a level we have less than almost any effect on – yet we argue semantic differences like Apartheid, Racism and the creation of ghettos as if we think we know what we’re talking about.
There is a reason “Apartheid” is an Afrikaans term – meaning “separateness”, in fact. It is because it was their own singular brand of discrimination based conveniently on race alone. Even a scholar such as myself (not) can figure that out. In the US it is termed Racism or even “Jim Crow”, (based on a shameful legal ruling maintaining the separation of blacks and whites in the public sphere) which is the equivalent. In the late 1800′s and early 1900′s, entire black populations of some Southern towns were completely wiped out – killed, hung, shot, etc – in literal (unpunished) riots by whites, angry at the vote counts electing the black people with the temerity to run for office – and then getting elected. In modern America, things have advanced – an attribute of patience which seems to be the one central theme running through the entire edifice of equality accomplishment.
The argument over Apartheid is a useless argument, based more on emotion than sense. The West Bank is absurdly unfair, yes. And Gaza has her products and services interfered with by border guards from both Israel and Egypt. Meanwhile, especially in Gaza, the politicians who determine their voice in the world acerbate the problems with some really stupid behavior. And the Israeli’s get mad and elect the guy with the most hate, just to satisfy a more base emotion which only serves to widen the probability of achieving a state solution.
Does anyone see a theme here? It’s going to take compromises from each side to keep this boil on the Earth’s forehead from oozing for another set of decades. Prospects look grim, judging by some responses in here.
We need to step back, now and then, and ratchet DOWN the hate. In fact, there’s nothing to add to that.
on Sep 3rd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Steve, I agree… to an extent. Yet, my response to your comment is too off-topic for this thread… so, I blogged about it here:
http://blog.ryanlinstrom.com/post/179079400/semantics-apartheid-ethnic-cleansing
Israeli Mom, I guess I just have two main concerns:
#1. I think your analysis of Arabs living within Israel is not very accurate, and I think you would be hard-pressed to find an Arab-Israeli who would agree with this comment:
“Arab citizens have full legal rights. They live side by side with Jewish citizens.”
I know people who lived in Israel for many years before they noticed the inequalities just down the street.
#2. Your main focus in debunking this definition seems to be to uphold the original meaning of apartheid. i.e.:
“To compare the discrimination against Arabs within Israel with the racial segregation of apartheid is disrespectful to the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.”
I think it’s a noble goal, but given Tutu and Mandela’s comments comparing Israel and South Africa, it seems unfounded. They have no trouble calling it apartheid. Why do you?
That’s a sincere question, btw. I’m generally interested in why these terms are so contentious, since I feel that they were defined in such a way as to be used to prevent future injustices.
on Sep 4th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Ryan, I think we basically agree.
I am aware (although maybe not full aware, hard to be from my position), of the inequalities Arab citizens suffer from. For the purpose of this post, I wanted to show that legally they have the same stand – to explain why it’s not apartheid.
Since you agree apartheid is not the right term to use, then really, I have no argument with you. I accept the rest of your points, it was the terminology that bothers me because those using it are the same people who tried to push “Gaza as a concentration camp” slogan, in an attempt to spread an inaccurate perception.
And with all due respect to Tutu and Mandela, and I do have a lot of respect for their struggle, I don’t think they really understand the situation here.
on Sep 7th, 2009 at 4:08 am
You’re Quote: “Since you agree apartheid is not the right term”
(I certainly don’t agree – if it’s good enough term for Mandela and Tutu to use to describe (Greater) Israel, given that they know more about apartheid and how it works than both of us will ever know – then its good enough for me. And contrary to your perceptions, I think they are wise enough to COMPLETELY understand the situation in Israel – what a put down!)
Quote continued: …..to use, then really, I have no argument with you. I accept the rest of your points; it was the terminology that bothers me because those using it are the same people who tried to push “Gaza as a concentration camp” slogan, in an attempt to spread an inaccurate perception”
From this comment you would think that Israel was not in the business of “spreading inaccurate perceptions” You should listen to Mark Regev and the propaganda he spouts and the perceptions that the Israeli PR machine tries to promote worldwide.
Israel is a fully paid up member of the “spreading inaccurate perceptions club” – if not THE leading player.
I think you are bothered about the terms “apartheid, concentration camp and racist state” because there is no way they you can admit that you are part of promoting that system and indeed benefiting from it?
They are terms also very close to the bone when it comes to the treatments which were dished out to Jews in Europe and it’s hard to even imaging that Israel is now playing effectively on a similar if not the same turf. What goes around comes around as the saying goes!
on Sep 8th, 2009 at 8:37 am
Israeli Propaganda Strategy
(Part of the “state’s involvement in disseminating faulsehoods)
“For more than a year, Israeli diplomats have been talking openly about their new strategy to counter growing global anger at Israel’s defiance of international law. It’s no longer enough, they argue, just to invoke Sderot every time someone raises Gaza. The task is also to change the subject to more pleasant areas: film, arts, gay rights – things that underline commonalities between Israel and places such as Paris and New York. After the Gaza attack, this strategy went into high gear. “We will send well-known novelists and writers overseas, theatre companies, exhibits,” Arye Mekel, deputy director-general for cultural affairs for Israel’s Foreign Ministry, told The New York Times. “This way, you show Israel’s prettier face, so we are not thought of purely in the context of war.”
Let’s tell everyone how “normal” we are and how “normal things are in Israel” – ring any bells?
For full text
http://tinyurl.com/nvycgk
on Sep 8th, 2009 at 10:07 am
I’m not sure what your point is, Will. Or rather, I think I know what you’re saying, but how is that relevant? Sure, Israel prominently engages in what is called over here as “Hasbara”, or what you might call propaganda. As long as they’re not lying, I’m fine with these efforts. I don’t support everything Mark Regev says, or Arye Mekel – I disagree with their political point of view.
That doesn’t mean that doing PR for a country is wrong. And if you look at the word “Hasbara” it really reflects on the innate Israeli sense that we’re being attacked in the PR arena by people who don’t actually understand what’s going on here. I’d say your kind of responses are a good justification for the need of Hasbara – no offense
on Sep 10th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
There is none so blind as those who will not see and I understand why you are unable to understand or respond to the many point made by me and others.
Read the postings again then you may get it – though its highly doubtful – right now you, like those who lived in privilege under the apartheid regime in South Africa, are just unable to even comprehend what is going on around you. And like them you may find that the tide of events turns markedly and rapidly and not in favour of the privileged. Situations which have been built on so much injustice can be and often are swept away. Nothing is forever. Not even Israel.
But fortunately most of the privileged of Israel have two passports and dual nationality so they can always move away.