Tag Archive for 'Independent Australian Jewish Voices'

Australian Zionist organisation refuses to truly engage on BDS

Yet another story of the mainstream Jewish establishment attempting to shut down open debate on the most controversial issues. Certain, set boundaries are established around these discussions and the Zionist lobby polices them vigorously. Of course the effect is the general public seeing Jews once again trying to censor issues such as BDS and ongoing Zionist occupation of Palestine. This is in today’s Sydney Morning Herald:

A Sydney festival celebrating ”the broad diversity of opinions within the wider Jewish community” has banned two speakers because they supported Marrickville Council’s ill-fated boycott of Israel.

The University of NSW academic Peter Slezak, from Independent Australian Jewish Voices, and Vivienne Porzsolt, from Jews Against the Occupation – Sydney, were told by email they were no longer welcome to address the Limmud-Oz festival next month, due to their ”active and vocal involvement” in the proposed boycott at Marrickville.

However, organisers said the three-day festival of Jewish learning and creativity would not ”shy away from tough issues”.

The issue of the boycott will still be the topic of at least two sessions, while others would tackle ”challenging points of view”.

Dr Slezak, who had been invited to speak at the event for the second time, said the decision reflected the Jewish community’s ”hysterical” reaction to Marrickville planning to join the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign (BDS) against Israel.

He addressed the topic at the council’s meeting when it abandoned the policy last month. ”I argued that even people who are opposed to BDS should stand up for Marrickville Council against the unprecedented campaign of denunciation and bullying.”

In a statement provided by the Shalom Institute program director, Michael Misrachi, organisers said they decided to rule out presenters who advocated the boycott because it undermined the event’s engagement with Israeli academic and artistic institutions and their representatives.

”This is not about censorship, nor are we seeking to stifle dissenting views. Limmud-Oz is proud of the principles of pluralism and inclusiveness which guide us and Limmuds around the world,” it read.

Mr Misrachi confirmed Dr Slezak and Ms Porzsolt’s names were removed from the list of speakers on the event’s website following complaints.

Two other speakers have since pulled out of the festival in protest at the ban, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported.

Ms Porzsolt, who said she would still attend the festival, told organisers in an email they had misrepresented the boycott, and asked them to reconsider.

”My proposed workshop was not even on BDS … The exclusion of me as a person for the ideas I hold generally, and not because of the topic of my workshop, smacks of excommunication,” it read.

The chief executive of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, Vic Alhadeff, said it endorsed the decision of the Shalom Institute.

Marrickville, BDS and Palestine in eyes of The Jerusalem Post

One week after Sydney’s Marrickville BDS vote, the issue continues to resonate globally. I was interviewed late last week by the pro-settler and conservative Jerusalem Post newspaper. The journalist was friendly enough but it was clear I speaking to a man who didn’t see the West Bank as occupied but merely Judea and Samaria (the biblical names for areas controlled by the Zionist state).

Here’s the story:

Australian Jewish leaders are confident that the Marrickville Council decision last week to repeal its ban of Israeli goods as well as cultural and academic ties has ended the boycott movement in their country at the governmental level.

“The backlash has been quite strong and unanimous from the wider populace and from the Australian federal government and the New South Wales government, so we find it hard to believe that other local councils will go for this,” said Yair Miller, president of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies.

He said the backlash came about because citizens and national leaders were angry that a local council had overstepped its bounds and become embroiled in an international dispute.

Uri Windt, a member of the Inner West Jewish Community and Friends Peace Alliance, said of the possibility of more councils choosing to boycott Israel, “I don’t think people will be discussing it for a long time.”

The anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement is not as well-organized in Australia as in some countries.

“There’s no real official BDS movement here, but there are groups who advocate for BDS,” boycott supporter Anthony Loewenstein, a freelance journalist and co-founder of Independent Australian Jewish Voices, said.

Miller commented, “The BDS is fairly well-organized, but it’s very small and only [popular] in fringe radical groups, most of which are Palestinian solidarity groups.”

Nevertheless, Loewenstein said many councils were discussing ways to support BDS, though he declined to name them.

Though he was not happy with the outcome of Tuesday’s meeting, when the Marrickville Council voted to repeal its boycott, Loewenstein said the publicity generated by the council was important. “Like in other places where BDS has been put forward, it creates a bigger debate, which is what happened in Australia.” He attended the meeting.

Calls placed to the BDS office in Ramallah were not returned by press time.

Marrickville Mayor Fiona Byrne, a Greens member of the council who had supported the boycott, was unavailable to speak with The Jerusalem Post, but she said in a council press release that the findings of a staff report on the costs of implementing a boycott had influenced Tuesday’s vote.

“The report identifies some options – the cost of which would be impractical to the council and our local residents,” she said. “The plight of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories has been and remains a source of concern for Marrickville councilors.”

Severing ties with Israel would cost taxpayers an estimated $3.7 million to $4.3m., according to the report.

“We have created a little egg which is support for the plight of the Palestinian people, and a sledgehammer is being used to break that… Certainly we have put BDS on the national agenda, whatever that means,” Byrne said, according to the Australian Broadcasting Corp.

Many in the media suggested the boycott issue caused Byrne to lose the election for Marrickville’s parliamentary seat in March. The Greens MP candidate for the neighboring district of Balmain, Jamie Parker, who does not support BDS, won.

“Aside from the far-left media, the coverage from mainstream media sources was overwhelmingly critical of Marrickville for getting involved,” Miller said. “The main criticism was that a local council was getting involved in foreign affairs, which is not in their mandate, and for getting in on one side of a very complex conflict.”

In a telephone survey of 500 Marrickville Council constituents, commissioned by the Inner West Jewish Community and Friends Peace Alliance and conducted between March 7 and 13, 48 percent of respondents said their local council should play no role in foreign affairs, though 43% said it should have a minor role. However, 76% expressed opposition to the council taking sides in foreign conflicts, and 51% of respondents were unaware of the council’s boycott motion. Sixty-three percent of those surveyed opposed the motion.

The alliance, which also began an online petition signed by 283 people (signatures of those with no connection to Marrickville were removed) was established by local Jews following the boycott resolution’s ratification. Eighty-five people came to its first meeting and formed its core support group, said Windt, who attended Tuesday’s meeting.

“BDS instantly injects a note of divisiveness and fictiousness, because it poses the issue that if you’re against BDS you’re against the Palestinians,” Windt said. “We made the point that we agree with the Palestinians’ right to self-determination and we agree with the two-state solution. It’s not about being anti-Palestinian, but if you want peace you have to create peace there and peace here.”

In an editorial published on Tuesday in the Sydney Morning Herald, alliance members Gael Kennedy and Janet Kossy urged the Marrickville Council to follow the government officials in a neighboring suburb, Leichhardt, where Parker is mayor, by bringing together members of Palestinian solidarity groups and Jewish communal organizations to focus on initiatives in the Middle East where Israelis and Palestinians work together.

On December 14, the Marrickville Council garnered headlines when it became the first such body to approve an Israeli boycott. On Tuesday, the 12-member council voted to rescind part of the resolution it passed in December that said the council would “boycott all goods made in Israel and any sporting, academic institutions, government or institutional cultural exchanges.”

Nevertheless, the council affirmed that it supported the global BDS campaign in principle. The council also condemned all violent acts, and voice support for the right of Israel and a Palestinian state to exist and for local peace initiatives and “the inherent human rights of all residents in the Middle East.”

Morris Hanna, an Independent member of the Marrickville Council and a former Marrickville mayor, voted against the boycott resolution in December and supported its repeal on Tuesday. “This is not a local issue – a local government worries about the environment, parks, kindergartens and cleaning the streets,” said Hanna, an Egyptian Coptic Christian.

Six council members – four from the Labor Party and two from the Greens Party – who voted for the boycott resolution in December withdrew their support for it last week.

Greens candidate posters in Marrickville and surrounding areas were defaced with swastikas before elections, and some council members reportedly received threats. Loewenstein felt this was the work of supporters of Israel, though Miller said that there was no proof that Jews or Israel advocates were guilty. “We took pains to emphasize that the [Jewish] community should act responsibly and with respect at all times,” Miller said.

Marrickville BDS debate showed how little Palestine is understood in Australia

This has been the week of Sydney’s Marrickville council putting Palestine on the national and global map by daring to support Palestine (though sadly giving in to bullying and rescind BDS). At this week’s fiery public meeting, it was clear how many Zionists have vested interests in not acknowledging the devastating effects of Israel’s occupation on Palestinian lands. Far better to talk about Hamas, Hizbollah, terrorism, “democracy” etc.

In today’s Sydney Morning Herald, reporter Jo Tovey gives voice to those who rarely receive it in the corporate press:

Accusations of one-sided media coverage of the issue were also rife at Tuesday’s meeting. The academic Peter Slezak, of Independent Australian Jewish Voices, said Jewish critics of Israel and supporters of the BDS campaign had not been heard, particularly in the Jewish media.

Samah Sabawi, a Palestinian-Australian, said their voice had been lost. ”I don’t feel we were able to discuss and debate the issue rationally and I don’t feel the door was open for Palestinian voices to discuss what the BDS was about.”

Jews who understand why BDS must force Israel to be legal and decent

The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network has released the following statement (that I’ve happily signed) articulating an alternative and supportive Jewish perspective on boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel:

Because academic, cultural and commercial boycotts, divestments and sanctions of Israel:

  • are being called for by Palestinian civil society in response to the occupation and colonization of their land,
  • are a moral tool of non-violent, peaceful response to more than sixty years of Israeli colonialism, and,
  • rightfully place accountability on Israeli institutions (and their allies and partners) that use business, cultural, and academic ties to white-wash Israel’s responsibility for continuing crimes against humanity,

The undersigned organizations and individuals stand firm in our support of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) initiatives against Israel until it meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law.

BDS is not antisemitic. We reject the notion that the 2005 BDS call from Palestine, and the BDS campaigns the world over which it has inspired, are rooted in anti-Jewish sentiment. On the contrary, BDS is an anti-racist movement against the daily, brutal occupation of Palestine and military threat to the region by the State of Israel. False claims of antisemitism distort the true nature of the Palestinian struggle and are an affront to, and betrayal of, the long history of Jewish survival and resistance to persecution.

BDS is not anti-democratic. We also reject the assertion that the cultural and academic boycotts of Israel defy the democratic principle of free speech. Research and development in academic institutions play a central role in designing and defending Israel’s military and intelligence machinery. Cultural institutions perpetuate the deception of Israeli democracy. To defend freedom of speech for those who disregard justice while demonizing those who struggle for justice is a great disservice to genuine democracy.

Through boycott, divestment and sanctions, civil society asserts our commitment to not contribute to the Israeli state, which is responsible for atrocious acts of disregard for human life and well being. Attacks against BDS campaigns will not prevent us from taking this stance against Israeli impunity. For the Jewish organizations signed onto this letter, self-determination for Jews includes the right to participate in the movement for justice in Palestine and to live in the world with our fellow citizens in peace, freedom, and equity. It does not include the domination and colonization of other people or living separate from our fellow human beings in a state that privileges Jews.

BDS was a key strategy in ending the white South African system of apartheid by applying international pressure. In pursuit of justice, peace and freedom for all, we speak out as Jews committed to BDS and Palestinian liberation.

  • International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network
  • Not In Our Name (Argentina)
  • Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in Middle East (EJJP, Germany)
  • Not in Our Name: Jews Opposing Zionism (Canada)
  • Jews for a Just Peace (Fredericton, Canada)
  • Independent Jewish Voice (Canada)
  • Middle East Children’s Alliance (USA)
  • Critical Jewish Voice (Austria)
  • Women in Black (Austria)
  • French Jewish Union for Peace (UJFP)
  • Bay Area Women in Black (USA)
  • St. Louis Women in Black (USA)
  • Philadelphia Jews for a Just Peace (USA)
  • American Jews for a Just Peace (USA)
  • Ronnie Kasrils, former South African government minister, writer, founder Not In My Name, South Africa
  • Antony Loewenstein, Independent Australian Jewish Voices
  • Peter Slezak, Independent Australian Jewish Voices
  • Moshé Machover, Professor (emeritus) (UK), founder Matzpen
  • Felicia Langer, Israeli lawyer, author, Right Livelihood Award 2006 (Alternative Nobel Prize) 1990, Bruno Kreisky Prize 1991
  • Mieciu Langer, Nazi Holocaust survivor
  • Hedy Epstein, Nazi Holocaust survivor
  • Hajo G. Meyer PhD, Nazi Holocaust survivor
  • Kamal Chenoy, IJAN India
  • Paola Canarutto & Giorgio Forti, Rete ECO, Italy
  • Liliane Cordova Kaczerginski, IJAN France
  • Sonia Fayman, IJAN France & UJFP

Ongoing importance of separating Zionism and Judaism

The following interview by Sam Whiteley appears in today’s West Australian:

Freelance journalist Antony Loewenstein is no stranger to controversy.

“The silence is over,” says Loewenstein, author of My Israel Question which generated a swell of public debate and was shortlisted for the 2007 New South Wales Premier’s Literary Award.

Co-founder of Independent Australian Jewish Voices and author of The Blogging Revolution, his book My Israel Question, first published in 2006, has incited a litany of hate mail but for this self-prescribed atheist Jew, (who ironically also lost family during The Holocaust), there has never been a greater need for dialogue about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Now in its third edition, the book expands upon the region’s struggle and its myriad complex layers. Beginning with his personal understanding of the conflict whilst growing up in a liberal Jewish family in Melbourne, Lowenstein’s brave tome delves further into the problems of Zionism and anti-Semitism, the disconnect between the Jewish in Israel and Jewish Diaspora, issues of the lobbyists and the problematic language used in media to define the conflict.

“The truth of the matter is that the term ‘anti-Semitism’ has been used and abused so woefully by both the Israel Zionist lobby in the West and Israel itself, the word had lost a lot of its meaning even though anti-Semitism does exist,” says Loewenstein.

“It’s the longest occupation in modern history and it’s getting worse and in my view many Jews are keen to make no separation between Zionism and Judaism. They can’t, therefore, be surprised when anti-Semitism increases because of Israeli actions. It doesn’t justify it but it certainly explains why this happens. If you don’t separate those ideologies, if you say I am Jewish and I’m a Zionist, there is no difference.”

Lowenstein firmly believes the maintaining of an infrastructure of occupation is far more important to Israel than democracy for the vast majority of people in the Arab world.

“The reality of what Israel has become is there are plans to be a driving democracy. In fact, Israel is not a democracy. It’s a democracy if you are Jewish. If you’re Arab or whatever else, you are actively discriminated against. If you live in the West Bank as an Arab as opposed to a Jew, there are different laws and anyone who believes in human rights, equality and decency in this day and age simply won’t accept this.”

It would be an understatement to say Loewenstein has broken free from the expectations of the Jewish Diaspora community.

“The implication is that if you are a Jew, that somehow you have a responsibility to support Israel,” he says. “I’ve been accused of pretty much everything under the sun and there is no doubt the criticism saddens me,” says Loewenstein, who admits that although his parents have supported his book, they themselves have lost friends over its publication.

He recalls his visit to Gaza in mid 2009 and the mood of its occupants.

“The area, the neighbourhood and its buildings remain flattened six months after the war, nothing really has changed,” says Loewenstein. “What I found in Gaza was a sense of people feeling they’ve been forgotten by the world. While people are not starving, there is to some extent a degree of despair as there is virtually no freedom of movement.

“On one hand, parts of Gaza are really beautiful, it’s on the Mediterranean. On the other hand, there is a lot of mass devastation and to live there you have to be resilient. Life is tough, unemployment is high. Hamas, of course, controls Gaza and my thoughts are that little has changed and somehow we have this idea in the West that if we support the people in Gaza or the Palestinians themselves, you’ll somehow also support terrorism when in fact the opposite is true.”

My Israel Question, whilst condemning Israel for its treatment of the Palestinians, recognises a changing narrative and perception of Israel.

“There is no doubt that for the first decade after Israel was formed in the late 40s after the Holocaust there was a certain sympathy for Israel, the Jewish and the Zionist cause which continued up to the Six-Day War in 1967 when Israel took over the West Bank,” Loewenstein says.

“Many Western liberals saw it as a quasi-social experiment. Fast-forward to the 20th century and I think what has fundamentally changed, through the internet and television and 9/11, in an ironic way, is that elements of the Western press are more open to perspectives of both Arabs and Palestinians and indeed dissenting Jews like myself.

“In most Western countries, except for the US, and indeed for most of the world for that matter, they are fundamentally supportive of the Palestinians.

“Israel can only survive in its current form with states like Egypt, Jordon, Saudi Arabia and others as dictatorships which are funded and propped up of course by Washington. Anyone, in my view, who believes in human rights, should welcome that change because there is nothing stable about the majority of Arab people who are living under dictatorships. It may be stable for the leaders but that isn’t really good enough.”

Antony Loewenstein will be a guest of the Perth Writer’s Festival. My Israel Question is published by Melbourne University Press ($32.99)

Israel/Palestine needs a South African style truth and reconciliation commission

What would Israel/Palestine look like in a one-state solution? An exclusive new article on the Independent Australian Jewish Voices website by John Docker examines some possibilities:

Recent South African history may also give us a basis for new ideas and visions. In Sydney this year I heard Albie Sachs speak about human rights and the rule of law before and after apartheid South Africa. It was very moving to see him in person, a man who in 1966 had gone into exile after sustained mistreatment, including lengthy bouts of solitary confinement, only in 1988 in Mozambique to lose an arm and the sight of an eye after being car-bombed by South African security agents. In The Strange Alchemy of Life and Law Sachs refers to the new legal institutions of post-apartheid South Africa, institutions which I think could be seriously considered as models for a post-apartheid Israel-Palestine.

In the opening chapter, “Tales of Terrorism and Torture”, Sachs gives some of the background for the post-apartheid creation of the famous Truth and Reconciliation Commission. He observes that state terrorism by South African security forces led to mutilation, massacre, and extermination on a large scale. But he also refers to intense debates in the ANC in exile, initiated by Oliver Tambo, over the question of torture, for it turned out that ANC security personnel were torturing captured South African security agents in ANC camps in Angola. Tambo wished Sachs to be involved, so that a Code of Conduct could be drawn up, “a code of criminal law and procedure, adapted to the peculiar circumstances of an exiled and dispersed political organization”.

What had to be debated, Oliver Tambo made clear to the 1985 assembly, was “whether the Code of Conduct should make special allowance in extremely grave circumstances for what were called ‘intensive methods of interrogation’”.

Sachs reports that, one by one, the “young soldiers of Umkhonto We Siswe came up to the platform and gave their answer: an emphatic no”. They insisted that there be “very clear standards and that absolutely no torture be used in any circumstances, whatever the euphemism used”. In Sachs’ view, the young soldiers were making a statement about “the kind of people we were, what we were fighting for, and what our morality and core values were about”.

Opposition to torture became a part of the Code of Conduct, supported by the soldiers and Oliver Tambo and formulated by Sachs and ANC lawyers. Such opposition to torture was also, Sachs says, “absolutely consistent with hard-won principles of international law”. It was in this spirit, Sachs feels, of creating a future “constitutional order in a free South Africa”, that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and allied institutions were established. This includes “what many today regard as the most progressive Constitution in the world”, with its centrepiece Bill of Rights and its respect for human dignity.

So, there’s a key feature here that I believe can be drawn from The Strange Alchemy of Life and Law. A future Israel-Palestine could create such a constitutional order, with a Constitution and a Truth and Reconciliation Commission modelled on post-apartheid South Africa’s.

IAJV November newsletter

The following newsletter was sent out today:

Dear friends,

We are sending our occasional newsletter here and would like to take the opportunity to thank everyone who has been so supportive of our efforts; both with their willingness to sign our recent statement and donations. You will be aware that we are very limited in our resources and so it is both very heartening and practically helpful to receive so much ongoing encouragement and support. Above all, it indicates clearly that we are helping to fill an important gap in the public dialogue.

Our recent IAJV advertisement appeared prominently in the Sydney Morning Herald, the Australian and Australian Jewish News with around 120 signatures (http://antonyloewenstein.com/2010/10/09/australian-jews-say-enough-is-enough/) and highlighted the importance of Jews speaking out for peace and justice in the Middle East.

The ad was attacked by the Australian Jewish News’ columnist Mark Baker (http://jewishnews.net.au/news/2010/10/07/saddened-by-the-sense-of-censorship/15800) and a number of Jewish writers in the letter’s pages of the AJN (http://antonyloewenstein.com/2010/10/21/myopic-jews-berate-iajv-for-caring-about-human-rights/).

We are pleased with the more than 130 Jewish signatories (and growing) and very generous financial support that made the advertisements possible. We continue to receive many emails and letters from across the community including both Jewish and non-Jewish supporters who express gratitude and encouragement for our public stand as Jewish voices. We are planning to maintain the momentum with new initiatives and will inform you all soon of IAJV events in the pipeline.

We want to express our thanks to all who contributed in various ways to our efforts and thereby to add to the growing pressure on the Australian government to take a more enlightened view of the Middle East crisis.

In other news, American Jewish writer and activist Anna Baltzer recently toured Australia and attracted large crowds across the country. She received great media coverage (Eg. http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2010/s3047744.htm and http://www.smh.com.au/national/activist-questions-contract-20101026-172eo.html).

Her visit was sponsored by Australians for Palestine, Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine and IAJV and we are again pleased to work together with these groups to promote human rights in the Middle East.

Anna was attacked by the mainstream Jewish community and defended by IAJV’s Peter Slezak on J Wire:

Alan Gold on Baltzer
http://www.jwire.com.au/featured-articles/anna-who/12558

Peter Slezak reply to Gold
http://www.jwire.com.au/featured/who-is-anna-baltzer-peter-slezak-replies/12635#more-12635

David Singer reply to Slezak
http://www.jwire.com.au/featured-articles/anna-who-david-singer-adds-his-view/12662

Alan Gold again
http://www.jwire.com.au/featured-articles/and-over-to-alan-gold/12643

Peter Slezak reply to Gold and Singer
http://www.jwire.com.au/letters/response-to-gold-and-singer/12997

David Singer again
http://www.jwire.com.au/letters/david-singers-reply-to-peter-slezak/13026

Anna appeared at Canberra’s Parliament House and made a presentation to 20 Federal parliamentarians among many others including diplomats and journalists. As in her many talks, Anna presented some of the troubling aspects of human rights violations in the West Bank and the need for governments and individuals to act on behalf of the principles of justice, international law and human rights for all.

Finally, the following links are some recent news from the Middle East:

- Antony Loewenstein, Western politicians prefer to ignore Israel’s inherent racism, Sydney Morning Herald:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/western-politicians-prefer-to-ignore-israels-inherent-racism-20101027-173p8.html

- Gideon Levy, Israel is proud to present; the aggressor-victim, Haaretz:
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/israel-is-proud-to-present-the-aggressor-victim-1.322053

- Israeli human rights group B’Tselem on abuse of Palestinians in Israeli detention:
http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/201010_Kept_in_the_Dark.asp

- Israeli human rights group Gisha on the real situation with the Israeli blockade of Gaza:
http://www.gazagateway.org/2010/10/the-ban-on-student-travel-between-gaza-and-the-west-bank-fatma-sharifs-story/

Thanks again for your support and ongoing interest in our efforts.

Best wishes for now,

Independent Australian Jewish Voices
Peter Slezak
James Levy
Antony Loewenstein
Eran Asoulin
http://www.iajv.org/

Western politicians prefer to ignore Israel’s inherent racism

My following article appears in today’s Sydney Morning Herald:

Imagine a mainstream Australian politician saying that Aborigines should be banned from leading tourists around Uluru because they might “present anti-Australian positions” to visitors. The outcry would be furious.

But a bill is currently before the Israeli Knesset, led by a parliamentarian from the “moderate” Kadima party, that would bar Arab residents of East Jerusalem from working as tour guides in the city. Knesset member Gideon Ezra said it was essential tourist groups are “accompanied by a tour guide who is an Israeli citizen and has institutional loyalty to the [Jewish] state of Israel”.

It is just the latest sign in an ever-tightening noose around Arabs from the Zionist mainstream in the self-described Jewish nation.

Journalist Gideon Levy writes in the Israeli daily Haaretz that no politician “has even begun to think of Arabs as being equal to Jews”. The Israeli Jewish public increasingly shares these authoritarian views. In a study published in the newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, 36 per cent of Israeli Jews urged the revoking of Arab voting rights and restriction of free speech in “times of political difficulty”.

Israel is not a democracy for all its citizens but an insecure nation demanding obedience to an ideology that deliberately excludes the legitimate rights of its Arab population.

The occupation in the West Bank is deepening daily, after more than 43 years, with colonies expanding at the fastest rate in two years. The illegal siege on Gaza contributes to Palestinian children suffering debilitating malnutrition.

This is the Israel that Western politicians prefer to ignore. When I recently confronted Opposition Leader Tony Abbott over his blind backing for Israeli “democracy”, he muttered something about the Middle East not being “perfect.” But, I countered, what about Jewish-only settler roads in the West Bank? That was “bad”, he acknowledged, before looking away nervously.

Julia Gillard’s Labor Party shares these delusions. It is one of the reasons that the Independent Australian Jewish Voices group published newspaper advertisements nationally this month demanding the Australian government “exert pressure on Israel to conform to international law and humanitarian standards”.

The growing global concern over Israeli values has been crystallised by the Netanyahu cabinet voting to force non-Jews seeking citizenship to swear allegiance to Israel as a “Jewish and democratic state”.

The decision was met with furious indignation from a vocal minority in Israel, not least Palestinians who were being asked to negate their historical rights. Leftist Jewish Israelis marched through Tel Aviv chanting, “Fascism and ethnic cleansing are standing proud”.

In the Diaspora there was virtual silence. Blind loyalty came before defending democratic values. The Achilles heel is its deference to Israeli government decisions, a Maoist-like devotion to a country increasingly delegitimised by its own occupying policies.

One of the main reasons the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign is thriving around the world – alongside the one-state solution idea – is that Israel ignores global demands to change its behaviour. Cultural and economic isolation worked against apartheid South Africa.

Just the latest example of a principled stance in reaction to the loyalty oath, was the refusal of the English filmmaker Mike Leigh to participate in a program at a Jerusalem film school. He also cited expanding West Bank settlements and the brutal attack on the Gaza flotilla.

Leigh was praised by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel for highlighting “the fact that collaborating with institutions of a state that practises occupation, colonisation and apartheid, as Israel does, cannot be regarded as a neutral act …”

No other Western state has tried to introduce anything like the loyalty oath. The oath is on an ever-growing list of anti-democratic proposals before the Knesset, including a one-year prison term for “incitement for the negation of the existence of the state of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state”.

Palestinians and leftist Jews are loathed fifth-columns to be smeared and isolated.

No obfuscation about the supposedly devilish plans of Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran or al-Qaeda can distract from the reality of Israel’s inherent racism. The world should stop pumping in funds to perpetuate the infrastructure of oppression.

Antony Loewenstein is a freelance journalist and author of My Israel Question.

Myopic Jews berate IAJV for caring about human rights

Following the Australia-wide advertisement by Independent Australian Jewish Voices (IAJV) calling for a more open debate over Israel/Palestine, the following letters have appeared in the Australian Jewish News over the last weeks:

What a dismay to find Independent Australian Jewish Voices’ advertisement in last week’s AJN.

We do live in a democracy where anyone has freedom of expression. However, it is beyond comprehension that this group could even suggest deconstructing vital security systems designed to keep Israel as safe as possible. The very idea that they would ask us to pressure the Australian government with their views is ill-conceived. Such pressures can only incite further anti-Semitism. The protective policies have been designed to safe-guard their relatives who have chosen to live in Israel.

Israel is not just a memorial to the Holocaust as implied in the ad. Israel stands for the present and future existential future existence of the Jewish people. Israel cannot afford the luxury of complacency. It must stay vigilant. Our turbulent past has taught us that.

Rosie Hersch
Brighton East, Vic

“ENOUGH is enough”. This is the title of a large advertisement in The Australian, signed by the Independent Australian Jewish Voices (IAJV).
Now I am returning the same title to them. Everybody is entitled to their opinions, but to advertise it in newspapers is to me a cowardly way to do so.
It has been shown on TV many times how people on the flotilla attacked the Israeli soldiers with iron bars and other tools.
They were warned in advance that they were in foreign waters and that they should turn back. One of their answers was: “Jews, go back to Auschwitz”. Didn’t the members of the IAJV notice it? I wonder how would they react in such a situation.
With the rise of the anti-Semitism around the world, does embattled Israel need this?
Only citizens who live in their own country have the right to criticise it.
Why do those academics not advertise Israel’s courageous medical achievements in Haiti, or the fact that this tiny country accepted refugees from Darfur, or that Israel’s army is the only army in the world that tried to warn their enemies about forthcoming bombardments? I do not recall Hamas doing so before sending rockets to Sderot.
My Jewishness has always been and will remain to be a source of pride, in spite of the fact that I lived through the Holocaust and lost my entire family.

Helen Lepere
Elsternwick, Vic

Jewish dissent landing in front of countless mainstream readers

This is how the Independent Australian Jewish Voices advertisement looked in the Sydney Morning Herald yesterday, on page five of News Review. Prime position for hundreds of thousands of readers to see a message of Jewish dissent over Israeli crimes in Palestine:

Failing to take responsibility for what Zionism has created

Following the publication of the Independent Australian Jewish Voices advertisement across the Australian media yesterday, Zionist columnist Mark Baker writes in the Australian Jewish News that debate over “Jewish” issues should be wider but he still wants to proscribe certain boundaries. He condemns the lack of “balance” in the IAJV statement, implying somehow that both Israelis and Palestinians are equally to blame for the issue. Baker simply can’t come to terms with his own complicity in the Zionist occupation project, deploying equivocal language in the process. Soft, Left Zionist ideas have allowed the Jewish Diaspora to show its “love” for Israel by stepping so carefully around the Middle East debate that the Israeli government has merely continued to continue the colonies in the West Bank and beyond:

There is a McCarthyist spirit in the Jewish air, an atmosphere where thoughts are censored and words cut off mid-sentence. In an age of mass communications, there is no need to summons a person to testify. A flick of the computer button can spread a lie through the viral stratosphere, and travel to people’s dinner tables for a lively conversation of malice and libel.

The crucible for these whispering campaigns is spawned by fear, and in our world there is indeed much to fear. As Jews, our traumas born of history are being fuelled by an international effort to delegitimise the places and ideas we love most. Our Zionism – Israel – is under threat in a way that I have not experienced in my lifetime, surpassing even the 1975 UN circus that equated Zionism with racism. Today, the climate that would turn Israel into a pariah state is buttressed by a world leader who uses genocidal rhetoric, and will soon have the means to make good on his promise.

Yet in defending Israel, we also need to be vigilant that we do not surrender the values that make Israel worth fighting for; the justness of its identity as the national homeland of the Jewish people, its commitments to free speech and equality, the passionate arguments that make Israel one of the world’s most vibrant democracies.

Within Israel, there is currently a struggle over the meaning of these values that goes beyond the political wings of Left and Right. Which is the truer face of Zionism: The Zionism of the settlers in Hebron or the Zionism of protestors at Sheikh Jarrah? The Zionism of groups that are attacking Israel’s Supreme Court and universities, or the Zionism that values the rule of law and academic inquiry? The Zionism that treats Israeli Arabs as a fifth column, or the Zionism that upholds the rights of the Arab minority in the spirit of Israel’s Declaration of Independence?

For those of us in the Diaspora for whom Israel is one of the core pillars of our identity, we cannot ignore the impact of these struggles. In fact, our community has always provided an infrastructure that respects the differences among us, while recognising that in our diversity we are all working towards a common goal.

How do we define these common goals of Zionism? How do we reach them?

Herein lies the current danger. There is a worldwide trend in Israel and the Diaspora to circumscribe in the narrowest way how we love and advocate for Israel. Patriotism gets measured through rigid slogans rather than through the vitality of Israel itself.

The danger that we face is that increasing numbers of Jews will find themselves alienated from this constricted space, and pushed outside the doors of Jewish life.

There are many students, for example, who in this last election voted for the Greens as an extension of their Jewish readings of environmental responsibility. I have heard people characterise these voters as traitors and anti-Zionists. If we really cared about Jewish continuity, would we allow them to be maligned in this way?

Should we censor Jews if they state that they do not believe in the strategy of blockading Gaza, or if they argue that Jerusalem should be the shared capital of Israel and a future Palestinian state, sentiments that are expressed by a large portion of Israelis?

To be sure, anyone who is a Zionist today will be concerned about the campaign to delegitimise Israel and how words of criticism might fuel the anti-Zionist agenda. The recent statement by the Independent Australian Jewish Voices, for example, lacks any semblance of balance and is designed to present an inflammatory condemnation of Israel, heightened by rhetorical references to Holocaust memory.

While a balanced response is difficult to strike, a monolithic approach that does not allow for criticism of Israeli policies is counterproductive. It rings false with the public and with ourselves; it smothers the diversity of our Zionist commitments; it serves the status quo and undermines the imperative of reaching a two-state solution; and it won’t wash with a younger generation of Jews who are demanding an authentic, open conversation about their values and Israel.

A culture that stifles debate is encircling our community. Fear of being abused or distorted or taken out of context is silencing many younger Jews.

I fear that if we don’t broaden the discussion, then we will wake up and find a new generation that is Jewishly silent, which will translate into apathy, assimilation, and alienation from Israel. The ideas that we wish to defend will have been destroyed by our own zealotry. And the McCarthyists will have no one left to pursue except themselves.

Mark Baker is director of the Australian Centre for Jewish Civilisation and associate professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Monash University.

Australian Jews say enough is enough

The following advertisement appears prominently in today’s Sydney Morning Herald and Australian [in a slightly different version] and in this week’s Australian Jewish News, organised by Independent Australian Jewish Voices:

Roll up for another few decades of settlement expansion in Palestine

My following article appears on ABC’s Unleashed today:

Will they or won’t they? The international media were counting down the hours until Israel’s self-described “settlement freeze” ended this week.

Most Western journalists, based in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, looked for any signs from the government of Benjamin Netanyahu that would appease the perceived outrage of Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas who claimed he would walk out of US-backed talks if colonies continued construction.

The elaborate dance came and went, building resumed and Palestinians were once again left standing at the altar with no concessions and less land without Zionist footprints.

In fact, if reporters had actually travelled around the West Bank during the last months they would have found extensive settler work. Dror Etkes writes in Haaretz that even according to official Israeli figures the number of housing units built in settlements barely reduced over the last 10 months. Etkes explains:

“The truth is that the settlers know better than anyone else that not only did construction in settlements continue over the last 10 months, and vigorously, but also that a relatively large part of the houses were built on settlements that lie east of the separation fence, such as Bracha, Itamar, Eli, Shilo, Maaleh Mikhmas, Maon, Carmel, Beit Haggai, Kiryat Arba, Mitzpeh Yeriho and others.”

In other words, illegal colonies on Palestinian land expanded and yet virtually nobody said anything about it. A two-state solution is impossible with creeping expansion on a daily basis. It’s no wonder the one-state solution, or a variation of it, is increasingly on the mainstream agenda.

US president Barack Obama spoke at the United Nations last week and warned both Palestinians and Israelis to get on-board with his efforts. If they did not, he said, “Palestinians will never know the pride and dignity that comes with their own state” and “Israelis will never know the certainty and security that comes with sovereign and stable neighbours who are committed to co-existence.”

But then the US president included this clincher: “The hard realities of demography will take hold.” This means that soon the numbers of Palestinians and Arabs will outnumber Jews in Israel and Palestine, making an occupying Zionist state an apartheid entity by definition.

Tragically, realities on the ground are already apartheid-like and a fair and equitable division of land, called for by Washington, Australia and the EU, is delusional. This is what decades of Western indulgence has done to the Jewish state, criminally assisted by the Zionist lobby in the US and beyond. Witness the Jewish Forward editorial last week that praised Palestinian capitulation to Zionist demands, something America may be keen to accelerate.

Peter Beinart recently wrote in the Daily Beast that, “To be labelled a champion of peace by the American Jewish establishment, it turns out, a prime minister of Israel only really has to do one thing: be prime minister of Israel.”

Furthermore, countless Jewish groups work directly against Israel’s long-term interests. A recent investigation by IPS found Jewish groups in Europe receiving tax exemptions for assisting the IDF and illegal settlements.

In Australia, the media mouthpiece of the Israeli government, the Australian Jewish News (AJN), is equally incapable of being anything other than a repeater of Netanyahu government talking points. If somebody else were leader of the country, the AJN would mindlessly echo these, too. It is for these reasons of unthinking patriotism and nationalist fervour that I remain involved in Independent Australian Jewish Voices as an alternative to bombastic and pro-Zionist, settler positions.

The Israeli government has been committed to the colonial project in the West Bank for more than four decades. Palestinians living under occupation experience this catastrophe daily.

Take the town of Wadi Rahaal, on the desert outskirts of Bethlehem. Its residents are increasingly surrounded by the Efrat settlement and its security infrastructure. The 1,700 residents are close to prisoners in their own land. And, of course, Gaza remains under occupation.

The matrix of control of the settlements was shown to a journalist from the New York Times when Peace Now took her on an aerial tour of the northern West Bank. The group has even released an iPhone app to assist in following the ever-growing movement of the colonies. The Israeli government is so proud of its expansion that the tourism minister is planning West Bank tours “for internal tourism and for tourism from abroad”. Roll up and see Palestinians living in cages.

It’s almost redundant to write what is required to undo Israel’s self-destructiveness. Roger Cohen says in the New York Times that Obama “must now break some [Israelis] bones to get his way” and demand a complete settlement freeze.

Instead, Obama seems to be begging Netanyahu to extend the “freeze” for extensive US concessions. The world’s only super-power is again on its knees before its client state despite Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor and self-described “Israel’s Attorney”, claiming on ABC Radio’s PM that Netanyahu is “very committed” to peace.

But it’s too late. The Palestinians are being asked to accept Israel as a Jewish state, immediately negating the full rights of the over 1 million Arabs inside Israel and acceptance of the legitimate legal rights of the millions of Palestinians with the right to return to ancestral lands. We can’t be surprised that countless Palestinian refugees in Lebanon prefer armed struggle than futile negotiations.

Author of the book, The Invention of the Jewish People, Shlomo Sand, argues that Israel can’t be both a Jewish state and an Israeli democracy and it appears to prefer the former:

“The trouble is that the Zionist enterprise, which created a new people here, is far from satisfied with its creation and prefers to see it as a bastard. It prefers to cling to the idea of a Jewish people-race, profiting for now from its imaginary existence.”

This week’s controversy was the speech at the UN by Israel’s foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman calling for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians to make way for a contiguous Zionist state. Netanyahu was angry about the timing of the speech but not the content. Lieberman is far more honest than the bulk of Israeli politicians; he articulates what many of them have long wanted to do. His recent suggestion was forcing Israeli Arabs to sign a loyalty oath to the Zionist state.

Another recent Lieberman call was that current peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians should be about the exchange of land and populations and not land for peace; they must accept a purely Jewish state. Lamis Andoni writes on Al-Jazeera that accepting such an outrageous idea would be a betrayal of the decades-old struggle:

“Israel is pushing for Arab recognition of Israel as a Jewish state [because] it wants the Palestinian leadership in one swift move to legitimise the expulsion of Palestinian-Israelis and to end any discussion of the right of return.”

This is something that, thus far, neither Abbas nor Hamas would ever accept.

While the US and Israeli-backed Palestinian Authority, armed and trained by American Lieutenant General Keith Dayton to create a crack-team of thugs to crush Hamas opposition in the West Bank and suppress any protest, the international community have a choice.

Many in South Africa are using their historical experience to warn Israel that it faces growing isolation. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, amongst many others, are backing calls for the University of Johannesburg (UJ) to sever academic ties with Israel’s Ben Gurion University (BGU) due to its collusion with the occupation.

The ultimatum by UJ, issued on Wednesday, was that BGU “would have to work with Palestinian universities on research projects and stop its “direct and indirect support for the Israeli military and the occupation” or face exclusion.

A complete boycott was eventually shunned by the university but serious pressure applied.

The logic of boycott, divestment and sanctions is becoming increasingly clear, with Jews sometimes taking charge. The alternative is playing the game of endless negotiations that always move in one direction; South Africans have the moral authority to lead the way.

Tutu’s call to arms speaks for itself:

“Together with the peace-loving peoples of this Earth, I condemn any form of violence – but surely we must recognise that people caged in, starved and stripped of their essential material and political rights must resist their Pharaoh? Surely resistance also makes us human? Palestinians have chosen, like we did, the nonviolent tools of boycott, divestment and sanctions.”

Antony Loewenstein is a journalist, blogger and author of My Israel Question and The Blogging Revolution.

When will more Jews not back occupation and oppression?

Many Australian Jews see their role as simply backing anything Israel does. Nuke Gaza? No worries. Those Palestinians clearly deserved it.

Here’s a letter in this week’s Australian Jewish News that perfectly captures the mood. Thanks for mentioning Independent Australian Jewish Voices!

Thank goodness for the unswerving, if not always uncritical, support for Israel by the overwhelming majority of Australian Jews. There is scope for legitimate debate reflecting opinions across the entire political spectrum, and our community organisations reflect and encourage genuine differences.
By contrast, the actions of self-styled “Jewish groups” such as the Australian Jewish Democratic Society (AJDS) and Independent Australian Jewish Voices reflect only prejudice and bigotry.
Why do we never hear those independent voices raised in defence of the rights of Israeli civilians, or in condemnation of the atrocities perpetrated by our enemies? After years of anti-Israel rhetoric, the AJDS has reached a new low by publicly supporting Israel boycotts.
Faced with the creeping Islamisation of Europe and the downgrading of support from the Obama Administration, it behoves all who are concerned for Israel’s safety and security to rally to its support.
When Jews like those at the AJDS purport to speak “as concerned Jews”, they are doing far more than expressing a contrary or independent political view.
They are encouraging and emboldening all anti-Semites who cower behind the cloak of anti-Zionism, including those committed to the annihilation of Israel. In so doing, they are endangering the physical safety of Israelis and the well-being of all Jews.

Tom Borsky
St Kilda East, Vic

Documentary on Sydney Finkelstein premiere

Independent Australian Jewish Voices and Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine recently organised the Australian premiere of American Radical, on the life and times of Jewish dissenter Norman Finkelstein.

Australian writer and journalist Reuben Brand made a short documentary of the evening’s proceedings:

Australians rally around the Hebron Festival of Friendship

The following article by Vivienne Porzsolt appears in this week’s Green Left Weekly:

Leichhardt Friends of Hebron can be very proud of the Festival of Friendship for Hebron it held over June 25-26.

The event raised more than $5000 for a kindergarten in the impoverished village of Um al Khair in the South Hebron hills. It also won a significant political victory over the ban the previous Leichhardt Council administration placed on a Palestinian photo exhibition two years earlier.

A festival banner was prominently displayed outside as the town hall filled with people at the opening to hear Greens Mayor Jamie Parker and Palestinian ambassador Dr Izzat Abdulhadi. Palestinian writer Randa Abdel Fattah and Palestinian refugee Fathieh Douer also spoke.

The festival could not have taken place without Parker’s support. It was in stark contrast to the weak-kneed actions of the previous administration.

A panel chaired by journalist and author Peter Manning on “Censorship of the Palestinian story: how does it shape Australian understandings?” included Carole Lawson, former convener of Leichhardt Friends of Hebron, Karen Vesk and Alissar Chidiac, formerly of the Powerhouse Museum, and Dr Peter Slezak from Independent Australian Jewish Voices.

Slezak said the concept of “neutrality” was morally nonsensical in the face of human oppression and violation of international law.

He discussed the tendency to self-censorship and the need for institutions like the ABC, the print media and museums to conduct themselves with integrity and not cave in to the pressure exerted by Israeli propagandists.

The festival also featured the Australian premier of the Welcome to Hebron and a presentation by Lisa Arnold of APHEDA Union Aid Abroad on the history of Israel/Palestine. I spoke about my recent work with Israeli peace activists. There were also musical performances and poetry readings.

The festival received overwhelming support from a wide range of people across the community. Several professional artists performed free of charge.

Leichhardt Friends of Hebron was formed in 2007 to engage Leichhardt Municipal Council and the local community to raise awareness of the Palestinian story and provide practical humanitarian support.

The task was complicated by the intervention of the Inner West Chavurah, a local Jewish community group. It opposed the development of a “sister” relationship between Leichhardt and Hebron on the grounds that a public body like a council should not “take sides”.

The group was concerned, as are many Jews, that the campaign would provoke anger against Israel and Jews. However, it is the brutal actions of the State of Israel that are responsible for anger against Israel.

Jews best protect themselves from this hatred by being clear about the human rights issues involved and taking an ethical stand.

Leichhardt Friends of Hebron supports a collaborative approach. Its partner in building the kindergarten in South Hebron is a group of Palestinians and Jewish Israelis working together to support grassroots Palestinian communities under occupation.

This kind of partnership is an example of the kind of fruitful co-existence that could be possible between Palestinians and Jews in Israel/Palestine.

But for this to happen, the current oppressive regime must be abolished. All people concerned with justice and peace should work together to that end.

[Vivienne Porzsolt is a member of Jews Against the Occupation.]

IAJV June newsletter

The following email was just sent to the Independent Australian Jewish Voices email list:

Dear friends,

The recent Gaza flotilla debacle has brought international attention to the blockade on Gaza by Israel. Media coverage has been intense and we have been pleased to see the growing dissent worldwide among Jews. The wider community is no longer ignoring the usual Jewish silence or apologetics as even the Sydney Morning Herald editorialised in early June that “it is time for Jews of the diaspora to question Israel’s actions”.

A few days later, IAJV co-founder Peter Slezak published a piece in the Sydney Morning Herald that stressed these issues facing Jews in particular, and called for a more critical, public Jewish position on Israeli behaviour and the 43 year-old occupation:.

In other news, IAJV co-sponsored film screenings in Sydney and Melbourne of the documentary ‘American Radical’ on Norman Finkelstein. These were highly successful events at which Antony Loewenstein and Peter Slezak spoke with other panellists to large audiences in both cities. In particular, there was a significant sense of the growing importance of communication and collaboration between Jews, Palestinians and the wider community.

Towards this end, we would like to draw your attention to the exemplary activities of Australian media producer Daz Chandler in the West Bank, bringing the human face of Palestinians and their plight to a wider audience. We stongly recommend support for her current fund-raising activities seeking to bring broadcast equipment to young people in the West Bank. See her work here:

We believe it is an important initiative and we hope that you may contribute generously to her current fund-raising campaign before it closes shortly. A brief indication of the work from the website:


Although this is a part of the world that features quite heavily in the Western media, the coverage rarely features the everyday individual, living that life. Radio Lajee brings a human face to the refugee community, creating a greater cross-cultural connection built on communication, shared interests and understanding. The project provides this community with a new skill-set, broadcast quality equipment and most importantly, the opportunity to tell their stories their way to a Western audience.

Finally, the following are recent writings on the Middle East:

- The Los Angeles Times report on life in Gaza.

- The US-magazine Nation reports on the growing movement in the US towards boycotts, sanctions and divestment from Israel.

- Gideon Levy in Haaretz on Israel’s growing international isolation after the Gaza flotilla debacle.

Best wishes,
Antony Loewenstein
Peter Slezak
Eran Asoulin
Jim Levy

Tonight in Sydney: Australian premiere of Finkelstein film

Questioning the Promised Land is a Jewish need

I’m pleased to see my friend and co-founder of Indpendent Australian Jewish Voices (IAJV), Peter Slezak, with a piece in today’s Sydney Morning Herald on the importance of Jewish dissent.

These are the kinds of debates the Jewish community are so afraid to have. By defending all Israeli actions, they are blind to the reality of what Israel has become. History won’t forget:

The Mavi Marmara victims are the most visible of many unarmed international solidarity workers and Palestinian civilians killed by Israeli military forces at peaceful demonstrations. Charges that Israel’s lethal commando assault violated international law are far from the most serious it faces, after wars on Lebanon in 1982 and 2006, and Gaza in 2008-09. The lame official excuses for the assault invite the question: what does it take for “supporters” of Israel to protest that enough is enough?

Jewish leaders and their community follow Israeli official script: the raid on the unarmed civilians of the flotilla was in self-defence, just as pasta, coriander and children’s toys entering Gaza pose an existential threat to the Jewish state. The collective punishment of Gaza is merely putting them “on a diet”. George Orwell would have been impressed by such Newspeak in “defence of the indefensible”.

Apologists claim international outrage towards Israel is evidence of global anti-Semitism, seeking to “delegitimise” the Jewish state. The slur has caused non-Jewish commentators and individuals to avoid public criticism. The Jewish establishment has even sought to discredit human rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, though the same criticisms may be found in reports of Israel’s own B’Tselem.

The Mavi Marmara victims are the most visible of many unarmed international solidarity workers and Palestinian civilians killed by Israeli military forces at peaceful demonstrations. Charges that Israel’s lethal commando assault violated international law are far from the most serious it faces, after wars on Lebanon in 1982 and 2006, and Gaza in 2008-09. The lame official excuses for the assault invite the question: what does it take for “supporters” of Israel to protest that enough is enough?

Jewish leaders and their community follow Israeli official script: the raid on the unarmed civilians of the flotilla was in self-defence, just as pasta, coriander and children’s toys entering Gaza pose an existential threat to the Jewish state. The collective punishment of Gaza is merely putting them “on a diet”. George Orwell would have been impressed by such Newspeak in “defence of the indefensible”.

Apologists claim international outrage towards Israel is evidence of global anti-Semitism, seeking to “delegitimise” the Jewish state. The slur has caused non-Jewish commentators and individuals to avoid public criticism. The Jewish establishment has even sought to discredit human rights groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, though the same criticisms may be found in reports of Israel’s own B’Tselem.

Diaspora Jewish communities and their leadership have not only avoided making public criticism of Israel themselves, but have sought to prevent other Jews speaking out as well. Those who dare, such as the signatories to Independent Australian Jewish Voices, are labelled “self-hating”, “useful idiots”, “kapos” and even “Jews for genocide”. However, if their communities expect uncritical loyalty of Jews to Zionism, they can hardly be surprised if others fail to make the distinction clearly.

The wider public is not mistaken in seeing a conspicuous Jewish silence as condoning whatever the state of Israel does. In Plato’s Republic, Socrates says: “We should be the first to use rhetoric to denounce ourselves and the people close to us, to expose their crimes and save them from immorality.” It is a moral truism, as is the biblical precept about the hypocrite in Matthew 7:”For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged.”

For such reasons, in a recent article in the New York Review of Books, Peter Beinart has charged the diaspora Jewish establishment with being detached from reality, failing to recognise “Israel is becoming (has become) a right-wing, ultra-nationalist country” being abandoned by younger liberal and progressive Jews. As early as 1948, an open letter published in The New York Times signed by Hannah Arendt, Einstein and others warned against the fatal combination of “ultra-nationalism, religious mysticism and a propaganda of racial superiority”.

It is one of history’s ironies that Jews have embraced an essentialist idea of some intrinsic quality constituting their identity and destiny, since they have been perhaps history’s most aggrieved victims of it. Since the position of diaspora Jews has a critical influence on government policies in Israel itself and elsewhere, Beinart poses the question to Jewish leaders: what would Israel’s government have to do to make them scream “no”? Beinart asks: “If the line has not yet been crossed, where is the line?”

The question of Jewish identity and responsibility has been posed acutely by some Jews themselves, those who break ranks – those referred to in Isaac Deutscher’s essay as ”The Non-Jewish Jew”. Among these, Baruch Spinoza (1634-77) is described by Bertrand Russell as “the noblest and most lovable of the great philosophers”. For his heresies, he was given the severest punishment, Cherem – permanent excommunication from the 17th century Amsterdam Jewish community.

He notes the paradox that Jewish heretics who transcend Jewry belong to a characteristically Jewish tradition, among the great revolutionaries of modern thought, including Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. To Deutscher’s list we may add Hannah Arendt, the late renegade American historian Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky, all reviled by their communities.

“They all went beyond the boundaries of Jewry,” Deutscher says, to transcend their narrowly conceived ethnic identity while remaining attached to it. Such Jewish thinkers embrace a wider, universal, Enlightenment outlook – the tradition of secular, liberalism and humanism. This is the position of the famous Jewish philosopher Marx – not Karl, but Groucho – who quipped “I wouldn’t want to join any club that would have me as a member”.

Do you feel good when your football team wins a game? Do you know any of the players whose success you enjoy and feel you share? Are you proud of being Jewish? Or Irish? Or Australian? What have you done to deserve credit for the achievements of Einstein, Beckett, Bradman or anyone else?

The true heroes in history are the heretics who adopt a critical attitude towards the national symbols and sacred traditions.

Edward Said, the Palestinian intellectual who took students to visit Auschwitz, made the point: “To this terribly important task of representing the collective suffering of your own people … reinforcing its memory, there must be added something else … The task, I believe, is to universalise the crisis, to give greater human scope to what a particular race or nation suffered, to associate that experience with the suffering of others.”

Israel is not the state of its citizens, of whom now 20 per cent are not Jewish, but the state of the Jewish people. The Knesset has considered a bill that would institute a jail sentence for anyone who speaks ”against Israel’s existence as a Jewish and democratic state”. But, as Ariel Sharon explicitly recognised in the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot, there is a contradiction inherent in attributing these two properties – Jewish and democratic, like green and colourless.

In view of the brutal occupation of the West Bank, inhumane blockade of Gaza, continuing dispossession, injustice and suffering of the Palestinians, Jews might heed Einstein’s prophetic warning in 1955: ”The attitude we adopt towards the Arab minority will provide the real test of our moral standards as a people.”

Peter Slezak is a senior lecturer at the University of NSW’s school of history and philosophy of science.

Talking BDS post flotilla massacre

My following interview with Green Left Weekly appears today:

Sydney-based journalist and author Antony Loewenstein is an outspoken critic of Israeli policies and author of the best-selling 2006 book My Israel Question. He is the co-founder of advocacy group Independent Australian Jewish Voices and is a board member of Macquarie University’s Centre for Middle East and North African Studies. Articles and commentary by Loewenstein can be found at Antonyloewenstein.com.

Green Left Weekly’s Tony Iltis spoke with Loewenstein about Israel’s military assault on the unarmed Freedom Flotilla, which sought to bring humanitarian aid to break Israel’s siege of the Palestinian Gaza Strip. At least nine activists were killed in the assault.

* * *

Loewenstein told GLW he was surprised by Israel’s assault on the Freedom Flotilla. “While we’re clearly used to Israel breaking international law by occupying peoples land, killing people, launching unprovoked wars — that’s normal Zionist behaviour.

“But”, he added, “this was surprising because it appears to be so utterly disproportionate, which again is not unique for Israel, but is so counterproductive.”

Loewenstein said the action shows “sheer arrogance and self-delusion”. He said if the action was fully thought through by Israel, “and evidence suggests it was”, then it apparently believed that “whatever Israel was to do, the world would simply accept”.

“Or more importantly, the US would support Israel when it claims it was self-defence.”

He said: “What does seem clear is that Israel believes using overwhelming force in the middle of the night on a humanitarian ship in the middle of the ocean, in international waters, would somehow not provoke some kind of response.

“The argument has been made that the activists on the boat reacted violently and Israel had no choice but to open fire on them.

“In the footage that Israel has released thus far, you do see evidence of the commandos coming from the helicopters and being set upon by activists.

“But what was Israel expecting people to do? Simply lie there and take it? The truth is that Israel was invading a sovereign entity on international waters and people had a right to defend themselves from that attack.”

He told GLW: “The bigger issue here is not this tragedy, but the siege on Gaza. That’s what this is all about.

“It is about the fact that the siege is immoral and counterproductive. This has brought far greater focus onto the blockade of Gaza, which has been going now for three-and-a-half years.

“I did hear that Egypt has opened its border with Gaza temporarily — we don’t know for how long, maybe just three or four days. Of course Egypt’s role in the blockade is just as scandalous as Israel’s.

“In a sense, they’re a client state that does the dirty work of Israel and the US.”

On whether this incident will prove to be a turning point in the struggle for justice and peace in the Middle East, Loewenstein said: “It’s very hard to say. Clearly, there are now growing international calls for the lifting of the siege, including from our Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who’s hardly known for being brave on the Middle East (or on anything really).

“He did come out yesterday and say the siege should be lifted, which is a welcome comment from the Australian government and a very rare one at that.”

But he added, “the government that matters the most is the US”.

“The Obama administration’s response so far has been tepid, to put it mildly. Although they have in the past called for the lifting of the siege, there has not been any comment along those lines in the last 48 hours.”

However, Loewenstein added: “Just this week there was an interview in the [British] Guardian with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, who said that there was growing contact between his organisation and the Obama administration but America simply hasn’t got the guts to speak out.

“So there was contact. And if there’s going to be any chance of peace, Hamas must be involved in the process.

“We keep hearing so much propaganda that Hamas are like Hitler, and they’re going to destroy all the Jews, that they hate Jews. There are undoubtedly some elements in Hamas that don’t like Jews. I saw this when I was in Gaza.

“But the truth is that they are a pragmatic political organisation that won a democratic election four years ago.”

He said progress to peace could not occur until Israel and the West recognises this. “If they think that continually blockading and isolating Gaza will achieve their interests — well, in fact, it’s having the opposite effect.

“I don’t see any evidence of Israel changing its position on this, frankly, but there needs to be sustained international pressure. If there’s not, and this should have happened a long time ago, there needs to be sustained growing calls and action [targeting Israel with a campaign] of boycott, divestment and sanctions.

“That is the only way Israel will understand — if it feels political pain.”