Monthly Archives: February 2011

Haaretz notices GOD TV’s role in JNF Forest of Hate (while GOD TV squirms)

Nir Hasson has a report at Haaretz’s Hebrew edition about GOD TV’s role in funding the Jewish National Fund’s ethnic cleansing of the Bedouin village Al Arakib in order to plant a non-native forest. There isn’t much in Hasson’s piece that wasn’t already introduced by Richard Silverstein, Neve Gordon, and through my reporting. But since Al Arakib has been destroyed for the 16th time (and Israeli riot police have begun firing rubber bullets and teargas at its residents), Hasson noticed that GOD TV recently published a disclaimer at its website distancing itself from the JNF’s monstrous project.

This is the network’s statement:

It has come to our attention that reports have been posted on the Internet. These reports mislead readers to believe that GOD TV may be responsible for displacement of Bedouin people in the Negev Desert in Israel. These claims are false.

We cannot comment on any ongoing legal proceedings between the Israeli Government and the village of Al-Arakib, as GOD TV is in no way involved in these proceedings.

GOD TV has committed to sponsor one million trees, to be planted through the efforts of the Jewish National Fund, KKL, and the Land of Promise Foundation, throughout the nation of Israel in an effort to restore the desert places to the lush green land it once was, preparing the Holy Land for the return of the King of Kings.

This apostolic, prophetic act of planting trees across Israel is a result of the commitment of Christians around the world coming together to bless the nation of Israel, and make the deserts livable once more.

GOD TV is not responsible for, or involved in, the decision as to the specific places trees are planted across the country.

GOD TV is so frightened by the exposure of its collaboration with the JNF in the dispossession of Al Arakib’s residents that it took down a YouTube video Richard Silverstein and I created to draw attention to the situation. Luckily, a vigilant reader has reposted it here:

(GOD TV’s and all other trademarks are the property of their respective holders. The video above contains limited excerpts from GOD TV’s broadcast.)

Of course, if Rory Alec and the GOD TV staff had genuine moral objections to forcing indigenous families from their homes with bulldozers and rubber bullets, they could register them with the JNF. And if the JNF refused to change course, they could pull out of the project. Instead, GOD TV appears to be concerned solely with its public image. That is why it has tasked its lawyers with suppressing free speech and why it must reassure its donors that only the JNF has the power to decide where the land will be prepared “for the return of the King of Kings.”

Don’t the good folks at GOD TV know that ethnic cleansing makes Baby Jesus cry?

Who’s afraid of the cultural boycott?

This piece was co-authored by Joseph Dana.

The day after the American pop star Macy Gray announced controversial plans to perform in Tel Aviv in March, we sat down for a drink at Pua, a bar nestled in the heart of one of Jaffa’s most gentrified neighborhoods. When the waitress, a sociable 20-something resident of the city’s burgeoning young Jewish community informed us of a new brand of beer the restaurant was carrying, we wondered based on rumors we had heard if it was brewed in a settlement in the Golan Heights. The waitress, who was clearly offended, vehemently denied that it was “a settlement beer.” She reassured us that the owner of the restaurant was “a real Tel Aviv type guy,” and as such, “would not carry such a product.”

We were confused. “What exactly is a Tel Aviv type guy?” we asked her. When she returned to our table with two European beers, we asked for more information about the owner and a conversation began. She informed us that the owner of the bar ‘just keeps to himself and his friends in Tel Aviv’. She told us that he was not interested in politics and just wanted to live his life. We asked about her ideas on politics and the occupation. “I am a photographer. I used to go to Bil’in but it is violent.” She continued, “Now I just spend time with my friends and try to be a good person. I can’t take trying to change anything anymore.”

When asked for her opinion on BDS, her response was short and quick: “You can’t fight evil with evil.” She insisted that every boycott in history was wrong. We pressed her gently on the issue of boycotts (what about MLK’s Montgomery Bus Boycott, or the boycott of apartheid South Africa?) but it was clear that she was unwilling to go deep into the issue. She knew about the Occupation, the settlements, the racism that was rising like a tidal wave all around her, but she had deliberately cloistered herself inside a quaint European-style bar and Tel Aviv’s cosmopolitan lifestyle. Perhaps she could have contributed to the fight for a real democracy in Israel and justice for Palestinians living under occupation, but she had surrendered to the culture of apathy sanctioned by an entitled elite.

We began to understand the power of the cultural boycott in disrupting the apathy that pervades middle class, urban Israeli society. Apathy allows Israelis to live in comfort behind iron walls while remaining immune to the occupation and innoculated from its horrors. The culture of apathy allows them to watch the news and let out a groan of concern without thinking seriously about political engagement. In the case of the waitress at Pua, her apathy enabled her to witness the brutal military repression of legitimate political protest in the West Bank, only to return home to Tel Aviv and ignore her culpability.

The cultural boycott forces Israelis to deal with Israel’s behavior towards Palestinians by targeting them where it counts most: in the heart of their affluent comfort zones. The extreme right of Lieberman and the settlement movement must be confronted and exposed, but they are only the most extreme representation of an official ideology of racism towards Palestinians and the Arab world. They have grown and metastisized through fervent political activity, charisma and demagogy, while the “Good Israel” of Tel Aviv sits by impassively, and even cynically, watching the waves roll in while their society goes over the brink. It is the culture of apathy that supplies oil to the Occupation Machine.

Many Ashkenazi citizens of Israel have a second passport, allowing them to travel to and receive benefits from Western countries. They have developed an easy escape valve from the oppressive and violent manifestations of Jewish nationalism. Meanwhile, Palestinians live under a matrix of control devised inside US and European-funded Israeli universities and high tech research centers. An elaborate network of walls, electrified fences, biometric scanning devices, predator drones and collaborator networks ensures that each aspect of their lives is dominated by the Occupation. Because Palestinian residents of Jerusalem are forbidden from living where they choose with West Bank spouses, even their love lives are occupied. How would our waitress at Pua react if her life was subject to such crushing limitations?

We have often heard the argument that Macy Gray and other artists thinking about boycotting should perform in Tel Aviv and Ramallah. This commonly held idea not only reinforces concepts of segregation between Jews and Palestinians, it misses the point of the Palestinian boycott call entirely. The cultural boycott is designed to undermine the normalization of Israeli society. Palestinians do not necessarily want to see rock shows in Ramallah, they want to bring an end to the occupation. The 170 Palestinian civil society organizations who crafted the BDS call concluded that the most realistic non-violent means for ending the occupation was to force Israelis to live with the full responsibility of their actions. This was one of the ideas behind the boycott of Apartheid South Africa and one of the reasons why organizations like the South African Artists Against Apartheid now work to achieve the same goals in Israel.

My colleague and peer, Noam Shiezaf, published a thoughtful piece on this site arguing that Macy Gray should request that a certain number of tickets be sold to Palestinians in the West Bank for her Tel Aviv performance. The Palestinians would buy the tickets and then Israel would refuse their entrance to Tel Aviv. This would then provide a suitable subtext for Macy Gray to cancel her show.

The idea is clever but raises an important question: why would Macy Gray need to create a subtext to cancel? Doesn’t the longest military occupation in history provide a suitable enough reason to boycott? Furthermore, Israel would be able to correctly point out that Palestinians from the West Bank, by and large, are not allowed to enter Tel Aviv due to the sovereign laws of entry and exit to the State of Israel. Thus, the stunt would accomplish little more than reinforcing the notion that a militarized and radicalized Israeli society is perfectly kosher. And by circumventing the substance of the Palestinian BDS call, it allows critics to paint the cultural boycott as a form of collective punishment.

Too much of the commentary about BDS addresses the movement in a vacuum. The fact is, BDS is an integral part of Palestinian non-violent tactics. Quite simply, BDS is the globalization of Palestinian non-violent action against Israel’s occupation. So why do certain Jewish organizations from the United States and Israeli liberal Zionists lend rhetorical support to the joint nonviolent struggle in Sheikh Jarrah and elsewhere, while demonizing the call for BDS as borderline anti-Semitic and beyond the pale of reasonable people? Would the leaders of these organizations sit with the Palestinian families forcibly evicted from their homes in Sheikh Jarrah and tell them that their tactics are illegitimate?

It is easy to wash your hands of moral responsibility by participating in noble but ultimately doomed battles against the Occupation Machine. Confronting your own personal responsibility in allowing the crisis to reach such a terrible juncture is much harder, if not impossible, for too many. Perhaps the hardest step for the left-wing of the Jewish Establishment is ceding control of the debate while Palestinians assume the lead in their own struggle for freedom.

If the international community and especially the American Jewish community is unwilling to allow Palestinians a global form of nonviolent resistance against Israel’s occupation, what is left for the Palestinians to do? If violence is out of the question – it is certainly a terrible option for everyone — should Palestinians simply allow the Occupation to sweep them away like dust?

This is the question posed by the Palestinian national poet Mahmoud Darwish in his famous poem, “The Earth Presses Against Us.” “Where should we go after the last border? Where should birds fly after the last sky?” he asked. BDS may not be a panacea, but it at least ensures that for the Palestinians a horizon darkened by occupation can be extended until a just solution comes into view.

Should Macy Gray perform in Tel Aviv? Ask Said Amireh of occupied Ni’lin

I put this question to my friend Said Amireh, a 19-year-old resident of the occupied West Bank town of Ni’lin. He said he’d like to see her perform in Tel Aviv, but he can’t. Why? Because his town is imprisoned behind the Israeli segregation wall. Meanwhile, the residents of the illegal Jews-only settlement of Hashmonaim who live just meters away, on the other side of the wall, travel to and from Tel Aviv on special bypass roads, and have annexed thousands of dunams of Ni’lin’s land.

Said is a participant in Ni’lin’s weekly unarmed demonstrations against the wall (see what it’s like here). Since the town rose up, the Israeli army has killed four of its residents, while injuring and jailing hundreds of others. Said was jailed for four and half months, then had to drop out of school and go to work when his father, Ibrahim, was imprisoned under specious charges of “incitement.” I attended one of Ibrahim’s trials in the Israeli military court at Ofer, and watched a military prosecutor and military judge railroad him despite scant evidence that he had committed any crime beyond organizing unarmed resistance against his dispossession.

“When I try to work my land,” Ibrahim Amireh said at the conclusion of the trial, “the Occupation comes and takes it away. When I try to resist them taking it away, the Occupation arrests me and puts me in jail. What else can I do?”

The South African Artists Against Apartheid has issued a letter to Macy Gray demanding that she take into account the voices of people living under occupation like Said and reconsider her trip to Tel Aviv:

We are writing to you to encourage you to reconsider performing in Israel. You might wonder what purpose refusing to perform in Israel (in line with the cultural boycott call) might serve? As a people whose parents and grandparents suffered under (and resisted) Apartheid in South Africa, our history is testament to the value and legitimacy that the international boycott had in bringing to an end the Apartheid regime in our country. When artists and sportspeople began refusing to perform in South Africa, the world’s eyes turned to the injustices that were happening here to people of colour. This then created a wave of pressure on politicians and world leaders representing their constituencies, to insist on a regime-change – this contributed to a free, democratic and non-racial South Africa.

Inspired by the boycott of Apartheid South Africa, Palestinians have called for a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign of Israel. As you are aware, this call has been actively supported by some Israelis as well. The aim of the campaign is not to target Israeli civilians, but to draw attention to the unjust acts that the Israeli state commits on a daily basis in their name.

The belief that cultural activities are “apolitical” is simply a myth. Artists have greater followings than politicians do; millions of people admire them and look to them as role models. They have a moral obligation to stand up against injustice all over the world. By performing in a country whose government systematically makes life unbearable for a targeted group of people is to ignore all sense of justice and morality and creates the impression that “it’s none of my business, I’m just here to entertain”…

News from Chelm: Knesset discusses ways to pressure performers not to cancel concerts in Israel

Today in Knesset, Ronit Tirosh of Kadima (the opposition party that almost never opposes racist and anti-democratic legislation, and often sponsors it) convened a discussion in the Commitee on Education, Culture and Sport about compelling reluctant pop stars to perform in Israel. The legislators were joined by Shuki Weiss, a big time Israeli concert promoter who has lost thousands from last minute cancellations by artists like Elvis Costello. “The state must intervene,” Weiss said, according to Achbar Ha’ir, an Israeli arts and culture publication (I am summarizing the Hebrew article).

So what sort of intervention did the committee propose? First, Tirosh raised the idea of compensating promoters like Weiss for their losses with some form of state supervision or insurance. This is wonderful idea, but only if you are pro-BDS. One of the key argument against BDS hinges on the specious idea that the boycott targets innocent Israeli citizens. Why should we punish Israelis for their government? anti-BDS people argue, assuming that somehow the people didn’t elect their government and don’t participate in maintaining the Occupation. But if the Israeli government doles out money to wealthy promoters to cover their losses (while the Finance and Housing Ministries bilk, exploit and evict tens of thousands of working class Jewish families — and you won’t hear about their plight from the Z Word or other hasbarist blogs) the cultural boycott becomes a direct means of targeting the state.

The only other idea that Tirosh and the committee could come up with was to do hasbara, or officially sanctioned propaganda, on Facebook and social media sites to encourage artists to make good on their plans to perform in Israel. This seems to be Israel’s answer to all its problems, as though commercials filled with bikini-clad girls on Tel Aviv beaches can distract from or paper over the crimes those same girls commit while in IDF uniform.

Of course, if Israel wanted to improve its international reputation, it could give unlimited permits to Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza to attend concerts in Israel. Why are illegal Jewish settlers from Hashmonaim able to see Macy Gray perform in Tel Aviv while my friend Said Amireh, a 19-year-old from the Palestinian who lives a few hundred meters away in Nilin, imprisoned behind a giant wall, can not? The answer is that the state is built on a foundation of discrimination. Because it does not intend to change, it must prepare for worldwide castigation.

Weiss went on to predict that things will get worse for Israel, especially in the age of social media-inspired revolutions in the Arab world like the one in Egypt. On this point, he is completely correct. The Dizengoff Command Band’s semi-satirical hit from Israeli in 1970, “The Whole World is Against Us,” has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.