NormanFinklenstIsrael-PaletinePart1.mp4

Dr. Norman Finkelstein Ph.D Lectures On Israeli-Palestine Conflict at Brown University, April 15th 2008.Part 1

Verbatim are made by Umar Badarsyah with a plausible editing by I Made Vira SAras 008 alah..

(minutes: 01.36) Thank you for coming out this evening and I look forward to a good discussion. The topic I wanted talk about this evening is one which the more I read on the topic the more it becomes compelling to me at anyway that the Israel-Palestine conflict is probably among the least complicated, least controversial in the world today.

(02.03) The consensus on the historical record, the consensus on the human rights record, the consensus on the legal diplomatic record basically the past, the present and the future is quite broad and one can almost say its remarkable.

(02.26) And now when I made an initial statement some people laugh because obviously its quieted odds with the perception of the conflict when we entered into the public arena. Where we were told how complex, how controversial, how intrigued this Israel- Palestine conflict is. And that a tough nut , it is to crack.

(02.55) I was on a way here, reading a new book by one of the negotiator at Camp David., a fellow named Aaron David Miller and he writes his account on the camp david negotiation in 2000 and basically the whole period of 1990s up to the present, and he goes at some great length about how complicated this question is, and how nobody would want to tackled it, but I don’t thing that’s what the record shows. The record shows that is not very complicated at all, and then the obvious question arises, if what I am saying is true and the burden on my remarks this evening is to demonstrate what I am saying is true. If what I am saying is true and how do you account for all the controversies that swirled around the Israel-Palestine conflict, when you enter the public arena. And the main argument I am going to make this evening is that most of that controversies is contrived, its artificial, its fake. And its designed, its purpose is, to divert people attentions from what the record actually shows. And to sold confusions about that record.

(04.21) Well let me begin with a fairly straight forward excess able and recent illustration. In July 2004, the highest judicial body in the world, the international court of justice it rendered a land marked advisory opinion on the wall that Israel is building in the occupied territories. Some of you who are familiar with the topic will perhaps know the conclusion the world court reached, namely that the wall Israel is building is illegal, it has to be dismantled and Israel has to pay compensations for the damages rot. In fact that was probably the least significant aspect of the world court advisory opinion. And the reason why, is this..

(05.22) For those of you who are familiar with the lingo of this thing called ‘the peace process’ …ahhh one aspect of this peace process is what’s called ‘the final status negotiations’ and that basically means those aspects of the Israel-Palestine conflict which are said to be so controversial, complex and intrigued that they have to be the furthered put off until the last stage of negotiations, because if you start with this issues the whole process will break down. So the usual sequences to claim, we first need confidence building measures, another catch phrase in this thing called the peace process, first we need confidence building measures, and then, we can proceed to those tough final status negotiations. Well it so happens that before the world court, the international court of justice could rule on the legality of the wall that Israel has been building, they first had to rule on nearly all the final status questions.

(06.47) The final status questions are usually said to consist of four:
1. Borders: what are the legitimate borders of the state of Israel, what would be the legitimate border of the Palestinian State;
2. Settlements, the status of the settlements that Israel is building in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
3. Jerussalem, the status of East Jerussalem; and number
4. The question of the refugees

(07.22) Well , it so happens at the world court had to rule on the first three questions: borders, settlements and Jerussalem , before it could rule on the legality of the wall that Israel is building, for reason which would be obvious to everybody in the audience. If the borders of Israel extended all the way into that West Bank, tentatively or factually then obviously the wall will be legal or tentatively legal. For reasons that every property owners in this room knows, if you have a quarrel with your neighbor, you are allowed to build a fence, or construct a fence along the border with your neighbor, but you obviously not allowed to build a fence around your neighbor’s swimming pool or garage.

(08.21) This on particularly complicate question of law and the same principle applies here ,so we have to first know where the border is, before we can determine the legality of the wall that’s being built, and the same principle applies to the settlements because as it happens this the wall that’s being built takes what the court calls a sinuous route that goes around the settlements. Well the settlements are legal? that’s fine! But if the settlements are the equivalent of your neighbor’s swimming pool ,well obviously question arise. And so the world court had to proceed to answer these questions.

(09.07) Allegedly and you are bare with me to the point of tedium, I hope, but because it keeps being said: “These questions are so controversial!”, they are so ‘complicated’. Well what did the World Court decide? Number one, on the question of borders, the International Court said, there is a fundamental principle of international law. It is stated in preamble paragraph of the Venice UN resolution 242 namely the inadmissibility of the Acquisition of Territory by War. Basic principle of international law said to be anchored in article 2 of the UN Charter. Therefore, Israel which conquered the West Bank and Gaza during the June 1967 War, it acquired them by war, therefore Israel has no title to them. Why??? (10.10)

(10.10) Why?? Because it is inadmissible to acquire a territory by war. And so the World Court rules Israel has no title to any territory outside it’s pre June 1967 border, and its very clear it refers to the West Bank and Gaza as Occupied Palestinian Territory, capital O, capital P, capital T and the abbreviation is usually OPT. I mentioned it only because It considered now a common place. If you open up any human rights report in the occupied territories, you would see everywhere they are referred to as Occupied Palestinian Territory parentheses OPT. It’s a non controversial question, they were acquired by Israel through war, Israel has no title to them, these are Occupied Palestinian Territory. They are not, as it often said in the public life, these are not disputed territories, these are Occupied Palestinian Territories, no dispute about the matter of ownership. I was reading today that Mr. Rumsfeld use to refer to them as the so called Occupied Palestinian Territories but it is not so called and it is not disputed says the World Court.

(11.45) Number two, the question of the settlements. The 460.000 settlers that Israel has transferred to the West Bank and previously to Gaza. What is their status under the international law? Again the World Court says. Its just not controversial. Article 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention states unambiguously or as lawyers like to say in plain language that is inadmissible for occupying power to transfer its population to occupied territory. And therefore the World Court says quoting UN Security Council’s Resolution that the settlements in the occupied territory constitute a flagrant violation of international law full stop.

(12.49) Number three, we’re often called in the matter of East Jerussalem is apart from the question of the refugees, the most complicated to resolve, and its true if you read the record of Camp David it is probably correct to say that the refugee quest..excuse me not the refugee quest.., the Jerussalem question was the toughest nut to crack. There was a huge amount of energy invested in trying to resolve that particular question, at the practical level! But legally there is no issue at all. How did Israel East Jerussalem? It acquired East Jerussalem exactly the same manner as It acquired the West Bank and Gaza. It acquired East Jerussalem in the course of a war, and under international law it is inadmissible to acquire territory by war. Therefore, Israel has no title to east Jerussalem. If you read the court decision It’s very explicit. It refers to the West Bank, including East jerussalem, and the Gaza Strip as Occupied Palestinian Territory, no dispute, no question, and no controversy, no complexity.

(14.16) Now, even that is really only part of the story. First of all World Court, international court decisions are often quite close, it work basically like our own Supreme Court, cases rise to the top so to speak, because they bare on controversial issues which are close, legally. That’s why they reach to Supreme Court. And as everyone in this room knows, Supreme Court decisions are often quite close as are world court decisions. So you take one that you would think is a no brainer. Let say 1996, positions for human right submit a question to the world court on the legality of nuclear war or the use of nuclear weapons, I think the technical term was the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons. Now the fundamental principle of the laws of war, as everyone in this room know is the principle of distinction between civilians and combatants. And then it seems to be pretty obvious that in so far as nuclear weapons are incapable of distinguishing between civilians and combatants by their nature ,they are indiscriminate weapons, in so far of incapable of distinguishing between civilians and combatants, you will think is obvious they are illegal under international law, their use. No, the World Court was on a very close vote and the vote was, the tight breaking vote was cast by the president of the court. So even when you would think something will be fairly straight forward, it was not! I don’t particulary agree with the decision of the court but it was actually a quite interesting decision and the dissents were, especially by the Judge Feromantry (aduh nama orang nih) were very interesting to read. Why do I mention it? Because when you come to the World Court advisory opinion, on this ‘Complicated Issue’ to which I just referred the vote wasn’t as close at all. It was fourteen to one. The one dissenting vote by the American judge Thomas Burgenthou to which I return to in a moment. It was not a close vote. These are not under international law, complicated questions.

(16.51) These are tenets , fundamental principles of international law which are being tested in the advisory opinion, or you can look at it from another angle. World Court decisions or opinions, when you take what’s called the majority opinion, the separate opinion, the decoration and the dissents, they can be a quite substantial. So I was reading the 1984 World Court opinion when Nikaragua went to the court because US was mining the harbors of Nikaragua, people of the previous generation will remember that. When you look at the full compendium, separate opinions, majority opinions, dissent and so forth it comes to a hefty thousands pages. And at one day in a past when I was a professor, I got to late at night when no one was around , printed out on my university printer now I cant do those things anymore unfortunately. They were quite hefty.

What interesting about this particular advisory opinions of the court, if you take all the opinions and you will find a lot of separate opinions. And Mr Burgenthou separate decoration. It comes to the left of a hundred pages. And it comes to the left of a hundred pages for a very simple reason: these are not complicated questions. Even you take the case of Judge Burgenthou himself. He doesn’t issue a dissent, in the nomenclature of the court, you can issue majority opinions, separate opinions, and then the dissent and in the middle is something called a declaration. The declaration being more neutral.
Even the American Judge, he was very cautious, he issues a declaration. Not a dissent! And in his declaration he begins by saying there is much in the majority opinions with which I agree. And then he goes on to look at what probably ‘the most not controversial but most critical question. Namely the issues of those settlements. Because where there’s no settlements there be no conflict. And Mr. Burgenthou says. Well Ia have to agree. Under article 49 those settlements are illegal. And he says if Israel is building the wall in order to protect the settlements, then he says, I am using his language, ipso facto the wall is illegal! And therefore what we find is an a most controversial question and of the most controversial of the controversial questions its fifteen to zero. There is no controversy what’s so ever. And then obviously raises again the obvious question. If what I am saying is true, how do we account for all of this alleged controversy swirling around the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Before I look at that I want to when the time allows me, which is obviously limited to go through the record on the three areas which are decestions of the area of the conflict. To put in nursery school’s language past, the present and the future.

So lets first look at the past, the history. I notice in this room there are some people who are roughly at my age cohort, I can detect them from their tidy shirts their love beads, that glaces over look in their eyes, still saying give peace a chance, still wishing they were Sony Bono with share. And for those who a hard can back to those wonderful days of the sixties which I not over. They will remember that probably the question in the historical record that used to generate the most controversy, the most dispute was how did those Palestinians become refugees in 1948?

(21.42)For those of you who are new to the topic, the background is very easy to sketch in November 1947 United Nation General Assembly decide to resolve this conflict in Palestine, we are going to divide it roughly in half between Jews and Arabs, immediately upon, the UN Resolution being passed, a conflict breaks out within Palestine by 9th May 1948 when Israel declared it statehood it becomes an inter-state conflicts with neighboring Arabs states. At the end of the war roughly 750.000 Palestinians find themselves outside their homes. And the question always arose: How did those 750.000 Palestinians, how did they end up refugees?

(22.40) And the standard argument that Israel put forward, as I said was probably widely believed up until roughly the late 1980’s, the argument was : that the Arabs Army stood poise on the border of Palestine ready to invade transmitted these radio messages broadcasted to the Palestinian in Palestine to leave their homes clear the field for the invading Arab Armies and after they successfully threw the Jews to the sea then the Palestinians would be able to return to their homes. How many people are familiar with that explanation of what happen in 1948?

(23.37) Well the other people must surely, because that’s the standard. And until the late 1980’s. As I said that was pretty much with everybody belief. And then in the late 80’s a number of Israeli historian in particularly but not exclusively Israeli historian start going trough the record from the Israeli archival point of view, and then main person who went through the record a fellow name Benny Maurice, and Benny Maurice concludes, to use his language not my own, that what happened in 1948 was an ethnic cleansing, and there is now you could say a broad consensus among historians that exactly that what happened in 1948 was the indigenous populations of Palestine and at any area that became Israel was ethnically cleansed.

(24.21) Now It’s not true to say no debate continues but the debate is now within fairly narrow parameters the debate now is was it ethnic cleansing premeditated intentional methodical or was it an accident of war? Everybody knows war generates refugees and maybe this refugees are simply a by product of a war. And to show you or to illustrate how narrow this debate has become. We take the case of Israel former Foreign Minister Sholomo Ben Ami a very smart guy, he is a historian by training and reasonably honest fellow for sure, he wrote couples of years ago a book called Scars of Wars Wounds of Piece part of which went through the history of the conflict and of course he has to address the refugee question and he says well, Ya it was an ethnic cleansing in 1948 but the former foreign minister says… I don’t really agree with Benny Maris, Maurice being one of the proponents of a notion that it was an accident of war, now says the former foreign minister I don’t not really agree with that, it was quite clearly premeditated intentional methodological as he puts it, it was anchored in the Zionist philosophy of transfer, transfer’s being the euphemism back then for explosion and so now you have the case of a former Foreign minister, incidentally not an ancient former foreign minister, he was the Israeli foreign minister in 2000 during the Camp David negotiations, even a former foreign minister and a trained historian acknowledges it was not just an ethnic cleansing but it was a premeditated ethnic cleansing anchored in the Zionist philosophy of transfer.

(26.24) a part from the question of the refugees, probably the question that loons largest or it’s most in the public eye, is the question of these wars that Israel has endured with its neighbors since it founding in 1948. And certainly it’s a large number of wars: 48, 56, 67, the Canal War, 68 to 70, 73,82, and the two intifadas.

(27.02) And the conventional wisdom is, as Israeli likes to say with a past of exception 1982 war, the war of Lebanon, this was wars of no choice. No choice wars. Aa well but that’s not the record any longer shows. You take the case of a very excellent book, I highly recommended it, I surely put it above my own. Aa by Zeef Maoz its called Defending The Holy Land, Maoz is a former director of Israel’s Jaavi Center of Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University. He is a very smart guy and obviously he held a prestigious position that’s the Israel most distinguish Center for Strategic Studies, and his written a very fat book it is probably around 800 pages. Its interesting and anyway to denigrate the book, I think the book is an excellent book, but just to put it in perspective, the book is mostly a synthesis of what all other scholars have written in the topic it’s a mostly a synthesis of that you call, in latin or scholarly language the monographic literature. He takes all and try to figure out ‘ok what is it all shown?’

(28.18) Obviously time doesn’t allow me to get through those 800 pages but it’s not without interest to just listen to his conclusions. So he says or concludes:’Israel war experience is a history of folly, recklessness, and self made traps. None of the wars, None, with a possible exception of the 1948 war of Israel independence, none was a war of necessity. They were all wars of choice or folly. The only possible exception he says and as I was actually interested, he qualifies it only possible exception is maybe 48. He goes on to say, Israel decision makers were as reluctant and risk averse when they came to making peace as they were daring and trigger happy when it came to making war! The official Israeli decision makers typically did not initiate peace overtures. Most of the peace initiatives in the Arab Israeli conflict came either from the Arab World or from the international community, or from grass root and informal channels. When Israel was willing to take risk for peace this usually paid off. The Arab generally showed a remarkable tendency for complaints with their treaty obligations. In quite of view cases It was Israel rather then the Arabs that violated formal and informal agreements. Again an opinion diametrically at odds with the conventional or mainstream wisdom 67 wasn’t a war of necessity, 73 the so called Yumkipur war not a war of necessity, the only possible exception is 48.

(30.39) Now bare in mind, under international law if it wasn’t a war of necessity which is defined very stringently a war of necessity is when you are the object of an armed attack article 51 of UN charter. In any other of case it’s a war of aggression. And even Mr. Maoz is clearing that. He says a war of choice is just the euphemism for a war of aggression. All of the wars with a possible exception of 48 says Mr Maoz were effectively wars of aggressions by Israel.

(31.27) Well, what about the present? Maybe the historical record has been clarified, because its historical. People had their chance to go through to the documentary record. But isn’t the present complicated? Its happening as, its unfolded as before our own eyes. And often when you read the newspapers you are told its very complicated.

(31.57) Occasionally I have this stomach if I could use the vulgarity, to look at the New York Times and this thing named Issabel Kurshner, she is their correspondent. And Mrs Kurshner is always misstated perplexity and confusion. She never knows what’s happening. So the last time Israel invaded Gaza. She says the Israeli say the majority of the fatalities were militants and the Palestinians say they were civilians. And the proverbial hands of flown in the air who knows who’s telling the truth?

(32.49) But in fact it’s not so difficult to who’s telling the truth all you have to do is do what’s done in every other conflicts. Namely what do reporters and journalists do. They go to the local human rights organization which has a track record of honesty and a track record of integrity and you asked them. So the very day that Mrs. Kurshner was throwing her hands in despair who knows who’s telling the truth, Beit Shelom the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories issues a press release say we went to each of the casualties and our conclusion the majority were civilians.

(33.47) Now it’s a very interesting question with this matter of the human rights record. Because on its surface as the lawyers like to say prima facie you would expect there are to be a lot of controversy, why?
Number one, human rights laws are relatively new body of international law and that means a lot of terms and concepts have not been really flesh out and defined. One for example every on in this room has heard namely the term human shield. But what a human shield actually means is not entirely clear. Because for example, let say a city is under attack, and the defending country puts artillery next to civilian buildings because they have no alternatives. It is after all a concentrate civilians area, a city .If its put an artillery, a piece of artillery next to civilian area. Is it using it as a human shield or not? It’s a very tough call and you’ll see different human rights organizations reaching different conclusions about the same situation. End of Part One (35.18)

Lessons from the Gaza Freedom March

Lessons from the Gaza Freedom March
By Joshua Brollier

Ditranslasikan secara bebas oleh Umar Badarsyah

Translasi ini sekedar manifestasi kecil dari pemaknaan pribadi atas jihad, Trilogi Jihad Pribadi: Anti-Korupsi, Palestina, dan Terus Belajar

Sumber: Palestinechronicle.com

When I traveled to Cairo to participate in the Gaza Freedom March, I hoped to enter Gaza to contribute toward ending the siege and preventing future air assaults and invasions, such as the 22-day Operation Cast Lead that Israel launched against Gaza at the close of 2008.

Ketika saya melakukan perjalanan ke Cairo untuk berpartisipasi dalam Gaza Freedom March, Saya berharap bisa masuk Gaza dan memberikan kontribusi dalam upaya mengakhiri pengepungan dan mencegah serangan-serangan udara dan invasi-invasi di masa yang akan datang,sepeti yang terjadi selama 22 hari Operasi Cast Lead penyerangan Israel terhadap Gaza di akhir tahun 2008.


I was also keenly looking forward to meeting a young Gazan who had greatly assisted my co-workers on a Voices delegation to Gaza during last year’s Operation Cast Lead. At considerable risk to himself, this young man met members of Voices at the border, arranged housing, translated, and assisted in bearing witness to the devastation caused by the Israeli military assault. Due to the callousness of the Egyptian authorities, I was not able to meet this man or deliver much needed material aid to his community. Early this morning, my co-workers and I received an email from our friend in Gaza, saying that the Israeli military is once again bombing near the Rafah border. One Palestinian was killed and others were injured. 

Saya juga bertekad untuk menjumpai seorang pemuda Gaza yang dengan luar biasa telah membantu rekan-rekan kerja saya yang tergabung dalam sebuah delegasi Voices ke Gaza saat Operasi Cast Lead berlangsung tahun lalu. Dengan resiko besar yang dihadapinya, pemuda ini menemui anggota-anggota Voices di perbatasan, mengatur penginapan, mentranslasi, dan membantu dalam memberi kesaksian  kehancuran yang diakibatkan oleh serangan militer Israel. Akibat sikap pemerintah Mesir yang tidak berperasaan, saya tidak bisa bertemu malik-laki ini atau mengirimkan banyak barang bantuan untuk komunitasnya. Pagi ini, saya dan rekan-rekan kerja menerima sebuah email dari teman kami di Gaza, mengatakan bahwa Israel sekali lagi melakukan pengeboman dekat perbatasan Rafah. Seorang warga Palestina tewas, dan beberapa lainnya terluka.


Given Israel’s continuing siege and bombardment of Gaza, I am eager to learn lessons from our experience in the Gaza Freedom March, regroup and continue in the struggle to end the siege and occupation. Here are several of the lessons which I think are most important to communicate to the wider U.S. public.

Mengingat pengepungan dan pengeboman Israel terhadap Gaza yang terus berlangsung, saya bermaksud untuk  mengambil banyak pelajaran dari pengalaman kita dalam Gaza Freedom March, untuk kembali berkonsolidasi, dan melanjutkan perjuangan menghentikan pengepungan dan pendudukan. Berikut adalah beberapa pelajaran yang saya pikir merupakan hal yang penting untuk dikomunikasikan kepada publik AS yang lebih luas.


The first is that the United States and Egyptian governments have been actively colluding with the Israeli government to maintain the siege of Gaza. All three are working together and they do not plan to stop imposing collective punishment on Gazans any time soon.  This punishment is carried out through forbidding Gazans to exchange goods or travel outside of Gaza. What’s more, all three governments are complicit in promulgating Israel’s greater program of apartheid and displacement of the Palestinians. The second lesson is that the worldwide movement in solidarity with Palestine is alive and growing. The movement is at a critical point where we must apply pressure on all three governments through a variety of nonviolent tactics.    

Pertama, bahwa pemerintah AS dan Mesir telah secara aktif berkolusi dengan pemerintah Israel untuk mempertahankan pengepungan di Gaza. Ketiganya bekerja sama dan mereka tidak berencana utnuk menghentikan hukuman kolektif terhadap penduduk Gaza kapan pun dalam waktu dekat. Hukuman ini dilakukan dengan melarang penduduk Gaza untuk jual beli barang atau melakukan perjalanan di luar Gaza. Lebih jauh lagi, ketiganya terlibat dalam program pembiaran/pemakluman program Apartheid Israel yang lebih besar dan perpindahan paksa para penduduk Palestina. Pelajaran kedua adalah bahwa gerakan solidaritas dunia atas Palestina hidup dan terus berkembang. Gerakan itu berada pada poin kritis dimana kita harus melakukan tekanan terhadap ketiga pemerintahan tersebut, melalui sejumlah taktik tanpa kekerasan.  


In reference to the complicity of the U.S., Israeli and Egyptian governments, I do not use the word apartheid lightly. I think this word sometimes polarizes people and causes them to self-censor information about the issue being discussed. That being said, I think that the broader international community nevertheless bears responsibility to recognize the plight of the Palestinian people and work to end Israel’s oppression. Throughout the Gaza Freedom March presence in Cairo, our sisters and brothers from the South African delegation dynamically articulated the connections between injuries that indigenous Africans suffered under the white supremacist regime in Pretoria and the inequalities that Palestinians now face at the hands of the Israeli government.

Ketika menunjuk pada keterlibatan pemerintah AS, Israel, dan Mesir, saya tidak menggunakan istilah Apartheid secara sembarangan. Saya pikir kata ini terkadang mempolarisasi orang dan menyebabkan mereka untuk menyaring (menolak) sendiri informasi tentang isu-isu yang sedang dibahas. Terlepas dari (polarisasi) itu, saya pikir komunitas internasional yang lebih luas bagaimanapun juga mengemban tanggung jawab untuk mengakui adanya penderitaan warga Palestina dan bekerja untuk mengakhiri penindasan Israel. Selama gerakan Gaza Freedom March berlangsung di Cairo, saudara-saudara dan saudari kami dari delegasi Afrika Selatan secara dinamik mengartikulasikan hubungan antara luka-luka yang dialami penduduk aseli Afrika yang menderita di bawah rezim supremasi kulit putih di Pretoria dengan  perlakuan tidak sama yang dialami oleh para penduduk Palestina saat ini, di bawah tangan pemerintahan Israel.


The delegation informed us that just as blacks in South Africa were forced to live in Bantustans and provide cheap labor for industry controlled by whites, so the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank are caged in smaller and smaller areas controlled by Israeli military checkpoints. The economic livelihood of the Palestinians is reliant upon free movement through these checkpoints and Israel often only grants access for Palestinians when it is financially useful for Israel. Similar to the situation in South Africa, Israel controls all the beneficial natural resources and siphons the productivity and profit of the resources away from the people of Palestine.       

Delegasi Afrika Selatan itu menginformasikan kepada kami bahwa sebagaimana terjadi terhadap orang-orang kulit hitam di Afrika Selatan yang dipaksa hidp di wilayah Bantustan, dan dipaksa menjadi pekerja murah bagi industry-industri yang dikontrol oleh orang-orang kulit putih, orang-orang Palestina di Gaza dan di Tepi Barat saat ini dikurung di area yang jauh lebih kecil yang dikontrol oleh pos-pos pemeriksaan militer Israel. Kehidupan ekonomi warga Palestina bergantung pada kebebasan bergerak dari pos-pos ini dan Israel seringkali hanya mengabulkan akses kepada orang-orang Palestina ketika itu berguna secara finansial bagi Israel. Sama halnya dengan yang situasi di Afrika Selatan, Israel mengendalikan semua sumber daya alam yang menguntungkan dan mengalirkan produktivitas dan keuntungan dari sumber-sumber itu jauh dari orang-orang Palestina.  


The state of Israel has not only exploited Palestinian labor, it has often attempted to forcibly relocate Palestinians in its quest to annex Palestinian lands. Palestinian resistance and international public opinion have thwarted Israel from successfully achieving its goal to appropriate all of Palestine. But given Israel’s persistent thrusts for expansion and defense of illegal settlements, most Palestinians doubt Israel’s commitment to an actual “peace process.”

Negara Israel tidak hanya mengeksploitasi pekerja Palestina, Israel sering melakukan relokasi paksa terhadap orang-orang Palestina dalam upayanya menganeksasi tanah-tanah mereka. Perlawanan Palestina dan opini publik internasional telah merintangi Israel dalam upayanya mencapai kesuksean mengambil seluruh Palestina. Namun, melihat upaya persisten Israel terhadap ekspansi dan mempertahankan pendudukan illegal, kebanyakan warga Palestina meragukan komitmen Israel terhadap sebuah proses perdamaian akan terwujud.


When analyzing the history of the conflict, The Israeli government’s practice of apartheid and displacement of Palestinians seems almost too sinister to be true. But to further understand the situation, U.S. citizens might look to an analogy from our own history. The indigenous people of North America were first considered by colonizers to have great potential as slaves, but when the Europeans realized that the Native American tribes were not easily subjugated, they moved swiftly into a national policy of relocation and, at times, annihilation. Our supposed national heroes like Andrew Jackson practiced ethnic cleansing with a belief that they acted in the name of God and country. When seen in this light, the ideologies of Manifest Destiny and Zionism look like two sides of the same coin. For the United States, the endless “peace process” of double-crossing treaties was not considered complete until the indigenous peoples were either banished to a reservation, safely out of sight and out of mind, or killed outright.

Ketika menganalisis sejarah konflik ini, parktek apartheid pemerintah Israel dan pemindahpaksaan warga Palestina nampak terlalu menyeramkan untuk jadi kenyataan. Namun untuk lebih memahami situasinya, para penduduk AS bisa melihat analogi dari sejarah kita sendiri. Para penduduk asli Amerika Utara pertama kali dipertimbangkan oleh para kolonialis memiliki potensi besar sebagai budak-budak, tetapi ketika orang-orang Eropa itu menyadari bahwa suku-suku aseli Amerika tidak mudah ditundukkan, mereka mengubah pendekatannya dengan kebijakan nasional relokasi dan, pada waktu itu, pemusnahan. Para pahlawan versi kita seperti Andrew Jackson mempraktikan pembersihan etnis dengan sebuah keyakinan bahwa mereka melakukan itu atas nama Tuhan dan Negara.


Many people who study and discuss issues related to Palestine are aware of the South African and North American analogies, but the general public in the United States doesn’t seem to notice that we are subsidizing these bloody policies with 3.5 billion dollars of military aid per year. Just last year, the Israeli government killed approximately 1,400 Palestinians in one campaign waged against Gaza, Operation Cast Lead, using weapons supplied by the United States. And according to the UN Humanitarian Monitor, food insecurity in Gaza this year has spiked to over 60 percent. So it’s likely that more Gazans have died as a result of the heightened blockade that has been imposed by Israel and Egypt since the attack. Now Egypt and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers are building a massive underground metal wall to prevent Palestinian access to tunnels under the Rafah border with Egypt, a last resort for importing much needed aid and commodities.

Banyak orang yang mempelajari dan mendiskusikan isu-isu Palestina menyadari analogi Afrika Selatan dan Amerika Utara ini, tapi publik umum di AS tampaknya tidak menyadari bahwa kita mensubsidi kebijakan-kebijakan berdaran ini dengan bantuan militer 3.5 juta dollar per tahun. Tahu nlalu saja, pemerintah Israel membunuh sekitar 1.400 orang Palestina dalam satu kali kampanye penyerangan atas Gaza, Operasi Cast Lead, menggunakan senjata-senjata yang pasok oleh AS.  Dan menurut Humanitarian Monitor PBB, ketidakamanan pangan di Gaza tahun ini meningkat hingga lebih dari 60%. Jadi tampaknya, lebih banyak penduduk Gaza yang meninggal sebagai hasil dari blockade yang meningkat yang telah dijalankan oleh Israel dan Mesir sejak penyerangan itu. Kini Korps Insinyur militer AS dan Mesir sedang membangun tembok metal bawah tanah yang massif untuk mencegah akses orang Palestina atas terowongan bawah tanah Rafah, perbatasan Mesir, sarana terakhir untuk mengimpor bantuan dan komoditas yang dibutuhkan.


The complicity of these major world powers became very clear to those of us who participated in the Gaza Freedom March. The Egyptian government, most certainly with an arm twisted by the Israeli and U.S. governments, did not welcome us into their country as they initially indicated they would. (Next to Israel, Egypt is the second largest recipient of US military aid. So maybe this factored into their decision.) Within one week of the March’s scheduled start date, Egyptian authorities notified us not to come.. When we arrived anyway, we were frequently detained. Our meetings were spied on and infiltrated. The vast majority of us were denied entry to Gaza. When we sought support at the U.S. Embassy, Egyptian police forcibly corralled us into a penned area outside the Embassy. U.S. officials in the embassy reiterated that we should not have come to march in solidarity with the Palestinians. When we decided to march in spite of this, we were met with riot cops, barricades and scores of secret police. Many of us were assaulted and a few suffered serious injuries.   

Kolusi kekuatan-kekuatan besar ini menjadi sangat jelas bagi kita yang berpartisipasi dalam gerakan Gaza Freedom March. Pemerintah Mesir, tentunya dengan lengan terpelintir oleh pemerintah Israel dan AS, tidak menyambut baik kedatangan kita masuk ke Negara itu sebagaimana niat baik mereka sebelumnya.  (Setelah Israel, Mesir adalah penerima bantuan militer AS kedua terbesar. Jadi barangkali factor ini yang menjadi dasar keputusan mereka) Seminggu sebelum tanggal dimulainya March (long march), otoritas Mesir memberitahukan kita untuk tidak dating. Ketika kami pada akhirnya tiba, kami kerap ditahan. Pertemuan-pertemuan kami dimata-matai atau diinfiltrasi. Mayoritas dari kami dilarang masuk ke Gaza. Ketika kami meminta dukungan kepada Kedutaan AS, polisi Mesir menggiring paksa kami ke area yang telah ditentukan di luar Kedutaan. Para petugas kedutaan menegaskan bahwa kami seharusnya tidak ikut dating ke march solidaritas bersama orang-orang Palestina. Ketika kami memutuskan ikut march terlepas larangan ini, kami bertemu dengan polisi huru-hara, barikade-barikade dan sejumlah polisi rahasia. Banyak dari kami mengalami penyerangan dan sejumlah orang mengalami luka serius.   


This treatment was only a small taste of the Palestinian experience. The daily suffering caused by the separation of Palestinian families was highlighted by the drama of having persons from the Palestinian Diaspora with us on the march. Because of the siege, many of these Palestinian marchers, now relocated to other countries, had been separated from their families for great lengths of time and others had not even been able to meet their relatives living in Palestine. It was heart wrenching to see

Perlakuan ini hanya sedikit rasa pengalaman yang dialami oleh orang Palestina. Penderitaan harian yang diakibatkan oleh pemisahan keluarga-keluarga Palestina digambarkan oleh orang-orang Palestina yang berdiaspora, yang ikut bersama kami dalam rombongan march. Karena pengepungan itu, banyak dari orang-orang Palestina yang ikut march ini, sekarang terelokasi ke Negara-negara lain, terpisah dari keluarga-keluarga mereka untuk sekian waktu yang sangat lama, dan beberapa bahkan tidak pernah bisa menjumpai kerabat mereka yang tinggal di Palestina. Hal  yang sangat memilukan untuk dilihat.


Additionally, Palestinian activists in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem risk indefinite incarceration for organizing non-violent demonstrations and resistance activities. Many are arrested on trumped charges, like Abdallah Abu Rahmah, an organizer for the “Stop the Wall” campaign. Abdallah has been incarcerated and charged with weapons possession for collecting used tear gas canisters shot at him by the Israeli Defense Forces during a peaceful protest. Many others like Mohammad Othman, have been held for months without charges being brought at all. Mohammad was arrested while returning from addressing the Norwegian national pension fund about divestment from Elbit Systems, a major Israeli military contractor. Beyond detentions, Palestinians regularly face extra-judicial killings from air strikes, similar to last night’s attacks near the Rafah border, carried out by the Israeli Air Force. 

Sebagai tambahan, para aktivis Palestina di Gaza, di Tepi Barat dan Jerusalem Timur menghadapi resiko penahanan ketika mengorganisasi demonstrasi dan perlawanan tanpa kekerasan. Banyak yang ditahan dengan dakwaan yang mengada-ada, seperti Abdallah Abu Rahmah, seorang pengelola kampanye Stop the Wall. Abdallah ditahan dan didakwa atas kepemilikan senjata untuk dikumpulkan, gas airmata ditembakkan kepadanya oleh Tentara Pertahanan Israel dalam sebuah aksi damai. Banyak yang lain, seperti Mohammad Othman, ditahan berbulan-bulan tanpa dakwaan sama sekali. Mohammad ditahan saat kembali setelah membahas dana pensiun nasional Norwegia tentang divestasi dari Elbit system, sebuah kontraktor besar militer Israel. Di luar penahanan, orang-orang Palestina secara rutin menghadapi pembunuhan di luar-peradilan dari serangan-serangan udara, sama dengan serangan malam tadi dekat perbatasan Rafah, yang dilakukan oleh Pasukan Udara Israel.


The Gaza Freedom March also gave us a sense of the Egyptian political experience. It’s quite farcical for the United States and Israel to talk of advancing human rights in the region when they are allied with Hosni Mubarack’s regime in Egypt. We witnessed first hand how the Egyptian government treats freedom of speech and assembly, especially when it comes to Egyptian citizens. Many Egyptian activists joined us in our demonstrations and they were singled out by plain-clothes police officers and forcefully made to leave. Often times they were followed home.

Gerakan Gaza Freedom March juga memberikan kami sebuah penginderaan terhadap pengalaman politik Mesir. Cukup menggelikan bagi Amerika Serikat dan Israel untuk membicarakan upaya memajukan hak asasi manusia di wilayah itu, ketika mereka berkongsi dengan rezim Hosni Mubarack di Mesir. Kami menyaksikan secara langsung bagaimana pemerintah Mesir memperlakukan kebebasan berserikat dan berbicara, khususnya terhadap penduduk Mesir sendiri. Banyak aktivis Mesir bergabung dengan kami dalam demo-demo kami dan mereka ditarik oleh para petugas polisi berpakaian sipil dan dipaksa untuk pergi. Sering kali mereka diikuti ketika pulang.


On one occasion, a young Egyptian-Palestinian woman was pulled out of our meeting by a senior officer who sent an undercover policeman after her. We formed a group to accompany her and made sure she made it home safely and without harassment. Every Egyptian activist I spoke with assured us if that had it not been for the international presence and attention around the Gaza Freedom March, they would have immediately been arrested, taken to a secured center and likely tortured for publicly demonstrating in support of Palestine. Still, Egyptians were eager to organize and wanted to hold meetings about how to further the movement. Much of the content of these clandestine meetings centered around forming a campaign of direct action to stop the underground wall being built between Egypt and Gaza. As a first step, international members of the march signed on as plaintiffs in a lawsuit with our Egyptian counterparts to challenge the legality of the underground wall.

Pada satu kesempatan, seorang perempuan muda berdarah campuran Mesir-Palestina (wow pasti cantik yaalah;)) ditarik dari pertemuan kami oleh petugas senior yang mengutus polisi menyamar untuk mengejarnya. Kami membentuk sebuah kelompok untuk menemaninya dan memastikan ia pulang dengan selamat tanpa mengalami pelecehan. Setiap aktivis Mesir yang berbicara dengan saya meyakinkan kami bahwa kalau bukan karena keberadaan masyarakat Internasional dan peratian seputar Gerakan Gaza Freedom March, mereka pasti sudah segera ditangkap, dibawa ke pusat pengamanan dan tentunya disiksa karena secara terang-terangan ikut berdemonstrasi mendukung Palestina. Tapi tetap saja, orang-orang Mesir mau mengelola dan mengadakan pertemuan-pertemuan seputar bagiamana melanjutkan gerakan ini. Sebagian besar konten dari  pertemuan ini berpusat di sekitar pembentukan sebuah kampanye aksi langsung untuk menghentikan pembangunan tembok bawah tanah yang sedang berlangsung di antara Mesir dan Gaza. Sebagai langkah pertama, anggota-anggota internasional dari gerakan pawai didaftarkan sebagai penggugat dalam sebuah gugatan bersama rekan-rekan aktivis Mesir kami, untuk menentang legalitas tembok bawah tanah tersebut.


With all the difficult decisions and unexpected frustrations surrounding the march, I was still very encouraged by the project. I found strength in Cairo among the marchers and the international movement they represented. The worldwide movement in solidarity with Palestinians is obviously alive and growing. Roughly 1300 delegates from 43 countries participated in the march, and those whom I met were some of the finest and most dedicated people I’ve come across. Not only that, I know the participants were only a fraction of the people from their communities concerned about Gaza who were not able to make it to the march. Each delegation brought its strengths. It was exciting to see the different organizing tactics employed, such as the French contingent’s decision to hold an encampment for nearly one week in front of their embassy.   

Dengan semua keputusan-keputusan yang sulit, dan sejumlah keadaan frustratif yang tak terduga mengelilingi gerakan pawai itu, saya masih sangat terdorong dengan proyek itu. Saya menemukan kekuatan di Cairo dari para anggota pawai dan gerakan internasional yang mereka wakili. Gerakan mendunia solidaritas terhadap Palestina ini, jelas hidup dan berkembang. Secara kasa terdapat 1.300 delegasi dari 43 negara yang ikut dalam pawai, dan mereka yang saya temui merupakan orang-orang terbaik dan paling berdedikasi yang pernah saya temui. Terlebih, saya tahu bahwa para partisipan ini hanyalah sebagian kecil dari anggota komunitas mereka yang juga sangat perhatian terhadap Gaza dan tidak bisa ikut dalam pawai. Tiap delegasi membawa kekuatannya sendiri. Sangat menarik melihat taktik-taktik organisasi berbeda yang digunakan, seperti kontingen PErancis yang memutuskan untuk membuat perkemahan nyaris seminggu di depan kedutaan mereka.


The Cairo declaration was formed and the South African group gave us insight to further focus the Boycott Divestment Sanctions Movement (BDS) through “campaigns to encourage divestment of trade union and other pension funds from companies directly implicated in the Occupation and/or the Israeli military industries.” They suggested very specifically targeting companies in our areas that both enable and profit from the occupation. For instance, Boeing, based in Chicago, exports Apache helicopters and F16 Eagle fighter planes to Israel that are regularly used in Israeli military operations in the Occupied Territories. Tactically, it makes a lot more senses to focus a campaign on Boeing than to randomly avoid an Israeli product at a supermarket, though you may want to do that too. 

Deklarasi Kairo terbentuk dan kelompok Afrika Selatan memberi kami wawasan untuk lebih memfokuskan Gerakan Boikot Sanksi divestasi (BDS) melalui "kampanye untuk mendorong divestasi serikat buruh dan dana pensiun lainnya dari perusahaan-perusahaan yang secara langsung terlibat dalam Pendudukan  dan / atau industry militer Israel. " Mereka menyarankan target-target perusahaan yang sangat spesifik di daerah kami yang melakukan baik upaya mendorong, dan mengambil keuntungan dari pendudukan. Sebagai contoh, perusahaan Boeing, yang berpusat di Chicago, mengekspor helicopter Apache dan pesawat-pesawat tempur Eagle F16 ke Israel, yang digunakan secara rutin dalam operasi-operasi militer Israel di daerah pendudukan. Secara taktis, ini membuat lebih banyak perhatian untuk memfokuskan kampanye memboikot Boeing daripada secara random menghindari produk Israel di supermarket, meskipun anda juga boleh/ mau melakukan itu juga.


This siege may not have been broken on December 31st, but this year started much differently for the people of Gaza when contrasted with the devastation of last year’s Operation Cast Lead. Organizers, activists and people in Gaza expressed their gratitude for the efforts of the Gaza Freedom March. International attention was focused on Gaza and there were solidarity marches all around the world. 

Pengepungan ini barangkali tidak berhasil dihentikan pada Desember 31, tapi tahun ini dimulai secara berbeda bagi orang-orang Gaza, jika dibandingkan dengan kehancuran yang dibawa oleh Operasi Cast Lead tahun lalu, banyak aktivis dan penduduk di Gaza menunjukkan rasa terima kasih mereka atas upaya-upaya yang dilakukan oleh Gaza Freedom March. Perhatian Internasional terfokus pada Gaza dan terdapat banyak aksi-aksi solidaritas di seluruh belahan dunia.


With this attention, the international community has reached a critical point to put pressure on the U.S, Egyptian and Israeli governments to stop the siege. Despite being embarrassed by the bad press, Egypt and the United States are going ahead with construction of the underground the wall. Furthermore, Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is threatening to launch more operations like Cast Lead. The attacks launched this morning lend ominous credibility to these threats. Our friend in Gaza has said in the past that he longs for a chance to live a normal life, unencumbered by siege and constant fear of bombings. He understandably believes that there is very little chance that his voice will be heard in the halls of powerful governing bodies. But we can and must join our voices with his. Our urgent task is to widely announce the Cairo Declaration’s call for BDS and to steadily build a stronger worldwide movement of non-violent direct action, inclusive of civil disobedience, to end the siege and occupation. 

Dengan perhatian ini, komunitas internasional telah mencapai titik kritis untuk membuat tekanan ke Pemerintah AS, Mesir dan Israel untuk menghentikan pengepungan. Meskipun dipermalukan oleh media, Mesir dan AS terus melanjutkan pembangunan tembok bawah tanah. Ditambah lagi, Perdana Menteri Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, mengancam untuk kembali melancarkan operasi seperti Cast Lead. Serangan yang berlangsung pagi ini, memberikan gambaran bahwa ancaman itu bukan omong kosong belaka. Teman kami di Gaza dulu pernah mengatakan bahwa dia merindukan kesempatan untuk menjalani hidup normal, tidak dihantui oleh pengepungan dan ketakutan konstan terhadap pemboman. Dia secara sadar percaya bahwa terdapat sedikit sekali kemungkinan suaranya akan didengar di aula pemerintahan-pemerintahan yang berkuasa. Tapi kita bisa dan harus ikut menyamakan suara dengan jeritannya. Tugas penting kita adalah untuk secara luas mengumumkan deklarasi Cairo untuk melakukan BDS dan secara stabil membangun gerakan mendunia dari aksi non-kekerasan langsung, pembangkangan sipil yang inklusif, demi mengakhiri pengepungan dan pendudukan.

- Joshua Brollier is a Co-Coordinator for Voices For Creative Non-Violence. He contributed this article to PalestineChronicle.com. Visit: www.vcnv.org.