The Police, the Zionist and the Crawler

by David Landy

Five years ago, the Israeli embassy in Ireland tried to hold a cultural event in Dublin city centre. They bought over the Israeli writer, AB Yehoshua to the Irish Writer’s Centre on Parnell Square. On a balmy June evening, we held a noisy, peaceful protest, reading from Yehoshua’s writings – the one where he looks forward to a ‘purifying war’ on Palestinians in Gaza and advocates collective punishment. We also read – loudly – from the works of two Palestinian poets – Ghassan Zaqtan and Zacharia Mohammad - who Israel had prevented from coming to Ireland when they were booked to read their works in the Irish Writers Centre. We were, as the police said, entitled to protest.

Last night, the Israeli embassy held another cultural event in Dublin City centre, a film festival in Filmbase, in Temple Bar. Naturally, we held a similar protest. It was a larger protest, but equally good-natured – although this time it was in the rain and cold. The only real difference was the attitude of the police. As our press release describes it:

A protest outside the Israeli Embassy sponsored “Israeli Film Days” in Temple Bar turned acrimonious this evening when Gardai broke up a peaceful demonstration by pro-Palestinian activists outside the venue. Citing Section 21 of the Public Order Act, Gardai forcibly removed around sixty activists from the area outside the venue, Filmbase, on Curved Street in Temple Bar, while others were removed from inside the venue.

Prior to the removal, the protestors had gathered to chant slogans and hand out leaflets explaining why they were opposed to the event. Between 5.30 and 6.40pm the activists held a loud, colourful, vibrant and entirely peaceful protest outside. By this time the majority of those attending the event had entered without incident – including the Tanaiste and Foreign Minister, Eamon Gilmore, and Justice Minister Alan Shatter, and it was at this time – after everyone inside had gone downstairs into the cinema area - that Gardai began to forcibly remove the protest from the street. After being forced off Curved Street, the protest found itself split into two crowds, on Temple Lane Street and Eustace Street.”

More information about the police shutting down our peaceful protest can be found here: http://www.ipsc.ie/press-releases/gardai-break-up-peaceful-protest-outside-israeli-embassy-sponsored-film-festival

Why did the police take such radically different approaches to such similar Palestinian solidarity actions? The immediate answer isn’t hard to find – we have a new Justice Minister, Alan Shatter. He is an Irish Jew and a staunch Zionist, and has always considered that his remit involves representing Israel in Ireland.

I have seen police clear a street of protesters before, but never with such lack of enthusiasm. They knew that this was an operationally stupid decision which only prolonged and intensified the protest. They were aware that we had actually been on the point of leaving. But orders is orders is orders and clearly our presence had become embarrassing to our Justice Minister in the presence of his Israeli friends. After all, they wouldn’t stand for that type of nonsense in Israel. So the rabble was cleared from the street.

However, Alan Shatter was not the only Irish Minister inside the Israeli festival of propaganda. Shamefully, near-unbelievably, our Foreign Minister, Eamon Gilmore, leader of the Labour party (and formerly from the Workers Party) was also present. This was despite the fact that a scant fortnight before, 14 Irish citizens, including two elected representatives had been attacked in international waters by Israeli commandos and dragged to an Israeli prison. After the Filmbase protest, there was a public meeting where these flotilla participants talked of their abuse by the Israelis. They also told of how Irish embassy staff who tried to ensure their release were lied to and treated badly by the Israeli officials. Evidently Eamon Gilmore isn’t concerned about Palestinians, but one would have thought that national pride would have led to him staying away from this Israeli event.

It’s awkward to bring up issues like national pride and national sovereignty without endorsing some kind of bigoted and small-minded nationalism. But the erosion of Irish national sovereignty over the last year is important, whether it is the IMF control of our economy, or the kowtowing to European banks. It is akin to the erosion of Greek sovereignty, which led to them impounding the Freedom Flotilla.


Our government protests that Ireland is not like Greece, but only in that we are good subjects that will abide by whatever rules the German and French governments and banks set us, not like those feckless Greeks. These days in Ireland it feels like the old colonised attitudes never really went away. That our elites were just waiting for the time to doff their caps to new masters. This more-or-less willing handover of vestiges of national sovereignty has had the knock-on effect that the government is less willing to risk offending anyone perceived as powerful. When Israeli officials called Ireland the most anti-Israel place in Europe and blamed our docile little government for this shocking state of affairs, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4149059,00.htmlsmall wonder that our Minister for Foreign Affairs crawled to Temple Bar to placate them and to appear at this festival of Israeli hasbara.

So now we have a toadying Minister for Foreign Affairs, a Zionist Minster for Justice.

This augers a sea-change in our government’s attitude to Palestine and Palestinian solidarity. First there is change in the police’s attitude - from easy tolerance to degrees of repression. More importantly, it speaks of a change in our government’s practice of at least voicing concern about the repression of Palestinian (while admittedly doing nothing), to a position indistinguishable from other European governments.

This change is not all bad – it indicates that Palestinian solidarity in this country and internationally is seen as a force to be taken seriously and combated rather than humoured. It shows how our actions, the events like the flotilla and the ongoing international boycott campaign, are starting to disrupt the normal flows of state and economic power.

For the growing governmental drift to Israel is taking place at a time when solidarity with Palestine in this country has never been stronger. It is one more indication of the widening divide between people and politicians in this country.

In the meantime, we can be happy that this protest turned out to be such a success. Our aim was to politicise Israel’s use of culture to whitewash their crimes. For the price of a few small bruises, we succeeded beyond all our expectations. We are confident that there will be a good, determined turnout for our protest this evening and Saturday and Sunday. For this, the police, the Zionist and the Crawler are to be thanked.

Book Launch: You're all invited

My book is out on the streets, and the book launch is next Tuesday - October 25th in SOAS (not the main campus). Anyone in London is invited along where I'll be discussing the book with the audience, and especially with Richard Kuper, the former head of JfJfP. All the info is below

Looking forward to seeing you there!

Jews for Justice for Palestinians

SOAS Palestine Society

London Middle East Institute

invite you to the book launch of

Jewish Identity and Palestinian Rights

Diaspora Jewish Opposition to Israel

David Landy in conversation with

Richard Kuper, former Chair of JfJfP

Tuesday, October 25, 7pm

V211, School of Oriental and African Studies

Vernon Square, Penton Rise, London WC1X 9EW

Diaspora Jews are increasingly likely to criticise Israel and support Palestinian rights. In most Western societies, Jewish organisations have sprung up to oppose Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, facing harsh criticism from fellow Jews for their actions.

Jewish Identity and Palestinian Rights is a groundbreaking study of this growing worldwide social movement, examining how it challenges traditional Jewish representations of itself. It looks at why people join this movement; and questions how they relate to the Palestinians and their struggle.

About the Author

David Landy is an Irish-Jewish academic, active in the Palestine solidarity movement. Formerly chair and currently national organiser of the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign, he is based in Dublin where he lectures sociology in Trinity College Dublin.

www.jfjfp.com / www.soaspalsoc.org / www.lmei.soas.ac.uk

Irish Republic blocks US arms to Israel

Ha'aretz has really come into its own given a near total blackout on reports in the UK media regarding Wikileaks reports involving the State of Israel.  Many of the reports have been on the Ha'aretz site for a few days now.  This one on Ireland blocking American arms transfers to Israel via Ireland's Shannon Airport shows how public opinion can have an impact.

The Irish government has acted to limit transfers of American weapons to Israel and Iraq through Shannon Airport in the wake of public outrage after the Second Lebanon War, an American diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks reveals.

The blocking of such transfers could even cost the Irish economy:

A cable sent in 2006 by the U.S. ambassador to Ireland at the time, James C. Kenny, discloses that the deputy head of mission warned Irish officials that the United States would begin using other European airports. Such a move could cost the Irish economy tens of millions of dollars.

But politics sometimes trumps economics:

According to the [US] ambassador, "Segments of the Irish public ... see the airport as a symbol of Irish complicity in perceived U.S. wrongdoing in the Gulf/Middle East." He said the Irish government "has recently introduced more cumbersome notification requirements for equipment-related transits in the wake of the Lebanon conflict."

The ambassador noted that the Irish foreign office protested to him that in February 2006, Apache helicopters were sent to Israel via Ireland without the local authorities being appropriately informed.

The ambassador wrote that senior Irish officials told him informally that if the United States made further mistakes in its conduct at the airport, the matter could become a central issue in Ireland's 2007 elections.

Imagine, arms to Israel becoming an issue in the elections of a western state....

Flotillas to Gaza. The Opportunity Costs

Around the time of the last flotilla – the massacred one – Richard Irvine had an interesting article in the Guardian. Richard (personal interest disclosure: he’s also from Ireland) was pointing out the similarities between the Mavi Marmara and The Exodus. The latter was the ship taking Jewish refugees to Palestine in 1947; it provoked international outrage when British forces boarded it, killing several passengers and preventing it from reaching Palestine.

While the comparison was clever and the article interesting, what struck me forcefully were the differences between the two ships. At its most basic, there were Jews on The Exodus. With a few exceptions, there were no Palestinians on the Mavi Marmara or any other ship on the flotilla. The Exodus served as an example of Jews doing things for themselves – liberating themselves from the Displaced Person’s camps in Europe – this is what gave the story its power. The Mavi Marmara and Freedom Flotilla is an example of other people doing things for Palestinians. As a story, it pushes Palestinians to the margins.

This is not meant to be a criticism of the flotilla tactic, but rather a reflection on its opportunity costs. All tactics come with these opportunity costs, these paths closed off, resources spent that could have be used elsewhere. Nothing - no political action anyway - is perfect. But that’s not to stop us trying to make them more perfect.

But before looking at these costs and weaknesses, we need to recognise that the flotillas have probably been the most successful tactic used to promote Palestine solidarity. As a way of demonstrating and creating international solidarity with Palestine it is unparalleled. As a means of reaching out to the public in our home countries and giving them a way of getting involved, it has surpassed anything else we’ve done. For instance in Ireland, thousands donated their fivers and tenners for bags of cement to Gaza and once this was done, these people were invested in the convoy; they were part of Palestine solidarity in an immediate and (sorry for the pun) concrete way. Connected in a way they hadn’t been before. And while comparisons with Sharpeville (or more extremely with 9/11) may be overstated, the flotillas have made the world aware as never before, of the brutality and random cruelty of the Israeli regime. Israel, unlike South Africa, has been able to get away with killing schoolchildren. But killing (non-Palestinian) aid activists was a step too far, too much for the rest of the world to stomach.

Yet things have been lost. One of the prime things cast overboard in the stories about the flotilla has been the agency of Palestinians. The stories are all about the activists and the aid. This, after all, is what made them easier to sell to the media. At the most cynical, there was the shock factor that Israel has descended to killing and brutalising white(ish) people, not just Arabs, Palestinians. But one does not need to be cynical – in Ireland the last flotilla was about ‘area man’, people from Cork, Donegal, somewhere nearby. It’s easy to get our media to write up stories about our generosity and our actions, be it a group of nurses raising money for medicines or retired bus-drivers on a sponsored run for the flotilla. This is all good. It makes solidarity much more immediate, more real for people than stories about foreigners in a far away land once again doing unspeakable things to each other.

But where are the Palestinians in these stories? They are indistinct, the object of aid, the victims of oppression. They are not seen as agents capable of liberating themselves, but passively awaiting our aid, our bravery. Not actors in this drama but once again assigned the role of spectators to their own history. Activists may be empowered by the flotilla story, but does this correspondingly disempower Palestinians? Perhaps not; the stories Irish or British people tell themselves so as to get involved in solidarity activism aren’t necessarily listened to by Palestinians. They have their own narrativws of action.

And yet… the mantle of despair and victimhood placed over Palestinians must have some effect. This is something solidarity activists are aware of. Speaking from experience, the Irish flotilla people were trying to assign agency to Palestinians, stressing the point of view of Gazans, how Palestinians are trying to break the siege, how they want the borders to be opened so the can be self-reliant, not recipients of aid. But actions speak louder than words and the flotilla tactic remains an action in which Palestinians are largely absent.

We can ask then whether this tactic builds Palestinian capacity to resist, or control of their own struggle. Long-term the hope is that it will - it will help end the siege, enabling Palestinians to have more control over their own futures. But asking the question more specifically: does the process of building the flotilla build Palestinian capacity inside the Occupied Territories? Also does it build specifically Palestinian diaspora activism and capacity the same way it builds other international solidarity activism? Should we be worried if it doesn’t? Considering that it is Palestinian struggle that will win freedom for Palestine, with international solidarity activism simply playing an ancillary role – I’d say yes, definitely.

Relating the flotilla tactic to domestic solidarity activism offers a useful pointer. There is a second opportunity cost to flotillas – the costs to international solidarity organisations to raise millions, only to have the millions captured by Israel. This is simply part of the cost of organising around sending people to Gaza, rather than around domestic activism. Groups like the ISM and EAPPI have been dealing with this quandary for years now. They recognise that Palestinians are pretty clear about what they want – it’s not so much for international activists to act as heroes in Israel/Palestine as for them to get involved in home country work when they return. These two groups stress this point, and in Ireland at any rate, so does the Free Gaza Movement, creating a good balance between flotilla work and domestic activism.

I can only speak for the Irish experience, but speaking for it, the flotilla organisers and participants have done a brilliant job in promoting and getting involved in Palestine solidarity work in this country. They have met ministers and local politicians, done press conferences and interviews, and have spoken up and down the country encouraging people to get active in solidarity work and to boycott, boycott, boycott Israel. This is aside from their work in trying to get another flotilla up and running. They have kept to an exhausting schedule upon returning, when it would have been much easier to lie back and recover from the trauma and craziness of the flotilla. They deserve the highest of praise for this. So, while there are undoubtedly some who would fetishise the flotilla, the majority of organisers and participants here most certainly do not, and conscientiously and deliberately promote domestic activism.

And so rephrasing the rather rhetorical questions I made above, can the same balance be made with respect to conscientiously and deliberately promoting Palestinian activities in the Occupied Territories and diaspora? It’s a difficult one to answer, but should be addressed. How about – even symbolically, getting the ships to take back something from Palestinians in Gaza – symbols of future exports from Gaza? Or ensure that there are Gazans on the organising committee, in constant contact with Western journalists. Or alternatively, using the flotilla to push and expand Palestinian diaspora political activism. After all, if we’re making comparisons with the Exodus, how about a boat with Palestinian exiles sailing to Gaza (They’d need to be citizens of other countries, so Israel’s brutality will hopefully be restrained).

To end: Of course there are some shortcomings in the flotilla tactic. But they’re not insurmountable. It should be possible to think of imaginative ways to overcome any weaknesses in what has already proved to be an imaginative, motivating and above all, effective tactic.

More fallout over forged passports

Small but significant piece of news about the incremental distancing from Israel that is happening in Europe. The Irish government reaction to the forging of passports to kill a Hamas politician in Dubai had been fairly disappointing - the expulsion of a low-level diplomat on a heavy news day. However, this is more significant - the EU commission was proposing that member countries be allowed to transfer their citizens' data to Israel. Ireland objected, citing the forging of passports as reason not to trust Israel. So now the issue will be debated by an EU committee.

This is no spectacular victory, rather its a slow dawning among certain sections of the ruling classes in Europe that there's something a bit fishy about Israel. But perhaps this vague apprehension that they are not 'one of us' will mean that in the future there'll be less resistance to Palestine solidarity work and to Palestinian demands. Eventually anyway.

IPSC welcomes Irish Government move to block transfer of EU citizen data to Israel
Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign

Press Release, Thursday 8th July 2010, 6.30pm

The Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign (IPSC) today welcomed the move by Irish Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern to block a proposed European Commission data-sharing plan with Israel. If adopted the proposal would have given the green light to EU member states to allow the transfer to and storage of sensitive personal data on European citizens to Israel.

The European Commission proposal was for EU member states to give a green-light to a declaration that the EU recognises Israeli data protection standards as being sufficient to allow member states to transfer sensitive personal data to Israel. Without such a declaration, the transfer of sensitive personal data to Israel is illegal. As a result of the Irish objection, the move will now have to be debated in an EU committee that deals with protection of personal data.

Speaking about the government’s objections to such a declaration, Minister Ahern’s office said: “It may well be the case that Israel provides data protections which meet EU standards, [but] the Minister believes the EU committee has to take very serious account of the forgery of EU passports – including Irish ones – by Israel in recent months. Personal data provided innocently to Israeli officials by Irish citizens was used in forging passports. [This] is a matter of the gravest concern.”

Freda Hughes, Chairperson of the IPSC, today said: “The IPSC welcomes Minister Ahern’s intervention to stop this process. The Israeli state has been routinely committing crimes against the Palestinian people for decades and the EU should not be taking steps to normalise this abusive behaviour by a rogue state. Furthermore, the very idea that EU citizens private data would be provided to Israel after the passport abuse in the Dubai murder is absurd. Israel’s actions have, time and again, proven that it is not a ‘normal’ state and should not be treated as such.”

Ms Hughes concluded with a call to the Irish government: “We understand that this important issue will be discussed at a future meeting of a special data protection committee. We encourage the Irish government to maintain the strong line they have already taken on this issue and refuse to allow Israel access to sensitive data on EU citizens. To allow such a move would leave millions of people open to state-sponsored identity theft of the kind we witnessed in Dubai last January, and indeed would be a tacit acceptance the legitimacy of the such acts of state terrorism carried out by Israel.”

ENDS

"The obnoxious phenomenon that is zionism"

I like that. It's a completely fraudulent headline though because this post was intended to just be about Gerry Adams visiting Palestine. The basic story is that the President of Sinn Fein, Gerry Adams, went to Palestine but was forbidden from entering Gaza because Israel didn't want him to meet with any Hamas people, which would be a bit difficult if he was in Gaza since Israel clearly considers every Gaza man, woman and child to be Hamas. But anyway, what do you when this happens? Turn to serial fantasist, Tony Blair, who as Quartet envoy to the Arab-Israeli peace process has ever such a lot of time on his hands. So there we have it, in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Ha'aretz, the Jerusalem Post and lots of other papers too, Mr Adams goes to Gaza and meets Hamas leader thanks to Tony Blair.


So why the headline? It's a quote that one of the Jerusalem Post's (at the time of writing) three reports attributes to an unnamed Sinn Feiner in an article written, it seems, by an Irish chap, Sean Gannon, who appears to be guesting at the Post and who doesn't seem to have a whole lot of time for the Irish republican movement:

MAINSTREAM Republican support for the Palestinians has been purely political since the official end of the IRA's war in 2005. Although he presides over a Sinn Fein which remains bitterly hostile to what it once termed "the obnoxious phenomenon that is Zionism," Adams, as an international peacemaker manqué, personally adopts a relatively moderate tone, leaving it to his international affairs spokesman, Aengus O'Snodaigh, to articulate the party's official positions. For example, in June 2006, O'Snodaigh described Israel as "without doubt one of the most abhorrent and despicable regimes on the planet." Two months later he claimed that the Second Lebanon War was the result of "continued Israeli aggression, expansion and occupation in the region" and called for UNIFIL's deployment on the Israeli side of the Blue Line. During Operation Cast Lead he demanded the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador to Ireland and compared him to Josef Goebbels.

I've said before that I often don't read articles in full before posting on them and this is a typical one. The article is actually quite lengthy and gets into a whole load of stuff about historical IRA and Sinn Fein figures who were antisemitic or who were associates or members of antisemitic organisations. So let's just take a look at the first instance, though it is a longer article than I first realised. Following the paragraph I pasted above, Gannon details some of Sinn Fein's expressions of hostility to Israel:

Sinn Fein repeatedly calls for the suspension of the EU's preferential trading agreement with the Israeli "rogue state" on the grounds of its "horrific crimes against humanity" and, in February, Adams himself launched the Irish Congress of Trade Unions' "Israel/Palestine Report" in Northern Ireland's parliament buildings, which calls for an economic, political and cultural boycott/divestment/sanctions campaign against Israel.




Republicans are also prominently involved in non-party anti-Israel activism, particularly in the Belfast branch of the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, where Sinn Fein cadres work alongside convicted IRA terrorists and members of dissident groups such as Eirigi.

I'd better point out here that Eirigi isn't dissident republican in the sense of supporting armed struggle. It opposes the Good Friday Agreement but supports cessation of violence, I think. Go check if you're interested.

Anyway, this is a lead in to what looks like a promising passage that suggests a difference between condemnation of Israel on the one hand and antisemitism on the other. But then look:

THE STRIDENCY of Irish Republicanism's anti-Israel campaign has, unsurprisingly, given rise to accusations of anti-Semitism.

I like that "unsurprisingly". It looks like "yawn yawn, yet another bogus allegation of antisemitism" but then:

Certainly, the movement is tainted with an anti-Semitic past. Arthur Griffith, who founded the original Sinn Fein movement in 1905, used the pages of his newspaper to rail against "Jew Swindledom" (9/10ths of all Jews were, he proclaimed, "usurers and parasites") and the Dreyfusards. While similar prejudices were commonplace in all the political parties which descended from his organization, only the eponymous rump which remained after the splits of 1921 and 1926 habitually preached Jew-hatred, culminating in a demand for an Irish-German alliance in 1939.

Now is he saying that there was just one party bearing the standard of antisemitism by the time Sinn Fein had split into broadly three components? I know that the original Sinn Fein split into what we now know as Fine Gael, Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein, but the antisemitic tendency in the party was the bit that eventually became Fine Gael, the party most favoured by the UK and sometimes described as west British as opposed, yes opposed to, Irish.

Anyway, enough of this. I just think there's a bit of mischief going on in the article in trying to pin an antisemitic motive on to the support an anti-imperialist party like Sinn Fein might be expected to show for a fellow resistance movement.