Setting a dangerous precedent: 16-year-old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing

Three months ago today, in the early hours of March, 17 2013, Israeli soldiers appeared at 16-year- old Ali Shamlawi’s house in the West Bank village of Hares. They blindfolded him, handcuffed him and took him away. His arrest was one of a spate of arrests in March of this year which saw 19 boys, aged 16 and 17 years old, arrested for throwing stones which were alleged to have caused a traffic accident on Route 5, a large road which cuts through the West Bank to service illegal Israeli settlements.

Hares is a village of 4,000 people south of the city of Nablus in the West Bank. Illegal Israeli settlements – including Ariel, the second-largest settlement in the West Bank – have been built on agricultural land confiscated from Hares. The traffic accident in question occurred on March 14 when a car carrying a mother and her three daughters from Ariel crashed into the back of a truck on Route 5 near Hares, after the truck had braked suddenly. The youngest daughter was critically injured in the crash. The driver of the truck initially attributed the sudden breaking to a flat tire but later claimed he braked suddenly when stones hit his truck.

Locals who were at the scene of the accident moments after it occurred were interviewed by the International Women’s Peace Service (IWPS) and reported that they did not see any youth in the vicinity. However in the weeks since the accident, 61 witnesses from surrounding illegal settlements have come forward claiming their cars were also damaged by stones thrown by Palestinian youth from the side of the road. These settlers claim that Palestinian boys were 5-10 metres from the side of the road but these allegations have never been verified by the extensive CCTV footage in the area.

Since the initial arrests, 14 of the Palestinian boys have been released. However, five boys, including Ali Shamlawi, remain in prison three months later. Along with the other boys, Ali is being charged with 25 separate counts of attempted murder (one for each individual stone he allegedly threw) and is facing 25 years to life imprisonment.

Last Thursday on June 13th, Ali was in court again for his sixth hearing. Having applied to attend the hearing in advance, I was informed the night before that permission had not been granted because it would be a closed hearing – something all too common in Israeli military courts. Ali’s lawyers have since confirmed that at the hearing his detention was extended to July 25th in order for the defense team to be able to consider all evidence being used against him.

Along with the 61 “witnesses” mentioned above, the prosecution’s evidence consists of confessions from the boys. The lawyers and NGOs working on the case insist that these confessions were forced under extreme duress and are therefore inadmissible. 16-year-old Ali was held in solitary confinement for two weeks after his arrest and denied access to a lawyer for the first few days. He was interrogated for up to 20 hours at a time and beaten. Until last week, he was also denied visitation from his family. Ali’s lawyers submitted a complaint on May 15th about the circumstances of his interrogation and torture but are still waiting to hear back from the military police investigation.

Interviews carried out by IWPS with some of the boys already released by Israel show further mistreatment of children in custody. One of the 19 boys arrested was hospitalised after being beaten by interrogators, while another reports being kept alone in a small cell where bright lights shone continuously and being threatened with harm to him and his family. Indeed, such allegations come on the heels of a February 2013 report by UNICEF which firmly concluded that “the ill-treatment of children who come in contact with the [Israeli] military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalised throughout the process…”

It is not just the treatment of these children during interrogation that should raise questions. Despite being only 16 years old, Ali is being tried as an adult in Israeli military court; while illegal Israeli settlers in the West Bank are subject to Israeli civil law, Palestinians living in the same area are subject to strict Israeli military law. Under this law, Palestinian youth can be sentenced to up to 20 years in prison for throwing stones at vehicles. Twenty years in prison for throwing stones would be considered harsh in even some of the world’s strictest regimes, but this case sets an even more dangerous precedent: the Israeli courts are charging these five boys not with stone-throwing but with attempted murder.

If the sentence is passed, this case could set a legal precedent which would allow the Israeli military to try any Palestinian youth with attempted murder for incidents of stone-throwing. While the evidence against the boys is tenuous at best (and downright illegal at worst), statistics on conviction rates in Israeli military courts do not bode well for the boys. According to a 2010 internal IDFreport, the military court system used to try Palestinians has a 99.7% conviction rate (In 2010, that meant only 25 full acquittals out of 9,542 cases).These highly troubling statistics expose the discrimination inherent in the Israeli judicial system when compared with similar statistics on settler attacks on Palestinians. A 2011 UN OCHA report revealed that over 90% of monitored complaints of settler violence filed by Palestinians with the Israeli police were closed without indictment.

With conviction rates of almost 100%, allegations of torture against children, and systematic discrimination against Palestinians, it is high time that Israel is held to account for the violations of international law endemic to its military detention and judicial systems.

For now, Ali must wait until July 25th to appear in court again, not knowing whether he will spend the rest of his life behind bars. This case has until now received little media attention. But for those of us who respect due process and human rights, it is time to speak up.

Addameer, IWPS and Defence for Children International are working with Ali’s lawyers on this case.

By Katherine Flynn

tt plurk Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt buzz Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt delicious Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt digg Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt facebook micro3 Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt myspace Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt ping Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt reddit Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing tt su Setting a dangerous precedent: 16 year old Ali Shamlawi faces 25 counts of attempted murder for alleged stone throwing

Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student

ibraheem1 247x300 Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student

Ibrahim Sarhan, 21-year-old student who was killed by Israeli forces on July 13, 2011

Ibrahim Omar Sarhan, a 21-year-old student was killed in the early hours of July 13, 2011 in Al Far’a refugee camp nearNablus. The science student of An Najah University was shot by Israeli soldiers after leaving the local mosque at around 4:30am with his uncle. He died shortly after arriving at hospital less than an hour later.  Although the Israeli army has defended its actions stating that Ibrahim was injured during a “standard arrest procedure”, both the circumstances of his shooting death and Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law indicate that Ibrahim was yet another mortal victim of Israel’s unchecked and illegal violent assaults on Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories.

Al Far’a refugee camp, where Ibrahim was born and lived with his family, was established in 1948 after the creation ofIsraelwhen over 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from their homes and hundreds of Palestinian villages were depopulated and destroyed. The camp was inhabited by refugees fleeing from 80 different villages from the north coastal region and currently has a population of around 7,000 people.  UNRWA provides basic educational and health services to the residents.  Nonetheless, poverty is endemic with only 14% of the residents fully employed according to the camp officials.

Local sources report that Israeli soldiers enter the camp regularly, often for no apparent reason other than to provoke the residents.   However in the last three months, military incursions had been carried out quietly under the cover of night, with most residents unaware of their presence. On July 13, however, this was not the case.  Residents reported waking to the explosions of sound bombs and gun fire after Israeli forces entered the camp at around 3:00 a.m.  Residents as well as the Israeli army report that soldiers were met with stone-throwing carried out by local youth.  The Israeli army has additionally claimed that an “incendiary device” was thrown at the soldiers, a claim which has been refuted by residents in the camp, but that no soldiers were injured during the operation.

As was his daily routine, Ibrahim attended dawn prayers at his local mosque in the early morning of July 13.  After the prayer Ibrahim and his uncle made their way to meet Ibrahim’s father and mother who were to leave on a trip toMecca. Their route led them down a tight alley, where reportedly walking several metres apart; the pair encountered a group of Israeli soldiers. The pair is reported to have not become aware of Israeli military presence until one soldier shouted “stop” in Hebrew. Ibrahim’s uncle, who was walking approximately 5-7 meters in front of Ibrahim and was much closer to the soldiers, stopped and was consequently arrested. Ibrahim, however, fled, running back towards the mosque, and turning left at the next intersection. Israeli soldiers pursued Ibrahim and opened fire at him from the intersection he had turned at, firing at him from an approximate distance of 40 meters.   Ibrahim was reportedly not hit by this fire and continued to run up the street, but seconds later, Ibrahim was engaged by a second group of soldiers on the same street, who from a side street on his left opened fire from approximately 25 metres. One bullet pierced Ibrahim’s thigh, rupturing his femoral artery.

Blood 200x300 Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student

Blood stains on street where Ibrahim ran after first being shot

Ibrahim sprinted back up the street they had come from.  After running approximately 60 meters, Ibrahim collapsed in front of a house and began to lose consciousness due to the massive blood loss. Residents of the house attempted to assist Ibrahim but Israeli soldiers, who had continued to pursue Ibrahim, ordered them to stay inside. Some residents report that the soldiers opened fire to enforce these orders. After several minutes of this stand-off, residents dragged Ibrahim around the corner out of the range of gunfire and carried him into another house, where the mother of the second house attempted to provide basic first aid to stop the flow of blood.

Israeli soldiers, who had apparently followed the blood trail, entered the second house soon after.  Witnesses report that the soldiers pushed aside residents who were pleading with the soldiers to leave Ibrahim where he lay until the ambulance arrived. While Ibrahim lay in what residents of the home described as a “pool of blood,” witnesses report that Israeli soldiers treated Ibrahim by breaking the leg off of a stool and tying it to his injured leg. The soldiers then carried Ibrahim from the house to a nearby side street inaccessible to cars.

The Palestinian Red Crescent Society received a phone call from the camp at around 5:00am, requesting an ambulance for a man who had collapsed on the ground. The ambulance arrived at the house around 10 minutes after receiving the call.   Because Ibrahim had been moved from the house to the narrow side street by Israeli soldiers, the ambulance was forced to reroute to his new position, which took approximately 2 minutes.  The ambulance was then briefly delayed when one Israeli soldier attempted to deny the ambulance access to the victim. After an argument between the soldiers, the ambulance was granted access and the paramedics found Ibrahim in a semi-conscious state.  The paramedic reported that Ibrahim’s leg had been wrapped with a bandage in an attempt to stem the flow of blood, but that he had not been provided with the vital liquids that were necessary given his critical condition. Ibrahim was then taken by ambulance toRifidiyaHospitalinNablus, where shortly after arriving he was pronounced dead.

Blood II1 200x300 Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student

Blood stains in front of the first house where Ibrahim collapsed and was denied medical attention by Israeli soldiers

The cause of death for Ibrahim was cardiac arrest, hemorrhagic shock due to the arterial rupture of the femoral artery.  The femoral artery is a main artery that runs down both legs and is vital to the vascular survival of a person as it supplies oxygen to the lower half of the body. If severed, a person may bleed to death within 10 to 15 minutes without immediate medical attention.  Any injury to the femoral artery can instantly become a life threatening situation. The paramedic who attended to Ibrahim reports that in his opinion, if Ibrahim would have been provided with the appropriate medical care sooner, such as the blood being stopped and vital liquids administered, Ibrahim may have survived.

*****

The Israeli military has claimed that Ibrahim was shot during a “standard arrest procedure,”  although there have been no public statements from the Israeli military that would indicate that Ibrahim had been identified or targeted for arrest prior to the shooting.  In addition to Ibrahim, residents report that 15 other men from the camp were arrested, 12 of whom were released later that same day.

funeral 233x300 Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student

Mourners at Ibrahim’s funeral.

Ibrahim had never been previously arrested by Israeli soldiers or police and was described by locals, including his high school teacher, as a “peaceful boy” who always had a smile on his face. His family describe Ibrahim as a quiet, polite and caring young man, explaining that never once did other residents in the camp complain of his behaviour, a rare occurrence in an overcrowded refugee camp. He cared very much for his family and saw it his responsibility to help them where and whenever he could. He helped his father in the family shop regularly from an early age and his mother explains how his five sisters saw him as the person to go to with their secrets and troubles. Ibrahim’s father describes him as “‘a real man.” Like most 21 year olds he had mixed ideas of what he would like to achieve with his future and although he was a science student, he had a great desire to work as a nurse. His tragic death sees a young man’s life cut short and leaves a family of five sisters, three brothers and a mother and father without the friend and confidante that they cherished.

 

The shooting death of Ibrahim Sarhan implicates the violations of multiple provisions of
International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law. For a complete legal analysis of the shooting death of Ibrahim Sarhan, please see our website at http://www.najah.edu/uchrd or link directly to the report here.

For the report “Standard Arrest?: The Shooting of an Unarmed Student” in Arabic.

tt plurk Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt buzz Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt delicious Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt digg Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt facebook micro3 Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt myspace Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt ping Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt reddit Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student tt su Standard Arrest? The shooting of an Unarmed Student

Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby

2 300x201 Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby

A Bay Area children’s museum shut down a planned exhibition of Gaza children’s drawings. Photo: Middle East Children’s Alliance

Pro-Israel organizations pressured an Oakland children’s museum to cancel an upcoming exhibition of drawings made by Palestinian children in the Gaza Strip. Community leaders say the shutting down of the exhibition is the result of a disturbing — and well-funded — campaign to silence Palestinian voices across the US.

On 8 September, just two weeks before the exhibition was set to open to the public, the board of directors of the Museum of Children’s Art (MOCHA) announced that they had canceled “A Child’s View of Gaza.” The board shut down the show due to pressure from “constituents,” according to a statement made by Randolph Bell, the board’s chairman, in the San Francisco Chronicle (“Oakland museum cancels Palestinian kids’ war art,” 9 September 2011).

The show was curated in partnership with the Berkeley-based non-profit group Middle East Children’s Alliance (MECA), which has been working for 23 years to advocate for Palestinian, Iraqi and Lebanese children’s rights. Barbara Lubin, MECA’s executive director, told The Electronic Intifada that it was “upsetting and infuriating” that the show was canceled, but she wasn’t surprised.

“Anybody who knows this issue knows that the Jewish Federations of North America and the Jewish Council for Public Affairs have launched a multi-million dollar project to combat what they call the ‘delegitmization’ of Israel,” Lubin said. “They try and suffocate the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement and censor Palestinian cultural initiatives. What they’re doing is financing the work of silencing and shutting down anyone who wants to talk about what’s really happening to Palestinians.”

The Chronicle also reported that the board of directors at MOCHA vaguely cited the “inappropriate nature” of the content of the children’s drawings in their decision to shut down the exhibit. Some of the Palestinian children’s illustrations show tanks, guns and explosions, but the board’s assertion that these images are “inappropriate” enough to censor is clearly selective.

In years past, MOCHA had successfully exhibited strikingly similar artwork by children in Iraq who drew from their personal experiences of war following the 2003 US-led invasion and subsequent occupation. Another exhibition several years ago showed artwork by children made during the Second World War that “featured images of Hitler, burning airplanes, sinking battleships, empty houses and a sad girl next to a Star of David,” the Chronicle added.

Lubin said that the difference in this context is simple: “The pro-Israel groups are afraid that people will start understanding what’s really going on with Israeli policy through seeing exhibits like the one we put together. They don’t want people to know that Palestinian children are suffering. They’re afraid of us hearing that other side. For 63 years we’ve heard one side in this country and around the world, and it’s time for the other side to be heard.”

Stretching Israel’s siege from Gaza to Oakland

The censored drawings were created through local children’s mental health initiatives in Gaza immediately following Israel’s attacks in the winter of 2008-09, during which approximately 1,400 Palestinians, including more than 300 children, were killed.

Ziad Abbas, associate director of MECA, told The Electronic Intifada that several art-based organizations in the Gaza Strip began working with traumatized children in an effort to help them channel their fears, anger and trauma through artistic expression. Those drawings resulted in the collection of artwork that was to be showcased at the children’s museum.

“The art projects were born out of a necessity to try to reduce the impact and effects of the attacks which killed hundreds of children in Gaza. These drawings came from that kind of therapy to express their feelings,” he said.

Abbas added that the child artists were thrilled that their work had “broken Israel’s siege on Gaza” when the drawings made their way to a museum halfway across the world.

“It was important for these children to know that their voices were going to be heard in Oakland. However, they didn’t expect the siege to stretch all the way from Gaza to California, which is essentially what happened when MOCHA canceled the exhibit due to pressure from these groups,” Abbas said.

Major donors: “Funding was not jeopardized”

Upon investigation, it emerged that those “constituents” who got the ear of MOCHA’s board chair included pro-Israel public relations institutions with extraordinarily large budgets and organized community outreach programs. In the Bay Area, these organizations include the Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC), a subsidiary branch of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA); and the local chapter of the Jewish Community Federation (JCF), which operates under the umbrella of the Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA).

The JCRC and the JCF both receive substantial funding from the Walter & Elise Haas Fund, which has also funded MOCHA.

The fund, based in San Francisco, is a major donor to arts, science, social justice and Jewish organizations around the Bay Area across the political and cultural spectrum. MOCHA received $30,000 in grants from the Haas fund in 2011 (Recent grantmaking: The Arts,” Walter & Elise Haas Fund website, accessed 9 September 2011).

However, a program coordinator with the Walter & Elise Haas Fund told The Electronic Intifada that their staff had talked to the museum about possible public concern with the exhibit, but that the art show “was their decision and their funding was not in any way jeopardized with their doing it.”

Pam David, the executive director of the Haas Fund, declined to comment for this article.

John Patchner, communications director for the East Bay Community Foundation — which has awarded tens of thousands of dollars in grants to MOCHA over the years — told The Electronic Intifada that they had “not been contacted by anyone in connection with the cancellation of the exhibit and we’re currently seeking additional information from the Museum of Children’s Art.”

But there are many other foundations that support MOCHA. And in August at least one pro-Israel online campaign encouraged the general public to directly contact MOCHA funders, and published a list of various foundations, in a bid to cancel the children’s art exhibition.

1 300x214 Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby

Israel lobby groups claimed the children’s drawings were “anti-Semitic” in a bid to shut down the exhibition. Photo: Middle East Children’s Alliance

 
“No fight is too small” for pro-Israel groups

Whether or not MOCHA’s funders were directly intimidated by pro-Israel groups in the Bay Area, it’s certain that top leadership from groups such as the JCRC had a hand in shutting the exhibit down. The JCRC has repeatedly thwarted art and cultural initiatives in the Bay Area which highlight the Palestinian struggle, and has used the guise of “fighting anti-Semitism” to censor alternative voices.

At San Francisco State University in 2006, a proposed mural in honor of the late Palestinian-American intellectual Edward Said was attacked by the JCRC, which helped convince the university administration that the mural sent a “chilling” and threatening message to Jewish students and therefore should be blocked (“SFSU president keeping Jews safe with mural censure,” Jewish Weekly, 6 October 2006).

In 2007, the JCRC also worked hand-in-hand with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), one of the largest and most influential Israel lobby organizations in the US, to force the San Francisco Arts Commission to exert pressure on a local grantee of theirs, an organization for at-risk youth in San Francisco. A mural, planned and painted by Homies Organizing the Mission to Empower Youth (HOMEY), depicted symbols of Palestinian struggle and resistance, including a Palestinian woman with a kuffiyeh (the traditional checkered headscarf) and a crack in the wall that resembled historic Palestine.

The JCRC and the ADL put pressure on the Arts Commission to make the artists omit or modify some of the images after claiming that the symbols were anti-Semitic and “out of touch with the overwhelming majority of Jews,” as reported in the San Francisco Examiner (“Controversial mural to be altered in S.F.,” 20 September 2007).

The two organizations also worked together to stifle free speech on college campuses in the Bay Area, censoring academic lectures by attempting to conflate criticism of Israeli policy with anti-Semitism. Other pro-Israel groups, backed by the ADL, have pressured faculty boards to deny tenure to university professors who openly criticize Israeli policies.

Following MOCHA’s cancellation of the exhibit, Rabbi Doug Kahn, executive director of the JCRC, admitted to the online blog Muzzlewatch (a project of Jewish Voice for Peace) that he was “working closely with the Jewish Federation of the East Bay [which is part of the JFNA]” and “shared with the leadership of MOCHA our concerns about the inappropriateness of this exhibit given the fact that MOCHA — an important and valued community institution — serves very young children” (“Oakland children’s museum cancels Palestinian children’s art exhibit under pressure from local Jewish groups,” 10 September 2011).

Rabbi Kahn refused to respond directly to The Electronic Intifada’s questions via phone, but emailed a statement from the JCRC on 12 September. Entitled “Jewish Community Applauds Children’s Art Museum’s Decision on Exhibit,” it alleges that the art show “contains violent images that dehumanize an entire ethnic and religious population.”

The JCRC adds that MOCHA’s leadership “recognized the negative effect that this inflammatory exhibit would have on young children, Jewish and non-Jewish alike,” adding that the drawings could “potentially create an unsafe atmosphere for Jewish children.”

However, nowhere in the children’s drawings are there anti-Semitic images or phrases. The only Stars of David that are drawn are the ones that Israel itself has put on its flags, F16 bomber jets, tanks and soldiers’ uniforms — ubiquitous Israeli national symbols that any Palestinian child living under Israeli military occupation would see on a daily basis, especially during times of wanton attacks.

The cancelation of the children’s exhibition was celebrated as a victory by pro-Israel groups. On 7 September, the day before MECA was informed by the museum’s board of directors that the exhibit had been canceled, the Jewish Federation of the East Bay (JFEB) had already received information that the show was shut down — and boasted about the cancellation of the exhibit on its official twitter account.

JFEB (@JFEDeastbay) tweeted: “Great news! The ‘Child’s view from Gaza’ exhibit at MOCHA has been canceled thanks to some great East Bay Jewish community organizing.”

Pro-Israel groups to “pressure civic leaders” in new $6M initiative

The timing of Kahn’s determination to pressure the MOCHA board is significant. Just eleven months ago, the JFNA pledged to invest $6 million in a new, three-year initiative they call the “Israel Action Network.”

Working alongside the JCPA — of which the JCRC, Kahn’s organization, is a subsidiary — the Israel Action Network “is expected to serve as a rapid-response team charged with countering the growing campaign to isolate Israel as a rogue state akin to apartheid-era South Africa — a campaign that the Israeli government and Jewish groups see as an existential threat to the Jewish state … The network will monitor the delegitimization movement worldwide and create a strategic plan to counter it wherever it crops up” (“Federations, JCPA teaming to fight delegitimization of Israel,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 25 October 2010).

The JFNA stated that this new campaign would seek to influence “civic leaders,” and said that it would be fully staffed and “up and running” by 1 January 2011.

According to their recent tax forms, the JFNA’s investment of $6 million in this new campaign should not be a financial burden — they listed more than $197 million in total assets between June 2009 and June 2010 (Return of organization exempt from income tax, 2009, 2009-2010 [PDF]).

The fact that these enormous, well-funded Israeli advocacy organizations have turned their attention to a singular, modest children’s art exhibition in Oakland highlights the Israeli lobbies’ tireless efforts to silence Palestinian expression. Deborah Agre of MECA agreed, saying that “no fight is too small” for these groups.

MECA’s Barbara Lubin added that the attack on this children’s art show is just one in a long line of such campaigns.

“But this is particularly saddening to me because these are voices of children,” Lubin said. “And as I said to the head of the board of directors at the museum, MECA loses, MOCHA loses, but more importantly, the children from Gaza lose the most. They’ve always been the ones to lose the most. Not only do they have to live through these bombings and the siege, but then when they try to express their experiences through art, they’re shut down.”

“There’s only one winner in all of this,” Lubin added, “And that is the Zionist lobby who intimidate, harass and do everything they can to make it impossible for people to have these kinds of exhibits.”

4 300x206 Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby

The child artists in Gaza are upset that their work has been censored, according to MECA staff. Photo: Middle East Children’s Alliance

 

MOCHA’s board of directors: supporting all children, or just some?

According to its tax documents, accessed from public records, it is clear that MOCHA is a grassroots organization highly dependent on funding from outside grants and foundations. MOCHA listed just over $700,000 in contributions and grants in 2009 — whereas salaries and employee benefits accounted for approximately double that amount. Their fee-based children’s art programs bring in additional revenue of just under $1 million for that year.

If pro-Israel lobbyists indeed placed threatening calls to foundations that support MOCHA, it is understandable that they could feel frightened by the potential loss of money for the next fiscal year and would therefore bend to pressure by these outside groups. But MOCHA may have violated its own mission statement in doing so. On its tax forms, MOCHA states its mission is “to ensure that the arts are a fundamental part of the lives of all children.”

Ziad Abbas said that it’s wrong for the board of directors to put conditions on that support. “Do they really support all children, or just certain ones? Certainly, in this situation, the Palestinian children who made this artwork are not being supported at all,” he remarked.

The Electronic Intifada asked whether the children in Gaza had been informed that their exhibition was shut down, and what their reaction was to the news. Abbas explained that he had just received a call from one of the young artists in Gaza who saw MECA’s press release on the Internet that explained that the show was canceled.

“He was extremely disappointed, and the other children were obviously shocked and sad as well,” Abbas replied. “It’s upsetting to them to hear that a children’s art museum across the world decided that their personal [narratives] are offensive, and then silenced their voices and artwork. When you hear about an art museum that has violated its own mission to censor children’s artwork and children’s artistic expression, it’s extremely disappointing.”

Community support is out in force

Following Thursday’s announcement by the MOCHA board of directors, MECA has been flooded with phone calls and emails from supporters not only just across the Bay Area but worldwide who are appalled at the shutting down of the children’s art show. And Lubin said that while outrage at the museum is understandable, the institution is not the enemy.

“MOCHA is very dear to our hearts,” Lubin emphasized. “We love this organization and respect the work they do. It’s an essential institution in the Bay Area. Our anger is not at the people who work at MOCHA; rather, our anger is at the board who do not have the courage to stand up to this kind of intimidation from the pro-Israel groups. We’re asking people to direct their anger at the board and at the Zionist organizations who do this kind of muzzling. But certainly not at the organization itself.”

MECA has started an email action campaign in an effort to counter-pressure the board of directors with support and gratitude for hosting the Palestinian children’s artwork. They are also asking people to come to the gallery on 24 September, on the planned opening day of the exhibition, in a show of support for the show even if it remains canceled.

Meanwhile, Lubin and the MECA staff are busy figuring out alternative venues for the exhibition.

“We’re not sure where the show will be yet, but we’ll continue to work on seeing that these voices are heard and that these pictures are shown. People want to do something, and have been offering space in their homes, shops and even in schools,” Abbas said. “They won’t shut down these children’s voices.”

Nora Barrows-Friedman is an award-winning independent journalist, and is a staff writer and editor for The Electronic Intifada. She also writes for Inter Press Service, Al Jazeera, Truthout and other outlets, and regularly reports from Palestine.

tt plurk Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt buzz Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt delicious Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt digg Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt facebook micro3 Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt myspace Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt ping Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt reddit Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby tt su Gaza children’s images of war censored under pressure from US Israel lobby

Boycott the state, not just the settlements

ariel2 300x180 Boycott the state, not just the settlements

The West Bank settlement of Ariel thrives, but it is economically viable only due to the Israeli government's support. Photo: EPA

Recent legislation passed in the Israeli Knesset, which many people call the “Anti-BDS” bill, has raised a number of questions about a rising tide of “fascism” in Israel. This language is not only used by Palestinian critics, who have long borne the brunt of Israel’s undemocratic policies. Now, many Israeli and Jewish-American writers can no longer ignore the trend.

If something good has come out of the passage of this legislation, it is two things: First, a growing number of people are recognising that the Zionist aim – the imposition of an ethnocentric majority by force in a territory where the majority of the native inhabitants are disenfranchised – is fundamentally and inherently undemocratic. Second, the passage of this bill has brought discussion of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement to the foreground.

While increased discussion about BDS will only strengthen the movement, a troubling trend has become apparent in some of the commentaries on BDS written in response to the passage of the “Anti-BDS” bill. This is the assertion that boycotting colonies or settlement goods is acceptable, while boycotting the Israeli state or Israeli products outside of the occupied territories is somehow unacceptable.

For many, this argument may be made with consideration for political strategy and not based on moral underpinnings or clarity. There is undoubtedly a hesitation among some who have embraced BDS as a strategy to extend BDS activities beyond products produced in the colonies and settlements.

This attitude is particularly prevalent among Zionists who recognise the danger the occupation poses for Israel, but do not want to be seen as targeting Israel itself. The BDS tent is growing nonetheless, regardless of what part of the occupation system is targeted. This is clearly threatening to Israel. The greatest evidence of the threat this poses is that the state felt threatened enough by the BDS movement to attempt to stop it through legislative repression.

But while varied approaches to BDS enlarge the tent, they also can be misleading and dangerous. The idea that colonies are legitimate BDS targets while the state of Israel is not creates the illusion that somehow these colonies exist in a vacuum without tacit and direct support from the Israeli state.

In fact, the settlement enterprise is a state-driven enterprise which requires various state-led efforts at multiple levels. These include the creation of economic incentives through the Israeli legislature to encourage population transfer into the occupied territories, the allotment of resources for the defence and development of these colonies, facilitating land purchases, granting mortgages and incentives to encourage private investment and developing infrastructure to serve these localities.

Settlements rely on government support

Take the settlement of Ariel as an example. Ariel is located deep in the West Bank. It is a large settlement with almost 20,000 residents. In the process of negotiations, Ariel, along with Ma’ale Adumim, another monstrosity deep in the West Bank, has posed the greatest challenge to an agreement on borders. The Israelis insist on keeping the settlement, which would drive a large wedge of Israeli-controlled territory into the northern part of the West Bank.

Half of Ariel’s population emigrated to Israel from the former Soviet Union and arrived only in the last two decades. To deal with the post-1990 influx of Soviet Jews (which increased Israel’s population by 12 per cent), the Israeli state created specific absorption policies which included rental support of up to $10,000 per family for the first year and mortgage subsidies of 50 per cent. With the mass influx into Israel, property prices skyrocketed and the new immigrants found some of the most affordable living opportunities further away from the coastal plain where the Israeli metropolis of Tel Aviv thrived: in illegal colonies in the occupied West Bank.

Ariel, which was established in 1978, grew from a local council to a municipality after these state policies enabled mass population growth. To ensure that the settlers could live in an area they could afford and still be connected to the Tel Aviv area where most worked, the state undertook the massive expansion of a road network in the 1990s which became Highway 5, also known as the “Trans-Samarian” highway.

Unsurprisingly, in the 2009 elections in Israel, Ariel gave 45 per cent of its vote to Likud and another 30 per cent to Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party. Both parties are dedicated to the strengthening and development of the illegal colonies, and are the largest parties in the current right-wing Israeli government.

So, while there may be individual settlers or small groups who build tents or place trailers on Palestinian hilltops in the West Bank, mass population transfer into occupied territory cannot happen without direct state involvement. Treating the colonies as entities separate from the state which makes them thrive is not only uninformed and unrealistic, but also creates the dangerous illusion that the state is innocent and the settler movement is not. Both regularly defy international law, but without state support the settlement movements would not be able to ossify the occupation.

This is why BDS’ targeting of the Israeli state is as justified as targeting the colonies and their products. It would be ludicrous to have argued that boycotting products from plantations in America’s Civil War-era South was legitimate while action against the Confederate government was not. While slavery and occupation are two very distinct things, they are both state-supported systems that violate human rights. Until we accept the reality that pressure must be placed on the Israeli state to change its behavior, we will likely see the continuation of occupation and colonisation.

Thankfully, more and more people are waking up to this reality every day. Ironically, it is the rising tide of fascism in Israel that is the catalyst behind many of these recent epiphanies.

Yousef Munayyer is a writer and political analyst based in Washington, DC. He is currently the Executive Director of the The Jerusalem Fund for Education and Community Development.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

tt plurk Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt buzz Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt delicious Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt digg Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt facebook micro3 Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt myspace Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt ping Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt reddit Boycott the state, not just the settlements tt su Boycott the state, not just the settlements