JANUARY 13, 2020
At a talk, I delivered in Northern
England in March 2018, I proposed that the best response to falsified accusations
of antisemitism, which is often lobbed against pro-Palestinian communities and
intellectuals everywhere are to draw even closer to the Palestinian narrative.
In fact, my proposal was not meant to be a sentimental response in any
way.
“Reclaiming the Palestinian narrative” has been the main theme in most
of my public speeches and writings in recent years. All of my books and much of
my academic studies and research have largely focused on positioning the
Palestinian people – their rights, history, culture, and political aspirations
– at the very core of any genuine understanding of the Palestinian struggle
against Israeli colonialism and apartheid.
True, there was nothing particularly special about my talk in Northern
England. I had already delivered a version of that speech in other parts of the
UK, Europe and elsewhere. But what made that event memorable is a conversation
I had with a passionate activist, who introduced himself as an advisor to the
office of the head of the British Labor Party, Jeremy Corbyn.
Although the activist agreed with me regarding the need to embrace the
Palestinian narrative, he insisted that the best way for Corbyn to deflect
anti-Semitic accusations, which have dogged his leadership since day one, is
for Labor to issue a sweeping and decisive condemnation of antisemitism, so
that Corbyn may silence his critics and he is finally able to focus on the pressing subject of Palestinian rights.
I was doubtful. I explained to the animated and self-assured activist
that Zionist manipulation and misuse of antisemitism is a phenomenon that has
preceded Corbyn by many decades, and will always be there as long as the
Israeli government finds the need to distract from its war crimes against
Palestinians and to crush pro-Palestinian solidarity worldwide.
I explained to him that while anti-Jewish racism is a real phenomenon
that must be confronted, “antisemitism”, as defined by Israel and its Zionist
allies is not a moral question that is meant to be solved by a press release,
no matter how strongly-worded. Rather, it is a smokescreen, with the ultimate
aim of distracting from the real conversation, that being the crimes of
military occupation, racism, and apartheid in Palestine.
In other words, no amount of talking, debating or defending oneself can
possibly convince the Zionists that demanding an end to the Israeli military
occupation in Palestine or the dismantling of the Israeli apartheid regime, or
any genuine criticism of the policies of Israel’s right-wing government is
not, in fact, acts of antisemitism.
Alas, the activist insisted that a strong statement that would clarify
Labor’s position on antisemitism would finally absolve Corbyn and protect his
legacy against the undeserved smearing.
The rest is history. Labor went into a witch-hunt, to catch the “true”
anti-Semites among its members. The unprecedented purge has reached many good
people who have dedicated years to serving their communities and defending
human rights in Palestine and elsewhere.
The statement to end all statements was followed by many others.
Numerous articles and arguments were written and made in defense of Corbyn – to
no avail. Only a few days before Labor lost the general election in December,
the Simon Wiesenthal Center named Corbyn, one of Britain’s most sincere and
well-intentioned leaders in the modern era, the “top anti-Semite of 2019”. So
much for engaging the Zionists.
It doesn’t matter whether Corbyn’s party lost the elections in part
because of Zionist smearing and unfounded anti-Semitic accusations. What truly
matter for me as a Palestinian intellectual who has hoped that Corbyn’s
leadership will constitute a paradigm shift regarding the country’s attitude
towards Israel and Palestine, is the fact that the Zionists have indeed
succeeded in keeping the conversation focused on Israeli priorities and Zionist
sensibilities. It saddens me that while Palestine should have occupied the
center stage, at least during Corbyn’s leadership years, it was still
marginalized signifying once again that solidarity with Palestine has become a
political liability to anyone hoping to win an election – in the UK and
anywhere in the West as well.
I find it puzzling, indeed disturbing, that Israel, directly or
otherwise, is able to determine the nature of any discussion on Palestine in
the West, not only within typical mainstream platforms but within
pro-Palestinian circles as well. For example, I have heard activists repeatedly
questioning whether the one-state solution is at all possible because “Israel
simply would never accept it”.
I often challenge my audiences to base their solidarity with Palestine
on real love, support, and admiration for the Palestinian people, for their
history, their anti-colonial struggle, and the thousands of heroes and heroines
who have sacrificed their own lives so that their people may live in freedom.
How many of us can name Palestine’s top poets, artists, feminists,
football players, singers, and historians? How familiar are we really, with
Palestinian geography, the intricacies of its politics, and the richness of its
culture?
Even in platforms that are sympathetic to the Palestinian struggle,
there is an inherent fear that such sympathy could be misconstrued as
antisemitism to the extent that Palestinian voices are often neglected, if not
completely supplanted with anti-Zionist Jewish voices. I see this happening
quite often even in Middle Eastern media that supposedly champion the
Palestinian cause.
This phenomenon is largely linked to Palestine and Palestine only. While
the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa and the civil rights struggle in
the United States – as was the case of many genuine anti-colonial liberations
movements around the world – have strategically used intersectionality to link
with other groups, locally, nationally or internationally, the movements
themselves relied on black voices as true representatives of their peoples’
struggles.
Historically, Palestinians have not always been marginalized within
their own discourse. Once upon a time, the Palestine Liberation Organization
(PLO), despite its many shortcomings, provided unified Palestinian political the discourse which served as a litmus test for any individual, group or government
regarding their position on Palestinian rights and freedom.
The Oslo accords ended all of that – it fragmented the Palestinian
discourse just as it has divided the Palestinian people. Since then, the
message emanating from Palestine has become muddled, factionalized and often
self-defeating. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement (BDS) has done a
tremendous job in bringing about some clarity by attempting to articulate a
universal Palestinian discourse.
However, BDS is yet to yield a centralized political strategy that is
communicated through a democratically-elected Palestinian body. As long as the
PLO persists in its inertia and without a truly democratic alternative, the
crisis of the Palestinian political discourse is likely to continue.
Concurrently, the Zionists must not be allowed to determine the nature
of our solidarity with the Palestinian people. While true Palestinian
solidarity requires the complete rejection of all forms of racism, including
antisemitism, the pro-Israel camp must be sidelined entirely from any
conversation pertaining to the values and morality of what it means to be
“pro-Palestine”.
To be anti-Zionist is not always the same as being pro-Palestine, the
former emanating from the rejection of racist, Zionist ideas and the latter
indicating a real connection and bond with Palestine and her people.
To be pro-Palestine is also to respect the centrality of the Palestinian
voice, because without the Palestinian narrative there can be no real or
meaningful solidarity, and also because, ultimately it will be the Palestinian
people who will liberate themselves.
“I am not a liberator,” said the iconic South American revolutionary
Ernesto Che Guevara. “Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves”.
For the Palestinians to “liberate themselves”, they have to claim their
centrality in the struggle for Palestinian rights everywhere, to articulate
their own discourse and to be the champions of their own freedom. Nothing else
will suffice.
Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author, and editor of Palestine
Chronicle. His latest book is The Last Earth: A Palestinian Story (Pluto Press,
London, 2018). He earned a Ph.D. in Palestine Studies from the University of
Exeter and is a Non-Resident Scholar at Orfalea Center for Global and
International Studies, UCSB.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario