OPPOSING THE BULLDOZERS, THE ARMY AND THE OCCUPATION |
THROUGH DIRECT ACTION AND A JOINT POPULAR STRUGGLE

INTRODUCTION

‘The following texts, drawn out from the vast ocean of information about oc-
cupied Palestine, do not consttute an attempt to represent “Anarchists Against
the Wall” the political entity, but rather the small-scale, particular contexts and
realities in which it operates. And yet we hope that in shedding light on the lat-
ter, a great deal about the nature of the former will also shine through.

Firstand foremost, Anarchists Against the Wall s a benner under which ac-
tions are made that are diametrically opposed, not only to the occupation, but
also 1o its root causes; to the personal perspectives and political systems within
Tsrael that sustain it, military and civilian. AAtW sweats off the excess weight
of thick, heavy ideological frames by making practice its center of gravity. This
is not to imply that principled, theoretical analyses are not needed, of course -
we certainly encourage applying them to deconstruct Zionist Apartheid myths;
however, at this time, the individuals comprising AAW would rather apply
tugging ropes, bolt-cutters and ten-pound hammers to deconstruct Israel’s Wall
and express their disagreement with IDF roadblocks.

Not only direct action, but also the joint struggle is at the heart of AALW. fn
fact, the group's inception can be traced bck to the fusion of parallel under-
currents in Palestine and Israel during the al-Aqsa Intifads, the second Pales-
tinian uprising. In Tsrael, the failure of the Oslo Accords resulted in a general
‘nationalist entrenchment and a shift to the right, including within the so-called
“Peace Camp”; however, it had an opposite effect on those at the far end of that
spectrum, as the realization of why Oslo faled led many to permanently let go
of the coattails of the Zionist left. Meanwhile, in the West Bank and the Gaza
Strip, although significantly more militarized than the fist, the second Intifada
contained widespread instances of popular struggle and civilian resstance, such
as direct actions, protests and demonstrations, NGO initiatives, independent
information and media efforts, youth projects, boycott campaigns, and civil
disobedience, usually led by local popular committees. Marginalized as they
were by the levels of violence and increasing Palestinian Authority hierarchi-
cal centralization, these efforts nevertheless managed to put down roots, and
eventually bear fruit.

AALW was a product of those two undercurrents coming together in 2003
~one year after Istael began construction of the Wall - at a four-month long pro-
test camp formed by Palestinian, Israeli and international actvists i the village
of Mas'ha, whose lands were being lost to the wall. This camp became a focal
point for a new form of struggle: joint, civilian, directly-democratic, commu-
nity based —a de-facto third Inifada, known as “the Intifada of the Wall",

Although consisting of few Israeli activists, AAtW took part in this new de-
velopment intensively, alongside an ever-widening number of Palestinian vil-
lages whose livelihoods were threatened by the wall: from Mas'ha to Budrus

1
1o Bil'in to Jayyous to Ni'ilin to Um Salmuna, and so on, in a pattern of direct
action and joint struggle which continues today. A key component of AAW's
mode of operation was and remains redirecting the racist privilege we cajoy
under Israel’s discriminatory policies, using it instead to decrease military vio-
lence at Palestinian protests by the mere act of joining them, as the armys rules
of engagement are significantly different (particularly regarding live ammuni-
tion) when Israelis are present.

‘The Intifada of the Wall continues, of course, and at great human cost: as of
February 2009, seventeen unarmed Palestinian protesters have been murdered
by soldiers and border police at demonstrations against its construction, and
thousands of others injured or arrested - Palestinian, international and Isracli
So far, AAW members have faced over one hundred indictments (half of which
are still pending), mostly for “bringing the war home" through protest actions
carried out inside Isracli cities. Moreover, setting aside the operating expenses
of everyday political work, such as transportation, phone bills, first aid of print-
ing costs, AAtW legal debts currently stand at over 40,000 US Dollars, in fees
owed to dedicated lawyers working tirelessly to represent us in the face of es-
calating legal repression from the police and the courts.

Obviously, AAtW does not receive funding from any offiial organization or
association (state, governmental or NGO), nor do we pay salaries or maintain
offices. We rely entirely on donations from people, all over the world, who re-
alize the importance and wish to enable the continuation of our oo-the-ground
support for the Palestinian struggle. As the costs of our legal harassment by the
state accumulate, we find ourselves in dire need of financial support, and there-
fore seck your help. If you are able to contribute financially in any way, please

log on to hitp://awalls.org/donations for details on how to do so.

Editor's Note due 10 a wide variety of paciical as well s principled poitical stances
within Anarchists Against the Wall, we would ik to emphasize that ll content expressed
herein, while wel-reasoned and insightf, representssolelythe oinions of the authors,
and not of the group as a whole.

ANARCHISTS AGAINST THE WALL.:
A PARADIGM FOR DIRECT ACTION IN THE BELLY
OF LEVIATHAN - YA BASTA | KHALAS!

W Bill Templer

“A voice is crying out for justice, from every place where
there is struggle.... may all humanity hear itself in owr cry."”
—Zapatista compafiera Elena, Chiapas, 21 July 2007

Anarchists Against the Wall has become one of the major direct-action groups
protesting against the muliple oppressions of the Isracli state. Their politics
concentrate on radical confrontation, and they are one of the few tough bunches
of comrades in Israel/Palestine fucing the brutal power of the state in concrete
ty with the oppressed, weck after week, in a spirit of what s called in
tsumud, persistence with grit, non-violent dogged resistance.

STOPPING THE GREAT WALL OF PALESTINE

AW activists are centrally involved in the struggle against the West Bank
Barrier, the segregation wall being built by the Isracli political class. They are
out there every week with the Palestinian popular resistance and village com-
mittees against the Apartheid Wall - known in Hebrew by the euphemism geder
ha-hafrada (Separation Fence) and called by many Palestinians jidar al-fasl al-
“unsuri (‘Racial Segregation Wall’) - in diverse areas of the West Bank, includ-
ing the villages of Bil'in west of Ramallah, al-Ma’asara and Ertas south of
Bethlehem and elsewhere. Their demo at Bil'in on 3 August 2007 was number
130th. They are also helping to protect Palestinian olive trees from bulldozing
as ever more land is expropriated. At the same time, they are engaged in a really
major legal campaign in the courts to defend their right to join together with
Palestinians to protect their land and protest sate violence and oppression (see
below).

FIGHTING HOUSE DEMOLITIONS

As AAtW broadens the interface of struggle, it became recently involved in
direct action against house demolitions of Arab Palestinian and Jewish work-
ing-class Israeli homes inside the Zionist state, vicious urban gentrification and
the resultant plight of the homeless, and wholesale demolition of homes of ‘re-
sistant’ simple Bedouin, mainly ex-herders and marginal agriculturalists in the
semi-arid Negev, now settled in permanent largely ‘unrecognized” villages and
gradually absorbed as wage slaves in the Israeli capitalist economy after most
of their lands were literally robbed.

REBUILDING DEMOLISHED HOMES

As of August 2007, AAHW activists are helping rebuild the home of Zina and
Omar Al-Adassi in the Ajami neighborhood of Jaffa, south Tel Aviv, which was
bulldozed full of furnishings early July at five in the morning by the Israel Land
Administration. The Al-Adassi family has four children, one of whom is dis-
abled. They have lived in their home for 26 years, and since its destruction have
beea living outdoors in an orchard in Jaffa. The demolition of the Al-Adassi
family home is part of a current wave of hundreds of demolition and evacuation
orders in Jaffa, designed to evict Arab residents and promote the transforma-
tion of Jaffa into an exclusively wealthy-Jewish city, with the construction of
some 5,000 luxury housing units where Ajemi now stands. Reconstruction of
the Al-adassi home is coordinated by the Jaffa Popular Committee, founded in
March 2007 to combat the wave of home demolitions and evacuations of Arab
residents from Jaffa.

SUDANESE REFUGEES IN DISTRESS
" AAW people have also taken a direct role in lending a hand to Darfur refu-
gees, who have fied into Israel across the Sinai desert from Egypt - especially
during recent months - and are being badly mistreated by the Israeli state and
local municipalities. A spokesperson from the Prime Minister's office has said:
“We don't want to be the Promised Land for African refugees.” Most are home-
less, penniless; many have been imprisoned in Isracl as ‘enemy nationals," since
Sudan does not recognize Isracl. All face the threat of deportation. A number
of refugees were recently driven out of town by Hadera city hall and literally
dumped in Liberty Bell Park in Jerusalem; AAW activists are now helping,
them find shelter. There are some 2,400 Affican refugees in Israel now, about
half of which came from Sudan. Many in the Isracli political class and the
electorate oppose their deportation to Egypt, but few Jews in Israel other than
AAMW call for them t0 receive asylum status and st

BUILDING NATURAL BRIDGES OF RESISTANCE

Progressive groups in North America should seck direct contact with AAIW,
through their website and other channels. They need solidarity, practical pro-
ductive links, and invitations to speak. They are present on a broad front of pro-
test in Isracl, including against nuclear arms on Hiroshima Day, Aug, 6. lsracl
is the only nuclear power in the Near East. As political scientist Neve Gordon
recently wrote in The Nation's online edition (July 30, 2007):

“They have no official leaders, no office, and no paid staff, and yet they have
managed to accomplish more than many well-oiled NGOs and Social move-
ments [...] As Jewish activists they are well aware that the Isracli military be-
haves very differently when Isracli Jews are present during a protest in the West
Bank and that the level of violence, while stll severe, is much less intense.
Indeed, according o Isracli soldiers the military has more stringent open fire
regulations for demonstrations in which non-Palestinians participate. So when

4
a village's public committee decides to carry out non-violent protests against
the occupying power, the anarchists mingle with the demonstrating villagers,
{hus becoming a human shield for ll of those Pelestinians who have chosen to
follow the path of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King. Even though the
anarchists e frequently beaten and arrested, they do not desist.”

THE LEGAL STRUGGLE

Like SDS increasingly will be in North America, AAtW is now engaged ina
‘major battle to protect civil liberties. The Iscaeli state is seking to undermine
their work by a massive barrage of indictments, 63 to date. Neve Gordon:

“[w]hen the Israeli police began to realize that beating and etaining them
would not stop their stubborn resistance, a different strategy was adopted.
Scores of legal indictments were issued by the state prosecutor. The anarchists
took this as a new challenge. They have launched a legal campaign, whose
aim is to defend the basic civil right of all Israels to resist their government's
rights-abusive policies. Leading this battle is Gabi Lasky, an energetic lawyer,
\who spends many of her weekends releasing anarchists from detention and her
weekdays representing them in court”

So AAtW comrades also need material help, and have just issued an appeal
for funds. As the arrest of an SDSer in a clash with neo-Nazis in Morristown,
NJ on July 28 points up, a legal defense fund is integral to the struggle, from
Brooklyn to Bil'in.

‘Established four years ago, the political spectrum of activists in AAtW is
wider than social anarchism in the stricter sense and reflects antiauthoritarian
anticapitalist PGA views as well, analogous to a rich array of thinking inside
SDS/MDS about analysis, praxis & ways forward. But all in AAW are com-
‘mitted to uncompromising direct action on various fronts, often against fully-
armed Tsrael troops. A number have been wounded in confrontations with state
violence. North Americans can learn from their struggle. Their battle on the
streets and in the courts. They are natural allies.

(YA BASTAI / KHALAS!

The global synergy of resistance is deepening. At a time when Zapatistas
‘meeting in Chispas are engaged in an international Encuentro/Encounter with
followers of La Sexta Declaracién de Ia Selva Lacandona from more than 80
countries, and the Oaxacan Popular Movement is growing in strength as a peo-
ple’s rebellion, it is important to see AW in the spirit of such resistance,
struggle for indigenous autonomy and vernacular values, the ethos of Arab-Pal-
estinjan/Jewish radical solidarity - the “many other groups who exist all over
the world but who we do not see until they shout Ya Basta of being despised,
and they rise up, and then we see them, we hear them, and we learn from them”
(Sixth Declaration EZLN, June 2005).

(August 4, 2007)

5
MeNnY -y

SPEECH FOR THE TEL AVIV
DEMONSTRATION AGAINST
THE WAR ON GAZA

W Adar Grayevsky & Yanay Israeli

[On January 3, 2009, eightdays afierthe beginning of Operation Cast Lead, AAUH touk
‘partin a thousands' strong march and rally in Tel Aviv against the attack on Gaza. The
Jollowing is the speech AAIW members wrote for the event]

The attacks on Gaza bear witness to an alarming process pushing Isracli so-
ciety further into the realms of extremism. Through this process, attacks on
civilian populations become more and mare brutal, while being simultancously
portrayed as essential,in fact as the very epitome of ustice. It s the process of a
moral obtusion washing over our entire society, a process by which everything
and anything becomes permissible.

What makes this extremism possible? It takes hold through the distortion of
facts and the blurring of notions. Such blurring is encouraged and nurtured by
politicians and military officials, and it has been accompanying us as a society
for a long time. We can all recall how the deepening of the occupation in Geza
and the West Bank was referred to as a peace process; how total Isracli control
over people's lives in Gaza was termed disengagement; and how a cruel siege
that included mass-starvation and withholding of the most basic goods became
known a5 a period of "calm".

‘Today we are told that a ruthless attack on Gaza’s populace i in fact a war on
Hamas; we are told that dropping bombs on residential areas in the world's most
densely-populated region is not a war crime but "an assault on the infrastructure
of terrorism"; that shelling the University of Gaza's female dorms i eliminating
explosives labs, and that murdering hundreds of women and children consti-
tutes just and moral combat. Foreign Affairs Minister Tzipi Livni went even
furthér and explained how waging war is essential to the advancement of peace,
1o less. Yes, it appears that what we are witnessing in Gaza today constitutes
the Isracli government's current definition of a "peace process

‘We have come here to say that this war is not necessary and is certainly not
just. We have come here to refuse the politics of hatred and vengeance. We have
come here to oppose the whitewashing of wa crimes, and their portrayal as &
fight against terrorists. We are here to say that those who speak out against civil-
fan casualties in Sderot cannot avoid speaking against the mass-killing taking
place in Gaza, courtesy of the Israeli army’s bombardments.

Thousands of people, both Palestinian and Jewish, have demonstrated against
the war in the course of the past week. Israels security apparatus, along with the
mainstream media, are doing their very best to forcefully silence these voices
of sanity. Those who expressed their opposition to the war were denounced as
traitors, their protests portrayed as disturbances. But above all else, the pro-war
forces within Isracl have tried to crush the growing dissent through mass-arrests
of Palestinians all across the country. Over 700 people who dared oppose the
vear have been arrested in the past week. More than 200 of them are still impris-
oned, nearly half of them minors. This i a form of racist, political persecution
‘which should worry every single Israeli citizen.

We stand here today, together, Jews and Palestinians, women and men, to
make sure our protest is heard. To say 1o to military attacks on civilian popula-

tions, and no to war. 1 am frequently asked, why are you constantly opposing?
However, we are marching here today not to oppose, but to Voice our support:
support for a ceasefire, for a period of real, mutual calm; support for

lifting the siege, for recognition of the fact that Gaza and the West

Bank are a single entity; support for an end to the occupation, and

for a joint Jewish-Palestinian struggle.for liberty.

(Vanuary 3, 2009)

i

B 71 11 Ny TN

TEAR GAS AND TEA
DILEMMAS OF PRINCIPLED OPPOSITION
AND PRIVILEGE

W Kobi Snitz

[First published in shortened form in “Le Monde Libertaire” no 169, March 2007.
Published in ful in September 2007 in the book “Barrieren durchbrechen! lsrael /
Palastina: Gewalfeiheir, Kriegsdienstverweigerung, Anarchismus”, Edited by

- Sebastian Kalicha, from the publishing house of Grasswuraelrevolution]

‘The truly marginalized political positions belong in a category of ideas which
are considered mad o irresponsible. The former label usually requires no argu-
ment, but the lattr is supported by an argument which cannot be dismissed out
of hand. As the argument goes, when a position is suffcieatly marginalized it
actually becomes counterproductive. Instead, the responsible madman is urged
towards the often-contradictory responsible position. This urging is possible
‘when the basic terms of discussion are sufficiently distorted, and therefore it is
useful to take another look at them,

“OUR GOOD INTENTIONS LEAD TO THIS HELL";
CRITICIZING THE WALL IN ISRAEL

For the last four years Isracl has been building what it calls  security barrier
(the wall) in the West Bank. The impact of this, the largest construction project
in Isracli history, can only be understood in connection with the range of other
Isracli policies and practices in the West Bank. According to the latest infor-
mation from B'selem - the leading Israeli human rights organization - these
include about 40 manned checkpoints and about 470 physical barriers of other
kinds. This count only includes the barriers located inside the West Bank which
prevent movement between Palestinian towns and villages, not from the West
Bank into Israel.! The checkpoints and barriers enforce an claborate system of
restrictions on the movement of all Palestinians in accordance with ever-chang-
ing rules which are not published, and are therefore almost impossible to chal-
lenge legally?*. These policies and others divide the Palestinian territories into
what is called "territorial units" in IDF lingo.*

‘The map of the divided west baak speaks for itsel, but if that s not enough,
some of the people involved in implementing Israeli policy are frank enough to
describe their aim:

“What Prime Minister Ariel Sharon played down in bis Rosh Hashanah in-
terviews was clearly exposed by his former bureau chief, Dov Weisglass, in
an interview in Haaretz Magazine (October 8). The goal of the disengagement
plen is to perpetuate Isracli control in most of the West Bank, and to repel any

8
internal or external pressure for a different political solution.

Sharon is consistently trying to realize his vision: sroeli control over the
castern and western slopes of the West Bank, and maintaining traffic corridors
along its length and breadth. The Palestinians will be left with seven enclaves
connected by special highways for their use.” More than any previous Isracli
policy or practice, the wall,if completed according to plan, stands to make the
partition of the West Bank permanent and irreversible. The prospects for Pal-
estinians and Israelis living with such borders are that “Unless ... a new map is
drawn separating Israel and the Pelestinian state, there will be no end to war in
the land."

The writer, Ephraim Sneh - who described Sharon's plan in this (presum-
ably critical) way - is the current deputy Minister of Defense who wrote this
before he joined the government which claims to continue “Sharon's way””. It is
convenient for Sneh, especially while he was in the opposition, to describe the
Givision of the West Bank (which has continued uninterrupted under decades of
changing Isracli governments) as “Sharon's vision”. However, as Ron Pundak
and Menzhem Klein wite, “The leaders of the settlers are correct in saying that
they came on behalf of the state and to their mind they are the embodiment of
classic Zionism"*

“The spectrum of Israeli opposition to the wall, from liberals to radicals, falls
into three main categories. The first category, the principled position, is to op-
pose the wall on the grounds that it is a policy which punishes people for being
Palestinian, Its alternative, the second category, opposes the wall on the grounds
that it s not an efficient way to achieve its stated goa! of protecting Israclis, ei-
ther because it does not provide security or because a more humane wall could
provide an equal amount of security. These two categories contradict each other
in the sense thatto criticize the wall for being inefficient s to imply that, had the
wall been efficient, it would have been legitimate. The third category is a vari
tion of the second. It contains calls for the construction of the well on the green
ine but crucially omit the condition that Israel withdraw back to the green line.
This position is the common position on the Isracl; center-left and is part of the
platform of Meretz - the Isracli social democratic party. Yossi Sarid, a former
ead of Meretz who describes himself as “a [former] member of the Knesset's
Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, a former minister of education in the
State of Israel, [and] a Zionist without post.” supports a wall which would not
hurt “Palestinians who committed no sin”. However, the wall which is being
constructed ‘s not the fence we intended, [..] we intended a completely differ-
ent fence, and [] our good intentions led to this hell. An apology is in order.”®
Sarid does explain why, as he predicted at the time, under Isracli occupetion
and with Sharon in power, it was unrealistic to think that his good intentions
would be realized. Stil, in writing his party platform Sarid wrote that “Meretz
supports the accelerated construction of a complete [..] separation fence [...
(it is) preferable for srael that the route of the fence not include Palestinian

il
population o territories.”. He went on to call “Sharon's fence [...] a crime
against humanity™"%. The difference between the first and third position is more
than a matter of the unintended, consequent route of the wall. Without an Isracli
‘withdrawal from the West Bank, even if the wall had been built on the green
line as Meretz wished, it would have facilitated the caging of Palestinians by
other means. With the Isracli army remaining on both sides of the wall, freedom
of movement for Palestinians could have remained increasingly constrained by
checkpoints, restricted roads and internal fences. Such tight control would not
have been possible without a wall preventing Palestinian access to Isracl, even
if that wall was on the green line.

Sarid's artcle certainly constitutes the strongest condemnation of the wall by
such a prominent Israeli figure, but although he assures us of the quality of his
intentions, the principled position is absent even in this apology.

To my knowledge, the principled opposition to the wall has not been made in
the Israeli press at all, and rarely even in statements of the radical left. The di-
lemma for Israeli radicals facing a tide of support for the wall is between mak-
ing an inherently racist argument and risking their exclusion from the main-
stream media.

To further illustrate what it means to even criticize the wall on any grounds
other than a principled opposition, consider the reaction to the idea of imposing
on Jews a regime similar to that imposed on Palestinians. The scale of reac.
tion to that hypothetical suggestion can be measured by the reaction 10 a re-
lated restriction proposed for the Jewish State. That proposal is UN resolution
242 which, if implemented, would prevent the Jewish state from ruling over
Palestinians in the occupied territories. Israel’s Foreign Minister Abba Eban
responded to resolution 242 by saying “We have opealy said that the map will
never again be the same as on June 4, 1967. For us, this is a matter of security
and of principles. The June map is for us equivalent to insecurity and danger.
1 do not exaggerate when 1 say that it has for us something of a memory of
Auschwitz."" Following Eban, the 1967 borders of Lsrael are now commonly
referred to as “Auschwitz borders” in the Isracli right.

Moreover, consider the idea that restrictions on Jews be justified by the ex-
istence of “a Jewish threat”. Such a discussion should be rejected flat out, inits
entirety, as being extremely racist, and arguing that a Jewish danger could be
dealt with differently would undermine such an unequivocal rejection. In fact,
even the mere allusion to a Jewish threat by terms such as “Jewish Bolshevism”
portrays those using it as antisemitic. Furthermore, to continue arguing for
more efficient way to deal with such a threat is to accept one or both of the racist
premises that underlie it - namely that all Jews are responsible for the actions of
some of them or that even if they are nat, it is still legitimate to punish innocent
Jews. The frst o these premises is the official position of the state of Isrel, and
s evident in the writing of human rights icon and srael's Minister for Diaspora
Affairs and Jerusalem, Natan Sharansky. It makes for some strange bedfellows:

o
“The state of Israel was bom in order to be a national home for the Jewish peo-
ple. Zionist leaders have always declared that the Jewish state belongs not just
To s citizens but to the Jewish people as a whole... for example, Argentinian
Jews paid a heavy price for Israeli decisions] when n revenge for the elimina-
tion of the leader of Hezbollah the organization blew up the Jewish community
center and murdered hundreds of Jews.”!* Such a statement can only be made
by those who are. considered immune from charges of antisemitism'®. Other-
wise, these terms would be rejected and condemned.

“This reaction should be kept in mind when it comes to recism against Arabs.
o take just one of countless examples, it is apparently acceptable for & major
Isracli newspaper o title the cover story of its weekend section “The Beduin
Threat" in large red letters over a picture of young children at a dump site.'*

Furthermore, while discussion of “Jewish Bolshevism” is immediately un-
derstood as racist due to its implication of all Jews, the same treatment is not
meted ot to the widely-used term “Islamic Terrorism”. 1 have seen only one
discussion about the appropriateness of using that term in the mainstream press;
{t was a side comment in a story about the appropriateness of calling Eric Rob-
ert Rudolph a “Christian terrorist”."” The almost universal acceptance of such
Tacist terms is the reason why opposing the wall on principled grounds i cither
{ncomprehensible in the Israeli media or understood as an endorsement of the
‘murder of Israelis. Israelis opposed to the wall often argue along the lines of the
alternative to the principled position, however when they do so, it is a conces-
sion to the racist assumption underlying that argument.

1 reality, the factual claims in this altemative argument hardly need to be
‘made. During arguments at the High Court of Justice, Isracl's State's Attomey
reversed the official position and admitted that considerations oter than secu-
rity issues determine the route of the wall* Those considerations are demo-
graphic and geographical, ie. the objective is to retain the largest amount of
land and natural resources with the smallest amount of Palestinians on it. These.
objectives are openly admitted by many of those who were involved in planning
and influencing the route of the wall.”

The relative importance of security considerations versus other objectives in
planning and building the wall is reflected in the fact that the border between
Tsracl and Egypt is not even fenced for most of its length. The Sinai desert is
widely used to smuggle weapons and was considered by Sharon (and now by
Olmert) as a security threat™, to say nothing of the active trafficking of women
and gils which takes place through that border”. Apparently, the security of
these women and girls is not the kind which compels the Isracli govemment to
build 2 wall. It should be pointed out that had a wall been built slong the Isracli
Egyptian border it would have faced no opposition. On the other hand, the terri-
tory of Israel would also not have been effectively expanded by such a wall

Security considerations and expansionist goals in the route of the wall some-
“imes come into conflict. This allows for an actual comparison of their relative im-

"
portance. In certain places where Israel does not yet dare to complete its planned
route for the wall, gaps remain which supposedly pose a securiy threat. But as
‘Akiva Eldar writes in Haaretz *Annexation is important, Securiy less 50"

Even some of the seitlers, who one would assume have the greatest need for
its protection, are opposed to the wall's construction® The urgency of the need
for the protection allegedly provided by the wall is demonstrated by the fact that
the damage to the scenery and habitat of small animals was cited as sufficient
reason for freezing construction of an entire section of the wall in Southern
Israel. This, more than two years after it was publicized that the construction
of the southern part of the wall was delayed by Sharon's refusal to construct it
on the green line* The story appeared two days after a double suicide attack in
Befer Sheva, and concerned the section of the wall through which the terrorists
entered Israel.

TEAR GAS AND TEA IN THE WEST BANK

Media work and, to a lesser extent, other appeals to the public present &
dilemma between opposing the wall on principled and marginalized grounds
or conceding the racist assumptions underlying the alternatives. Naturally, in-
teraction with other Isreeli institutions ranging from the High Court to infaniry
troops present parallel dilemmas.

Inseveral instances, in what might seem like a victory, the Isrzeli High Court
ordered that the route of the wall be changed®. Almost without exception, these
decisions also set precedents which legitimized much larger sections of the
wall:* In that sense, these small victories help legitimize the wall. Regardless
of the effect on the wall, an appeal to a court which approved the execution of
Palestinians without trial” is a repulsive concession. Furthermore, an appeal o
the court might also provide false hopes and defuse an otherwise more militant
popular struggle. In spite of this, dozens of appeals to the High Court were filed
by Palestinians who were directly affected by the wall.

It is not hard to understand how a similar dilemma exists with respect o
contacts with other levels of Israci offcials or with soldiers. For example, it is
often possible for activiss (especially Israelis) to have a form of on-the-spot ne-
gotiations with soldiers about minor “concessions”, such as being granted per-
mission o demonstrate & certain location. On the onc hand, such negotiation
might reduce the physical risk to demonstrators or buy some time, but on the
other hand the act of negotiating provides a recognition of the army’s authority,
as well as a pretext for aftacking the demonstration when the “agreement” s not
kept, As above, the process of negotiation also serves to defuse the momenfum
of a demonstration or march.

‘What s less widely accepted is the fact that the same sort of dilemma exists
even in the cooperation between Palestinian and Israli activists in the West
Bank. The privileged position of Israelis means thoy have greater access to
the media, the ability to move much more freely and face much less legal and

12
‘physical risk, etc. This tends to increase the influence Israelis have on deci-
sions about the struggle which affect their Palestinian counterparts consider-
ably more. In other words, even when using Isracli privilege for the purpose of
the struggle there is a concession. That is to say that, in a sense, the privilege is
extended in the struggle as well

Even social interaction can extend Isracli privilege. The relative freedom of Is-
raelis elevates their social position, and social ties created under these conditions
reflect that, thus perpetuating it. At least to some degree, this applies even to the
social ties between Isracli and Palestinian activists. This phenomenon s one facet
of what s referred to in Palestinian society as ormalization. As this Isracli sees
it this means that any interaction Palestinians carry out with Israelis, be it for the
most positive purpose, while the conditions are such that Israel occupies Pales-
tine, contains within it a degree of adjustment to these conditions and, in a way,
even their extension. This sensitivity is partly a result o the fact that some of the
most damaging Isracli policies were described as confidence-building measures
or similar processes, accompanied by promises of Israeli good intentions.

There is a contrasting idea, which is that interaction between Israclis and
Palestinians - and in particular social interaction - can eliminate mutual fear
and suspicion, supposedly the root cause of the conflict. Another variation on
this idea, one which I find more realistic, is that social interactions are valuable
because they strengthen the basis for a joint struggle. The value, even the very
justification, of joint political action should be weighed with this in mind.

“The question is perhaps illustrated in the choice Israclis make when coming
to the West Bank. It s the choice of whether to drink tea or to inhale tear gas at
a demonstration.

‘A sentiment perhaps unappreciated in the wider circles of Israeli activists
was expressed by a member of the Popular Committee Against the Wall in the
Palestinian village of Bilin. His message to Israelis was “After we end the oc-
cupation together, there will be plenty of time for tea”*

THE CHOICE OF SATANISTS, ANARCHISTS AGAINST THE WALL

The following are my impressions of the dilemmas faced by Anarchisis
Against the Wall (AACW) and the choices it made. It should be understood that
this does not represent an AAtW consensus or otherwise offcial position; in
fact, such a thing hardly exists

In late 2003, a loose group of Israeli activists formed a political direct action
870up to oppose Itael's so-called separation barier (the wall orfence), The pat-
tern of activity agreed on at the start of the activity, and which remains to this
day, is that of a non-violent “propaganda of the deed”, as wel as leaving the
talking and institutionalizing to others

A typical sentiment amongst members of the group was rejection of the old
tactics of the Israeli peace movement as ineffectual and paternalistic. In fact,
it was fairly common to reject even the formation of a recognizable group, be.
cause spending energy on the organization of such a group was thought to be
2 waste of resources. Moreover, as far as political traditions and connections
are concemed, the group can more accurately be described as part of an inter.
national movement than as a part of the Israeli peace movement. In particular,
anarchist movements and the so-called anti-globalization movement, as well as
the International Solidarity Movement, provided the experience and connection
‘which shaped the work of AATW,

The group coalesced around the Mas'ha camp where, together with interna-
tional and Palestinian activists, a protest camp was set up on the route of the
wall at the village of Mas’ha. At the same time, as part of its resistance to the
ongoing construction of the wall, the group also cut the fence and destroyed
parts of it. At one such action in December 2003, an Israeli activist named Gil
Netamati was shot by IDF soldiers in both legs with live ammunition from close
range. The large amouat of publicty this incident received fixed the group's
previously rotating name as the name picked for that action: Anarchists Against
the Wall.

In Isracl,like many other scietics, the term “Anarchist” is commonly used
in a derogatory manner whose most accurate synonym is probably “Satanist”.
The setanic association actually serves two purposes: it frees the group from
considerations of its public image, which tend to paralyze political action, and

more importantly it demonstrates the group's intent to set its own agenda. This
demonsiration strengthens the group, as it offers its members and potential
members the option to act according o their honest opinion, as opposed
o taking a compromised position in a debate Whose terms are dictated by
others.

In late 2003 and early 2004, several Palestinian villages which were about
0 lose much of their lands to the wall formed Popular Commitiess to resist the
wall and began demonstrating almost daily. The connections made during the
Mas'ha camp lead to sraelis being invited to join those demonstrations and
withit, o the beginning of a long-term partnership between AAW and Popular
Committees in many villages.

14
AW began a period of very intense activity. There were almost daily
demonstrations in several villages and AAtW, with a group of several dozen
Jsraelis, managed o have a small presence at each one of the demonstra-
tions they were invited to. Of course, every Palestinian demonstration also
includes ited Israelis in the form of the army or border police. The
importance of the presence of Israeli activists at demonstrations was that
it significantly reduced the amount of violence the army used against dem-
onstrators. In fact, the army freely admits that ts regulations regarding live
fire change when they suspect there are sraelis at a demonstration®. The
latest instruction booklet provided to IDF soldiers serving in the west bank
licitly states that the rules of engagement are different for demonstrations.
which include sraelis. Still, even with the levels of violence reduced, nine
Palestinians were killed while demonstrating against the wall, some even
when Israclis were present. Thousands more wete injured or arrested and
some spent months in jail

Resistance to the wall in Israel is made difficult by the extreme racism preva-
lent in Israeli society, which makes principled opposition to the wall either
incomprehensible or interpreted as an endorsement of the murder of Israel
“This has meant that AAW hes remained marginalized and subject to legal per-
secution as well as violent attacks at demonstrations. To date, AAtW members
have been arrested more times than it is possible to count, 63 indictments have
been filed against members of the group and one activist has already been jailed
for several months. The routine activity for AAtW includes not only constant
contact with the group's lawyer - the excellent and dedicated Gaby Lasky - but
also personal acquaintance with nurses at one of the major trauma centers in
Tel Aviv.

Dealing with such levels of physical danger is hard for  loose group which
is pretty open to new people to join and come to demonstrations. It is a constant
concem for AAEW to try to be s careful as possible without abandoning its
Palestinians partners. However, it is not clear if safety precautions exist at all
which can reduce the risk at demonstrations. Of the serious injuries suffered by
‘members of AAtW or other Israelis invited by the group, only in one instance
could the activists have prevented the injury.

Another unique aspect of AAtW.s work is the joint struggle it wages together
‘with Palestinians. This, of course, is not without its difficulties. It is hard to ex-
pect Palestinians to immediately accept and trust Israelis. In addition to the fear
of spies and provocateurs, cooperation with Israclis also involves an element of
‘normalization’ which means an adjustment to the conditions of the occupation.
Tsraeli activists also bring with them cultural influences which might not be
welcomed in some parts of Palestinian society. In light of this, and although it
hes no formalized ideological platform, AAtW does insist on several principles
of joint work. The fist principle is that although the struggle is a joint struggle,
Palestinians are the ones who are affected more by the decisions taken within i,

s
and are therefore the ones who should make the important decisions. Second,
Israclis have a special responsibility to respect Palestinian self-determination,
including respecting social customs and keeping out of internal Palestinian pol.
itics (of which there is plenty).

‘Weighting the negative aspects of normalization versus the benefits of social
ties is a more difficult question. Unlike cultural standards such as modest behav-
ior and dress, it would be far more repressive to try to codify what constitutes
appropriate social ties, let alone demand it of individuals. The only principle is
the general policy of respecting requests by Palestinian Popular Committees in
this regard as well.

 The amount of details above might give the impression that the difficulties
in a joint struggle are larger than they really are. Instead, the joint struggle fac-
es only one main difficulty: the Isracli state. The attention given to the issues
above is meant to highlight the process of political development which AAIW
has gone through together with its Palestinian partners. Over several years of
intense struggle, at certain low points the above difficulties came to the surfoce
and had to be dealt with. As perhaps the main contact between the Israsli peace
movement and the Palestinian peace movement, AACW transmited its experi-
ence to the Tsraeli peace movement and pleyed an important role in its politi-
cal development. At the time of AAtW's beginning, the idea of Tsraels joining
Palestinian demonstrations seemed incredible to the huge majority of the Isracl}
Ieft. After several years of activity, the number of Israclis who have themsclves
participated in joint demonstrations with Palestinians is in the thousands and in-
cludes many who are personally not marginalized at all. Sil, other than polifical
‘partes with a mostly-Arab constituency, no Isracl political party has supported
the join struggle against the wall

The obligation of citizens to resist criminal acts and policies carried out by
their government is recognized in international law and requires lsraelis to do
al they can to resist their government. More importantly, the moral obligation
of resisting the wall becomes apparent to anyone who has witnessed it cutting
off villages and towns, or merely seen its path drawn on & map. To look away
and ignore the crimes committed in our names, with our taxes, by the students

we train or those we keep polite company with, s o lose part of one's humanity.
‘This is & burden which Israclis are enslaved to by fear. In that sense, the act of
disobedience and resistance is also an act of personal liberation; an option open
to all Israclis who would join the struggle.

The struggle of Palestinians against those who would have them move
away or disappear is a constant struggle to simply exist. This struggle is
joined by Isracli supporters one day at a time, at a certain risk to themsclves.
The harshest penalty likely for Israelis does not include a lifetime of finan-
cial insecurity and being subjected to the whims of occupying soldiers. I
those penalties are not enough to deter our Palestinian partners — it should
not deter us as well.

1
REFERENCES

1. Dtsclents web sit, bitp/wwvw biselem.org/English/Freedom_of Movement/Statistics.asp
2. Bselents web st, htp//wr biselem.org/Englisb/Freedom_of_ Movement/Checkpoints_
and_Forbidden_Roads.asp

3. Amirn Hass, “Impossible Travel”, Haaretz English edition 19-1-07

4. Amira Hss, “Marking the terrtory", Haaretz English Edition, January 3 2007

5. Efraim Sneh, “Sharon's plan will perpette war”, Haaretz English edition Oct 11-04
6.1bid

7. The current scael government s ead by the “Kadima” (*Forward) party, whose election
slogan was “continuing Sharon's way"

8. Ron Pundak snd Menahem Klein, “Asother
from Hebrew.

9. Yossi Sard, "My afidavit to The Hague?, Haaretz English dition 21-01-2004

10.Tbid

11 Thid, my emphasis

12.1bid.

‘Abba Eban, Dec Spiegel, Noveber 5, 1969

14, Natan Sharansky, “The Importance of a Second House”, Haaretz 13-09-2004. My transla
tion from Hebrew. Hezbollah denies responsibility for the bombing and it has not been proven.
that it s esponsible for the bombing. See “So who's guilty?; Argentina's judiciary”, The Econo-
Imit, 11-9-2004, Furthecmore, unlike Sharausky, a leat in ofiialstaements,the Hezbollah
draws a distnction between a conlict with Israel and a conflct with Jews. Sec for example:
Akivn Eldar quoting Nawaf Musawi who he describes as Nasralla's man “there is nothing

in Hezbollah ideology which makes t an enemy of Jews.” Akiva Eldar, “Flamas Waats to get
Stronger, Hezbolsh is Calm: it Already Won', Haaretz 19-4-2005

15. There i a long and ugly history of antisemitic expressions in the Zionist movement. Sec
Leoni Bremner Zionist in the Age of the Dictators, a Reappraisal”, Lawrence Hill Books
1983; More recent examples run up to the 2006 scae lections, when a television ad by the
Iiberal “Shinui” party was banned by the chairperson of the central clections commite for
“using imagery which looks like it was taken from antisemitic propaganda” press release of the
Isaeli centrl elections committee, 15-3-06.

16. Arieh OSullivan “The Bedouin Threat.. on the Strategic, Social, Demographic, and Crimi-
sl Problems Brewing in racl's Wild South”, Jerusalem Post, Up front, 10-24-2004

17. Alan Cooperman, “Is Terrorism Tied To Christian Sect?”, Washington Post June 2, 2003

18. Yooz Vaval “The State a the Supreme Court: Secarity Concems ae not the Orly Ones.
which Tnfivence the Route of the Wall", Haaretz, 04-07-2004, My translation from Hebrew

19. Meron Rappaport, “A Wall in their Heart", Yedioth Abaronoth, 23-5-2003. An Eoglish
translation is available at itp://gush-shalom.org/archives/wall_yediot_eng html

20, Aluf Ben, “Olmert: Ariel wil Remain an Infegral Part of srael”, Haaretz 15-03-2006. My

jonisa”, Haaretz 10-10-2004, My translation

1
transiation from Hebrew

1. Nomi Levenkron nd Yoss Dahan, “Wome s Commodites: Trafiking in Wornn i
Yarael 003", Holine fo migrant workers sha L'k - it finistcots a he s
ot Lrcl was ls s i the Stae Depactment’s 2005 and 2004 “Traing b P
Reportas one ofth countries which “do no fully comply with the Act's minmus standards
but are making significant efforsto bring themselves into compliance

22 Axivn Bldar, “Annexaion i mportant,Securiy les 50", Haarez 19-08.2006. My rangl.
tion Grom Hebrew

2 st Shev - lsael Naonal News “Security B 1o Cuts T Pats of G Etion
03-10-0 it e raelationlaew.con/aews.pp2d=00879 ; Artz Sheve ey
National News, "KM Marciano Yitzhaki Opposed (0 the Construction of the Wal
hit/wowwnm,co.iUNews/News.aspu/ 158106 (in brow)

24. Muf Ben, Amos Hare, Gideon Alon and Amiram Bareke, “The Wal i the South s
Delayed Because Sharon Wats o Distance it rom the Green Line”, Haaree, 2.9-5004 My
translaion from Hebrew

25 Yuva Youz, High Court o usics Ordered 30k of the Separtion ence Caeel,
Hisaretz 30-6-2004; Yo Yous“High cour of Justic Orderedthe Fence around the 7
Settlement Dismantld" Haaretz 15-6-06. My transltio from Hebrew in ot

26. Yuval Youz, High court ofJustce Rejecs Hague Ruling about the Separaion Fene',

Hawretz, 15-9-05. My translation from Hebrew

7. Yval Youz, “Bara' LastVedit the IDF can Assassinate”, Hacets 15-12.06 My .
tion from Hebrew.

28. I'ad Burnal, pecsonal communication
29. Aviv L

i, “Picking thir bates” Haaretz English editon, 15-04-2004

|SRAEL - THE ONLY DEMOCRACY
IN THE MIDDLE EAST?

W Anat Guthmann & Anat Matar

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS - JOURNALISTS' ACCESS TO THE GAZA
STRIP DENIED

Reporters Without Borders has recenty ranked lsracl 149th o 160 counties
regarding the respect of the freedom of the press.

ot journalists have been forbidden to enter the Gaza strip for more than
o years. Amira Hass and Shiomi Eldar, two well-tnown Isaeli eporters,
O tered Gaza before the offensive and reported from there, were immedi-
stely arrested upon returning o Israel.

“Fhe lsraeli High Courts rling of Jamuary 2nd 2009 to allow a pool of rep-
esemtatives of the world media (only ight o them) to ente Gaza under stict
e tary supervision was not implemented by the state until the present day.
Towever, two Tsraei reporters, Ron Ben Yishay rom Ynet and Amos Harel
oo Haacetz, were allowed into the Gaza Stip, on the conition hat they ac-
Fmpary the Tsracli army. Thi fact exposes the le of the army's spokesmen
O he reasons not to allow journalists into the Gaza Sitip despie the HCJ
decision.

o the ther hand, dozens of journalsts that cannot enter the Gaza strip are
secaentin Sderot and ofhercites near sralssouther border. Thisfctcrates
O balanced coverage of the events, which is exactly the lsracl goal n win-
ing the media war s the world receives one-sided reparts.

Foreign joumalists have been detained, and online forums have becn con-
acted and requested o remove threads, which the army considered dangerous
tter to securty or morale. The parliament has happily jumped on the band-
agon, withone prominent MK sugaesting fo block alJazcera and al Arzbiya
ue o the demoralizing effect it has on our Aab populaon'.

rhese actions are placing lsrael at risk of appearing like & militry dictator-
ip', sad ABC’ Simon McGregor Wood. "When Isacl prevents journlists

o reporting it is runing therisk of being portrayed in the same manner as
countries such as Burma and Zimbabwe', he added.

THE REPRESSION OF THE PROTEST - EXTENSIVE FORCE, MASS
ARRESTS, INVESTIGATIONS AND THREATS.

Since the beginping of the offensive on Gaza, protesters met police and army
prutality in most of the peaceful demonstrations taking place on a daily basis.
fore than 800 lsrael citizens have been arrested during or aflr non-violent
Nermonstrations against the war, for isturbing the peac, waving Pelestinian
ags, and urin the nation's moral’. Others were called in for interogation

[
by the security services, and were intimidated, threatened and warned no (o
take purt n any demonstration, given house arrests and forbidden 10 entey e
ta ciie. The large majority of those arrested are Isracli Palestnian it
Abaut 30 others belong to the non-Zionist Jewish Ief wing, A third are e
18. More than 100 have already been indicted.
¥ estinian, Isaeli and intermational protesters in the West bank, paricipas.

ing in non-violent demonstration against the attack on Gaza, met extras army
Yiolence, which used live rounds, killing 4 Palestinian demonstrators 1y Niilin,
Kalkilia and Sawad. Many others were wounded. Demonstrators testifed s
in the wake of Operation Cast Lead, the army has reintroduced the use of the
Rouger 22, & semiautomaic rift that uses live ammuniton to isperse srona
Thistiffe was banned afer the second Inifaca for causin the deaths of s
ber of Palestinians, including youths and children.

*_ On January 12th, 2009, the Central Elections Commitee disqualified the
Lsraeli Arab lists of Balad and Rasm-Tael from participating in the Coming

- lections by  large majority inlight of thei apposiion to th mlary atcst
This decision was annulled on January 215t 2009 by the HCJ

The real test of democracy is in times of war and conflict, and it is in those

times that it is measured. These receat eveats join the long lst of Isrpel op-
pression fowards its Iracli and Palestinian citizens as well 3 the Pajestl
an habitants of the Gaza strip and the west bank. By denying the most basic
democrati ights: recdom of the press, the right o protestand minoriy rights,
Jaracl bas shown itself once more fa from the democratc values to whiop s
pretends.

(Jamuary 30, 2009)

ANARCHISTS UNDER FIRE

® Neve Gordon

Over the past five years the Israeli peace camp has dwindled. Last month
‘marked the occupation's 40th anniversary, and no more than 4,000 people gath-
1o in Tel-Aviv to protest Isrel's longstanding military rule. OF the demon-
irators who did show up, only a few hundred are what one could call ardent
Setivists - people who have dedicated their lfe to peace and justice

'Among the most committed of these are Isracl's anarchists. Yet, over the past
0 yearsthey have been under an ongoing atack, and it s becoming more and
more difficult for them to continue their struggle.

Eetablished in 2003, the anarchists are made up of young sraelis, mostly
in their twenties, who work closely with the Palestinian popular village com-
M ities in order to resst lsracl's occupation. They have no official leaders, no
Sffce, and no paid staff, and yet they have managed to accomplish more than
any well-oiled NGO and social movements. They are perhaps best known
for their efforts in the small village of Bilin, where for more than two years
weekly demonstrations have been staged against the wall that Lsrael is building
on Palestinian land.

2
‘The anarchists are active in numerous other villages and towns as well. Day
in and day out, they travel in small groups through the West Bank, supporting
non-violent direct action that help Palestinian farmers gain access to their fields
and crops, while opposing the construction of the separation barrier and the
confiscation of occupied land.

One of the most remarkable qualities of these young Israelis is their sub-
versive use of their own privilege, employing it not for self-interested social,
economic or political gain - as most people do - but rather in order to stand up
to power. The anarchists, in other words, exploit the privilege that comes with
their Jewish identity and use it as a strategic asset against the brutal policies of
the Jewish state.

As Jewish activists they are well aware that the Israeli military behaves very
differently when Isracli Jews are present during a protest in the West Bank and
that the level of violence, while still severe, is much less intense. Indeed, ac-
cording to Isracl soldiers the military has more stringent open fire regulations
for demonstrations in which non-Palestinians participate. So when a village's
public committees decides to carry out non-violent protests against the occupy-
ing power, the anarchists mingle with the demonstrating villagers, thus becom-
ing a human shield for all o those Palestinians who have chosen to follow the
path of Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King

Even though the anarchists are frequently beaten and arrested, they do not
desist. o date, about 10 Pelestinians have been killed in demonstrations against
the separation barrier and thousands have been wounded, a number that would
no doubt have been much greater had it not been for the fearless dedication of
the anarchists.

‘These unsung heroes are currently regarded in Israel as a fifth column, And
when the sraeli police began to realize that beating and detaining them would
not stop their stubborn resistance, a different strategy was adopted. Scores of
legal indictments were issued by the state prosecutor,

‘The anarchists took this as a new challenge. They have launched a legal
campaign, whose aim is to defend the basic civil right of all Israelis to resist
their government's rights-abusive policies. Leading this batle is Gabi Lasky, an
energetic lawyer, who spends many of her weekends releasing anarchists from
detention and her weekdays representing them in court,

Unlike the struggle inside the Occupied Territories, the legal battle to protect
civil liberties requires financial resources, which the anarchists do not have.
‘The state knows ths is the anarchists' Achilles heel and has been trying to un-
dermine their peace-building activities by making them pay hefty legal focs.
Although Lasky is working for litle more than minimum wage, the anarchists'
struggle cannot be sustained without help from concerned individuals around
the world. Find out how you can help online at wywawallsorg.

(August 3, 2007)

2
THE CARL VON OSSIETZY MEDAL
ACCEPTANCE SPEECH

B Anarchists Against the Wall

{On December 7, 2008, the Bil'in Popular Committee and Ancrchists Against the Wall
were jointly awarded the prestigious Carl von Ossietzy Medal in Berlin, given annually
by the International League of Human Rights and named after German Nobel Peace
Prize winner Carl von Ossietaky (1889-1938), who died in a Nazi concentration camp.
The following is a speech read at the ceremony by an AAW activist]

Hello,

I would like to be honest - am standing here, over this podium, although as
anarchists this situation raises very mixed feelings for me and my comrades
Honestly - we are reluctant to receive prizes for political activism. We would
prefer not to be singled out for glory, and receive gratitude for doing what we
feel i our duty. However, despite our anarchist reservations, which under nor-
mal circumstances would have prevailed, as Israelis and beneficiaries of our
country's unjust deeds toward Palestinians, we are very thankful for your sup-
port o the Palestinian struggle against Isracli Apartheid.

Here on this podium, just as in the olive groves of the West Bank, our pri-
mary moral duty is not to maintain ideological purity, but rather to stand with
Palestinians in their resistance to oppression. We recognize the importance of
garnering international support for the ongoing struggle, and the major contri-
bution of this award to this end. We believe that standing here, in the current
state of affairs, is a direct continuation of the blocking of bulldozers, standing
side by side with the stone throwers, or running away from teargas along with
Yyoung and elderly protesters.

Here, s in the olive groves, I would like to stress that we are not equal
partners, but rather occupiers who join the occupied in THEIR struggle. We
are aware of the fact that for many, the participation of Tsraelis in a Palestinian
struggle serves as & stamp of approval, but in our eyes, this partnership is not
about granting legitimacy. The Palestinian struggle s legitimate with or without
us. Rather, the struggle is an opportunity for us to cross, in action rather than
words, the barriers of national allegiance.

Over the past four years, and through over 200 demonstrations, Bil'in has be-
come a symbol and focal point for the movement against Isracl's wall, a move-
ment that for the past six years has mobilized thousands of people into g
roots popular resistance, and has forged an unprecedented on-the-ground,
Palestinien-Isracli struggle.

The fact that the movement is a civilian and unarmed one only serves to
accentuate the army’s excessive and unjust violence. Thousands have been in-
jured, hundreds jailed and imprisoned for lengthy periods and 15 were killed,

2
10 of them minors. We would like to dedicate this medal to the two most recent
casualtes of the strugale, ten year-old Ahmad Mousa and seventeen year-old

Youssef Amirah, who were murdered by border policemen in the village of
Nitilin four months ago, as part of the attempt to militarily suppress the wall-

related insurrection in the vilage.
Thank you again for supporting the /-——-—’"G\,p
joint popular struggle, ]
‘Anarchists Against the Wall

(December 7, 2008)

ANARCHISM, NATIONALISM
AND NEW STATES

W Uri Gordon

[The following is an excerpt from the book “Anarchy Alivel: Ani-authoritarian Politics
Jrom Pracice to Theory", by Uri Gordon, published by Pluto Press, 2008, Due to the
range of different and attimes conflicting opinions within AAtW regarding the one or two
state solutions, we would like to reemphasize that the following discussion represents
‘only the opinions of the artcle s author, not of Anarchists Against the Wall as a whole,]

[...] With the conflict in Palestine/Isracl so high on the public agenda, and
‘with significant anarchist involvement in Palestine solidarity campaigns, it is
surprising that the scant polemical anarchist contributions on the topic remain,
at best, irrelevant to the concrete experiences and dilemmas of movements
in the region. At their worst, they depart from anarchism altogether. Thus the
American Platformist Wayne Price (2002) descends into ‘very crude terms when
proclaimi

In the smoke and blood of Israel/Palestine these days, one point should be
clear, that Israel is the oppressor and the Palestinian Arabs are the oppressed.
Therefore anarchists, and all decent people, should be on the side of the Pal-
estinians. Criticisms of their leaderships or their methads of fighting are all
secondary; 5o is recognition that the Israeli Jews are also people and also have
certain collective rights. The first step, always, is to stand with the oppressed as
they fight for their freedom.

Asking all decent people to see someone else’s humanity and collective rights
as secondary to anything — whatever this is, this s not anarchism. Where does
Price’s side-taking leave the distinction between the Israeli government and
Isracli citizens, or solidarity with Israelis who struggle against te occupation
and social injustice? These Israelis are certainly not taking action because they
are “siding with the Palestinians”, but rather out of a sense of responsibility
and solidarity. For the anarchists among them, it is also clearly a struggle for
self-liberation from a militaristic, racist, sexist and otherwise unequal society.
Price’s complete indifference to those who consciously intervene against the
occupation and in multiple social conflicts within Lsraeli society rests on vast
generalizations about how “blind nationalism leads cach nation see itself and
the other as a bloc”. However, people who live inside a conflict are hardly that
nave ~ the author is only projecting his own, outsiders” black-and-white vision
onto the conflict, and the side tagged as black is subject to crass and dehumaniz-
ing language (see also Hobson, Price & Quest 2001). Unfortunately, this kind of
attitude has become a widespread phenomenon in the discourse of the European
and American Palestine-solidarity movement and the broader Left, represent-

2
ing what anarchist criics have been highlighting es a typically Leftist form of
Judeophobia o anti-Semitism (Austrizn and Goldman 2003, Michaels 2004,
Shot by both sides 2005).

Meanwhile, Price is so confident about having insight into to the just and
‘appropriate resolution that he permits himself to issue elaborate programs and
emands, down to the finer detais: unilateral Israeli withdrawal to 1967 lines,
a Palestinian state and the right of return, ending up in “some sort of *secular-
democratic’ or ‘binational’ communal federation” with “some sort of self-man-
aged non-capitalist economy”. Meanwhile “we must support the resistance of
the Palestinian people. They have the right to self-determination, that is, to
choose their leaders, their programs, and their methods of struggle, whatever
we think”,

‘Ablank cheque, then, to suicide bombings and any present or future Palestin-
ian elite. The statement’s imperative tone also begs the question: to whom, pre-
are Price’s “we” supposed to be issuing such elaborate demands? To the
Israeli state, backed perhaps by the potent threat of embassy occupations and
boycotts on academics, oranges and software? Or maybe to the international
community, or to the American state for that matter? In all cases this would
be a “politics of demand” which extends undue recognition and legitimation
1o state power through the act of demand itself ~ a strategy far removed from
anarchism.

Myopia towards what is happening on the ground is also & problem for Ryan
Chiang McCarthy (2002). Though taking issue with Price’s failure to distin-
guish between peoples and their rulers, McCarthy’s call for solidarity with lib-
ertarian forces on the ground is unfortunately extended only to struggles which
fll within his prejudiced Syndicalist gaze: “autonomous labor movements of
Palestinian and Israeli workers...A workers’ movement that bypasses the nar-
row lines of struggle...and fights for the unmediated demands of workers”,
Besides being entirely detached from reality — the prospects for autonomous
Iabour movements are as bleak in Israel/Palestine as they are in the rest of the
developed world — such a workerist fetish is also directly harmful. It reproduces
the invisibility of the many important struggles in Palestine/Israel that do not
revolve around work, and in which most anarchists happen to be participating.
Meanwhile, stubborn class reductionism demarcates no less narrow lines of
struggle than the ones which it criticizes, and does the protagonists violence by
forcing their actions into artficial frameworks. Thus Palestinians and lsraclis
are first and foremost “workers...manipulated by their rulers to massacre one
another”; army refusal is a “sparkling act of class solidarity carried out across
national Tines” (most refuseniks are middle-class, and self-declared Zionists
10 boot); while “the nationalist poison...drives Palestinian proletarian youth to
destroy themselves and Israeli fellow workers in suicide bombings”. This may
still be anarchism, but it is of a fossilized variety that forces obsolete formulas
of class struggle on a reality that is far removed from such orientations.

2
The root of the problem displayed by these writings is that the Palestinian-
Israeli conflit introduces complexites that are not casily addressed from & fra-
ditional anarchist standpoint. The tension between anarchists' anti-imperialist
commitments on the one hand, and their traditionally wholesale rebuttal of the
state and nationalism on the other, would seem to leave them at an impasse re-
garding the national liberation struggles of occupied peoples. The lack of fresh
thinking on the issue creates a position from which, it would seem, one cen only
fall back on the one-size-fits-ll formulae. In order to understand why ths is so,
let me now look at anarchist critiques of nationalism.

Prevalent in anarchist literature is a distinction between the “artficial” na-
tioualism constructed by the state on the one hand, and the “natural” feeling.
of belonging to a group that has shared ethnic, linguistic and/or cultural char-
acteristics. Michael Bakunin (1871:324) argued that the fatherland (“patria’
represents a “manner of living and feeling” — that is, a local culture ~ which is
“always an incontestable result of a long historic development”, As such, the
deep love of fatherland among the “common people..is a natural, real love?,
However, the corruption of this love under statist institutions is what anarchists
commonly rejected as nationalism - a primary loyalty to one’s nation-state. On
this reading, nationalism is a reactionary ideological device intended to create a
false unity of identity and interest between antagonistic classes within a single
country, pitting the oppressed working classes of different states against each
other and averting their aitention from the strugge against their real oppressors.
‘Thus for Bakunin “political patriotism, or love of the State, is not the faithful
expression” of the common people’s love for the fatherland, but rather an ex-
pression “distorted by means of false abstraction, always for the benefit of an
exploiting minority” (ibid.).

The most elaborate development of this theme was made by Gustav Landau-
er, who used the term “folk” to refer to the type of organic local and cultural
identity that s suppressed by state-sponsored nationalism and would return o
prominence in a free society. He saw folk identity as a unique spirit (Geist) con-
sisting of shared feelings, ideals, values, language, and beliefs, which unifies
individuals into a community (Landauer 1907). He also considered it possible
o have several identitics, seeing himself as  human being, a Jew, a German
and a southern German. In his words,

1 am happy about every imponderable and ineffable thing that brings about
exclusive bonds, unities, and also differentiations within humanity. If I want fo
transform pariotism then 1do not proceed in the slightest against the fine fact
of the nation...but against the mixing up of the nation and the state, agains the
confusion of differentiation and opposition. (Landaver 1973/1910:263)

Rudolf Rocker adopted Landaver’s distinction in his book Nationalism and
Culture, where a folk is defined as “the natural result of social union, a mutual
association of men brought about by a certain similarity of external conditions
of living, a common language, and special characteristics due to climate and

27
geographic environment” (Rocker 1937:200-1). However, Rocker clarifies that
itis only possible to speak of the folk, as an entity, in terms that specific to
given location and time. This is because, over time, “cultural reconstructions
and social stimulation always occur when different peoples and races come into
closer union. Every new culture s begun by such a fusion of different folk ele-
‘ments and takes its special shape from this” (346). What Rocker calls the “na-
tion”, on the other hand, is the artificial idea of a unified community of interest,
‘spirit or race created by the state. Thus, like Landauer and Bakunin, it was the
‘primary loyalty to one’s nation state that Rocker condemned as “nationalism”.
At the same time, these writers expected that with the abolition of the state, a
space would be opened for the self-determination and mutually-fertilizing de-
velopment of local folk cultures.

‘These attitudes to nationalism, however, had as their primary reference point
the European nationalisms associated with existing states. The issue of national-
ism in the national liberation struggles of stateless peoples received far less at-
tention from anarchists. Kropotkin, for one, saw national liberation movements
positively, arguing that the removal of foreign domination was a precondition
to broader social struggle (Grauer 1994). On the other hand, many anarchists
have argued that national liberation agendas only obfuscate the social struggle,
and end up creating new local elites that continue the same patterns of hierarchy
and oppression.

“This tension comes very strongly to the fore in the case of srael/Palestine.
‘The overwhelming majority of Palestinians want a state of their own alongside
Israel. So how can anarchists reconcile their support for Palestinian liberation
with their anti-statist principles? How can they promote the creation of yet an-
other state in the name of “national liberation™? The attempt to distance oneself
from support for Palestinian statehood is what motivates McCarthy's workerist
stance, s well as the British syndicalists of the Solidarity Federation who de-
clare that “we support the ight of the Palestinian people...fand] stand with those
Israclis who protest against the racist government...What we cannot do is sup-
port the creation of yet another state in the name of ‘national liberation’™ (Soli-
darity Federation 2002).

But there are two problems with such an attitude. First, it invites the charge
of paternalism since it implies that anarchists are somehow better than Palestin-
jans at discerning their real interests. Second, and more importantly, it leaves
anarchists with nothing but empty declarations to the effect that “we stand with
and support all those who are being oppressed by those who have the power to
do so” (ibid.), consigning anarchists to a position of irrelevance in the present
tense. On the one hand, it is clear that the establishment of a capitalist Palestin-
ian state through negotiations among existing and would-be governments would
only mean the “submission of the Intifada to a comprador Palestinian leader-
ship that will serve Israel”, as well as neoliberal exploitation through initiatives
like the Mediterranean Free Trade Area (Anarchist Communist Initiative 2004).

2
On the other hand, by disengaging from concrete Palestinian demands for
state, the same Israeli anarchists are left with nothing to propose except “an
entirely different way of life and equality for all the inhabitants of the region...
2 classless anarchist-communist society” (ibid.). This is all well and good, but
what happens in the meantime?

While anarchists surely can do something more specific in solidarity with
Palestinians than just saying that “we need a revolution”, any such action would
appear to be hopelessly contaminated by statism. The fact that anarchists nev-
ertheless engage in solidarity with Palestinian communities, internationally and
on the ground, requires us o grip this particular bull by its horns, Here, [ believe
there are at least four coherent Ways in which anarchists can deal with the di-
Temma of support for a Palestinian state. :

‘The first and most straightforward response is to acknowledge that there is
indeed  contradiction here, but to insis that in this given situation solidarity
s important even if it comes at the price of inconsistency. Endorsement of Pal.
estinian statehood by anarchists can be seen as a necessary pragmatic position.
It docs nobody any good to effectively say to the Palestinians, “sorry, we'll let
You remain non-citizens of a brutal occupation until after we're done abolishing
capitalism”. A point to be made here is that states have a track record of hostil-
ity to stateless peoples, refugees and nomads. The Jews and the Palestinians are
two among many examples of oppressed stateless peoples in the modern era.
‘While many Jews were citizens (often second-class citizens) of European coun-
tries at the beginning of the twentieth century, an important precondition for the.
Holocaust was the deprivation of Jews’ citizenships, rendering them stateless,
As a result, anarchists can recogpize Palestinian statehood as the only viable
Way to alleviate their oppression in the short term. This amounts to a specific
value judgment whereby anti-imperialist or even basic humanitarian concens
take precedence over an otherwise uncompromising anti-statism.

A second, different response argues that there is no contradiction at all in an-
archist support the establishment of a Palestinian state. This is simply because
Palestinians are already living under a state ~ Israe] - ard that the formation of
2 new Palestinian state creates only a quantitative change and not a qualitative
one. Anarchists object to the state as a general scheme of social relations - not
0 this or the other state, but to the principle behind them all. It is a misunder-
standing to reduce this objection to quantitative terms; the number of states in
the world adds or sublracts nothing from enarchiss” assessment of how closely
the world corresponds to their ideals. Having one single world state, for exam..
ple, would be as problematic for anarchists as the present situation (if not more.
50), although the process of creating one would have abolished some 190 states,
So from a purely anti-statst anarchist perspective, for Palestinians to live under
2 Palestinan state rather than an Isracli state would be , at worst, just as objec-
tionable. A Palestinian statc, no matter how capitalist, corrupt or pseudo-demo-
cratic, would in any event be less brutal than an occupying Isracli state.

2
A third response, informed by Kropotkin's view mentioned above, is that an-
archists can support a Palestinian state as a strategic choice, a desirable stage in
a longer-term struggle. No-one can sincerely expect that the situation in Isracl/
Palestine will move from the present one to anarchy in one abrupt step. Hence,
the establishment of a Palestinian state through a peace treaty with the Israeli
state, although far from a real solution to social problems, may turn out to be
a positive development on the way to more radical changes. The reduction of
everyday violence on both sides could do a great deal to open up more political
space for economic, feminist and environmental struggles, and would thus con-
stitute a positive development from a strategic point of view. The establishment
of a Palestinian state could form a bridgehead towards the flowering of myriad
social struggles, in Isreel and in whatever enclave-polity emerges under the.
Palestinian ruling elite. For anarchists, such a process could be a sigaificant step.
forward in a longer-term strategy for the destruction of the Israel, Palestinian,
and all other states along with capitalism, patriarchy and so on.

A fourth and final response would be to alter the terms of discussion alto-
gether, by arguing that whether or not anarchists support a Palestinian state is &
‘moot point, and leads to a false debate. What exactly are anarchists supposed to
do with their “support™? If the debate is to resolve itself in a meaningful direc-
tion, then the ultimate question is whether anarchists can and should take action
in-support of a Palestinian state. But what could such action possibly be, short
of declarations, petitions, demonstrations, and other elements of the “politics
of demand” that anarchists seek to transcend? One can hardly establish a state
through anarchist direct action, and the politicians who will eventually decide
on creating a Palestinian state are not exactly asking anarchists their opinion.
Seen in this light, debates about whether anarchists should give their short-term
“support” to a Palestinian state sound increasingly ridiculous, since the only
merit of such discussion would be to come up with a common platform. On
this view, anarchists may take action in solidarity with Palestinians (as well as
Tibetans, West Papuans and Sahrawis for that matter) without reference to the
question of statchood. The everyday acts of resistance that anarchists join and
defend in Palestine — e.g. removing roadblocks or defending olive harvesters
from attacks by Jewish settlers — are immediate steps to help preserve people’s
livelihoods and dignity, not a tep towards statehood. Once viewed from a lon-
ger-term strategic perspective, anarchists’ actions have worthwhile implications
whether or not they are attached to a statist agenda of independence.

For one thing, Israelis taking direct action alongside Palestinians is a strong
public message in itself. The majority of the public certainly views Israeli an-
archists as misguided, naive youth at best and as traitors at worst. The latter
response happens because the joint Palestinian-Israeli struggle transgresses the
fundamental taboos put in place by Zionist militarism. Alongside the living
example of nonviolence and cooperation between the two peoples, the struggle
forces Israeli spectators to confront their dark collective traumas. Israelis who

0
demonstrate hand-in-hand with Palestinians are threatening because they arc
afiaid neither of Arabs nor of the Second Holocaust that they are supposedly
destined to perpetrate. Notice how everything comes out when the anarchisis
are vilified by other Israclis;the fear of annibilation, the enemy as & calculated
‘murderer, and victims’ guilt expatiated through the assertion of self-defense and
Just war as unexamined axioms. And this is threatening on a deeper level than
any hole in the fence — but then again, anarchists didn't get ther reputation as
trouble-makers for nothing.

REFERENCES

Anarchist Communist Initiative, sracl (2004) “Two States for Two Peoples - Two
States Too Many” (leaflet), in FACA, We are all Anarchists against the Wall

Austrian, Guy Izhak and Ella Goldman (2003) “How to strengthen the Plestine Soli-
darity Movement by making friends with Jows”, Clamor magazine Communique #20;
hitpe/www.clamormagazine.org/communique/communique20.df

Aviraim, Adina (2003) “Militarization of knowledge; hitp://www.newprofile.org/
‘showdata.asp7pid=347

Ayalon, Uri (2004) “Resisting the Apartheid Wal
against the Hall

Bakunin, Michacl (1953/1871) “A crcular leter to my frends in Italy”, in G. P Maxi-
mo, ed., The Political Philosophy of Bakunin (London: Free Press)

‘Grauer, Mina (1994) “Anarcho-Nationalism: Anarchist attitudes towards Jewish na-
tionalism and Zionism", Modern Judaism 14.1 B

Hobson, Chistopher Z., Wayne Price and Matthew Quest (2001) “New Intifada” (de-
bate), The Ulopian 2; btp:/iwww.ainfos.ca/0 1 /apriainfos00225 html

Lendaver, Gustav (1907) “Volk und Land: Dreifig stische Thesea, Die Zukunft
(an. 12)

(1973/1910) “Schwache Stattsminner, Schwacheres Volk!", Der Soialist (June 10),
‘Trans.in Bugene Lunn, Prophet of Community: the Romaniic Socialism of Gustay
Landauer (Berkeley: University of Califoria Press)

MecCarthy , Ryan Chiang (2002) “Anarchists and Palestine: Class Struggle or Popular
Front?”, NEFAC website; hitp:/makhno.nefac.net/htmi/drupal/Tq=node/view/15§

Michcls, Lucy (2004) “Fear and Loathiag”, New Internationalist 372 (October);
htp://wwwffp.org/BackgroundJimichaels htm

Price, Wayne (2001) “Anarchism and the Isreeli-Palestinian War”, Barricada 17,
Rocker, Rudolf (1937) Nationalism and Culture (New York : Covic, Friede)

Shot by both sides (2005) “Anti semitism and the Left", Melbourne Indymedia; http:/
wwwmelbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/02/8795 1 php

Solidarity Federation (2002) “Human Rights: Yes — State of Palestine: No, Direct Ac-
tion 23; hup:fwwew directa.forced.co.ulsback issues/DA 23/regulars2.him

" inFdCA, We are all Anarchists

3
DYKES AND THE HOLY WAR
THE FIGHT AGAINST APARTHEID AND
QUEER STRUGGLES IN ISRAEL/PALESTINE

W Yossi Bartal

[First published in September 2007 in the book “Barrieren durchbrechen! Isracl /
Paldstina: Gewalreiheit, Kriegsdienstverweigerung, Anarchismus", Edited by Sebas-
tian Kalicha, from the publishing house of Grasswurzelrevolution]

As a queer-anarchist activist from Israel I am quite often confronted with
questions concerning the engagement of queer groups or individuals in the
Palestinian struggle against Israels Apartheid regime. How could I, as queer
and as an anarchist, fight for the establishment of a State where the powers
of occupation will just change hands and will erect new and old oppression?
What do we have to do with & National movement that is reconstructing the
same national ideals we are working to dismantle in our own society? In this
article 1 will try to examine these questions and expand my thoughts on the
tole of Solidarity and joint struggle from a queer-anarchist perspective.

THE FIGHT AGAINST THE OCCUPATION AS A FIGHT FOR CHANGE IN
OUR OWN SOCIETY

Maybe the most important point to clarify in the beginning of this text is
the role that the occupation since 1967, and the oppression of the Palestinian

2
Minority in Israel since 1948 (‘48 Palestinians), play in Isracli-Jewish society.
‘The state of Israel, which clais to be a “Jewish and Democratic state” and to
uphold equal rights for all it inhabitants, is having great difficulties maintain-
ing its democratic aspirations in light of its colonialist and religious nature, It
is highly recognized that the democratic rights and freedoms of members from
even the “more privileged groups” in Israel are suffering from the 40 year-old
ongoing occupation, and the social reality that emerged from it. The need for
national unity in the face of ever-coming wars, the rapid Militarization of a
Society that needs to control every step of 3 million Palestinians, and not for-
getting the Demographic war that needs to be waved against the Palestinian
uterus, take its toll from minority groups in Israel and harm all emancipation
struggles like the ones of the Feminist movement, the LGBTQ community,
‘workers organization, Ecological campaigns, Ethiopian and Mizrahi (Jews
from Arab decent) groups and many others. In a society that is in a constant
state of emergency, it is very difficul to fight for social justice o even speak
aboutit.

‘The history of the LGBT rights movement in Isracl might serve as an exam-
ple for the infiuences of major political events on a specific struggle for equal
rights. The existence of Gay and Lesbian groups since the 1970s, together with
several openly gay atists, poets and film-makers, did create a small circle of
understanding and tolerance for sexual minorities, but no one could ignore the.
fact that the biggest and strongest wave of LGBT political action and successes
took place in the 1990s, particularly after the election of Rabin (together with
the big electoral achievement of Meretz, the Zionist liberal-left party) and the
beginning of the Oslo "peace process" with the PLO. As unrealistic and false.
s they were, the hopes that the failed "peace process" raised among the Isracli
public - hopes for a real democratic tate, for an end to religious coercion and
anew middle east - gave the push that the LGBTQ community needed in order
o gain recognition and legal achievements. The second Intifada, orchestrated
with the reemergence of religious control, nationalism and militarism, stopped
these processes and, one might argue, also led to the big backlash and the huge
wave of homophobic violence, in the streets as well as in the media, which
‘was sparked by the aftempt to lead an international gay pride parade in West-
Jerusalem.

‘Thus it is clear for many political activists in progressive circles that the n
tional conflict currently blocks any kind of radical progress, disables buikding
of coalitions, and is being used and intensified quite often in order to silence
social conflicts inside Isracl (one can find a similar phenomena within Pales-
tinian society, were the struggle against Israeli occupation is being used by
some reactionary groups to silence social and feminist critics). The first step
for a radical social and feminist change in Israeli society must then be an end
1o the occupation - but what does it really mean?

)
THE OCCUPATION NEVER STOPS

*When the occupation will end..", how many times did we say this sen-
tence to ourselves, fantasizing over a future in the paradise we will live in, and
becoming more and more cynical and disillusioned with every passing year.
Today we know better - the occupation is not going to end, it is here to stay.
2 truths stand before my eyes as I make this statement: firt, the end of the
occupation with a two-state solution based on the *67 borders is unrealistic,
and second, the occupation is not just "the occupation of 1967" but a much
broader situation existing under the control of the state of Isracl.

Asolution comprised of two national states coexisting side by side as equals
is today a sad joke, end maybe it always was. This much-endorsed solution
was hijacked from its progressive supporters many years ago already (it was
only the Communist party in Israel that demanded "two states for two people”
in the 80s), and distorted it in order to legitimize the Apartheid of the 21t
Century. Today we know what these two states will to look like: barbed-wired
Bantustans surrounded by the same big military camp known as Israel. The
‘occupation will just continue under the new Orwellian definition of Peace
process and a false independence.

But opposition to the two-states solution is not based solely on its imple-
‘mentation being impossible, but also on the fact that it ignores numerous as-
pects and existing problems. The occupation of ‘67 cannot be understood as
an external problem, an invader's colonial fight. The occupation of 67 is not
an external problem disconnected from Israels internal problems. The Apart-
heid and the politics of occupation are the very basis of the state of Isracl: the
ethnic cleansing of 800,000 Palestinians in 1948 and the continued refusal to
allow their return, the barefaced discrimination and the ever-increasing police
violence against ‘48 Palestinians, the need to settle and protect the land from
the illegal people, to judaize the periphery, to wage a demographic war - all of
these take place in "Israel" and not in what is known as the "occupied territo-
ries". The occupation doesn't stop at the checkpoint, it is all around us, there
is no "here” and “there”. Israel is the occupation.

‘THE NECESSITY OF THE JOINT STRUGGLE

The strugge against occupation and Apartheid must be waged, not because
they are the first step towards the revolution, but simply because daily war
crimes and mass human rights violations shouldn't be allowed to happen, re-
gardless of whether the victims of these crimes are revolutionary Anarchists
or hard-working, poor conservative Muslims. The fact that the oppressed
sector is not the perfect revolutionary subject (if there is such a thing) does
not in any way diminish my obligation to stand alongside it against the state
- my state - which is curtailing its basic rights. This should be enough to ex-
‘plain why one should fight fiercely against the occupation. However, fighting
against something is never enough; we need to fight for something, for a dif-

3
ferent future, for what we think is the best solution for all people to live with
- but what is it?

One of the most imporiant issues for Isracl’s radical lef, especially since
the beginning of the Intifad, is the joint political work of Palestinians and
Israeli Jews. This could be understood as a reaction to the racist politics Is-
rael stands for: total separation between Israclis and Palestinians, be it with
walls (in 48 srael and in the west bank), checkpoints and Apartheid roads,
or through separate schools, racist and religious marriage laws and racist ha-
rassment of "Arab-looking" people at the entrance of every mall, restaurant
or club. In such a blatantly racist atmosphere, the most radical act is to break
this separation, by demonstrating together with Palestinians, living together,
talking to each other, loving and caring for each other - even to make love
with each other. It s not very well-recognized what a strong and amazing
‘emotional effect meeting Palestinians for the first time as equal partners in
a struggle, or even becoming friends with them, has on an Israeli Jew, and
how important it is to have these contacts in order to challenge your own rac-
ist and orientalist attitudes and destroy the “Clash of Cultures” theory (1 can
personally admit that sometimes it was only my emotional connection to my
several Palestinian friends that kept me sane under the constant wave of racist
and nationalist propeganda). To come together, to live together — Ta’ayush in
Arabic - is simultaneously our means and our ends.

LIBERATION IS A PROCESS

Bringing down the borders of nation and race might be the ultimate goal,
but the situation is a bit more challenging: Palestinians, as an ethnic group
suffering from national oppression and devoid of its own self-determination
and state, i fighting against his oppression in the most common and familiar
‘way: Palestinians are lcading a national liberation struggle in hope of achiev-
ing an independent, national state. The fact that people forced to live under
racist or nationalist oppression merge into a national group as a way for fight-
ing for their rights, along with the sad fact that almost all national liberation
struggles create new oppressive systems, should not be alien to us as Israeli
Jews.

But what should do as Anarchists in this struggle? What are we actually
fighting for, and with whom? Are we trying to be a part of this "national Lib-
eration process” as some Israeli radical Ief activists do, and see ourselves as
Jewish-Palestinians? Or do we believe that national liberation is just a point
one should go through, one step forward, and that the day it ends victoriously
(and another good question would be what does the end of a national lib
tion struggle in Palestine mean?) willalso be the day the exploited Palestinian
masses start the social revolution together with their Jewish working class
brothers and sisters? Or maybe it i totally irrelevant what we think or want,
because we are a part of the colonialist society and as such should only offer

35
our unconditional solidarity to the goals and needs of the oppressed sector?
These questions, although cynically phrased, are not entirely false. National
liberation s always ambiguous: it s the liberation from colonialist oppres-
sion and af the same time the construction of new models of oppressions and
exploitation, and it is exactly within this ambivalent situation that we need to
choose our path. This becomes even more complicated when we talk about a
colonialist situation that cannot be dealt with by driving the colonialist pow-
ers back to their home-countries, but rather through de-colonizing the settler
society, taking the Israelis into account not only as the current oppressors
but also es 2 people that deserves the same freedoms and rights as all other
peoples in the region.

‘The joint Palestinian-Israeli struggle - the fight against the wall that AALW
is leading, or the many campaigns that Tw’ayush organized in the occupied
teritories or in ‘48 Israel - seem to be the best way to tackle the many contra-
dictions we face in a politically productive way. The joint work of Israclis and
Palestinians is in this sense one of the goals, and maybe the most important
goal, of every campaign we take part n, be it the wail, house demolitions or
resisting army invasions. Through this work we deconstruct the racist foun-
dations of the conflict. An Israeli taking part in a Palestinian demonstration,
risking his life and body in the face of brutal army oppression, is challenging
not only the basic understandings of the Israeli soldier (soldiers ask us quite
often, before or after shooting at us, if we are not afraid to get killed inside
the villages by their Palestinian residents), but also those of the Palestinian
farmer that met Israelis only as their oppressors.

Naturally, the coming together of Palestinians and Israelis is not an easy
task for both sides. We must remember that many cultural, political and social
differences exist alongside our positions of power within this conflit, posi-

ions we cannot simply ignore out of hope or belief that we are all just equal
‘partners in a struggle. The struggle to change and challenge Palestinian cul-
ture with its Patriarchal, Militarist and Homophobic elements is not our task
but that of our Palestinian comrades to whom we must offer our solidarity -
first and foremost by lifting the weight of the occupation from their shoulders
and fighting those same elements in our own society. Liberation is always. a
process, and it can evolve and intensify only by removing the biggest obstacle
that stands in our way.

“The process of trying to build & joint future for Israclis and Palestinians in
the present rife with so many preconditions raises plenty of contradictions.
Our greatest task is finding out how to avoid these contradictions stopping
us from carrying on our fight, as well as finding out how to learn from
them and embrace them into a new understanding of the struggle against
global Capitalism. We are on the geographical and ideological frontline of

the new War, and our experiences, victories and failures will echo around
the globe.

A s

HERE MURDERERS ARE HEROES

W Surah Assouline

On Tuesday evening, July 27th, 2008,  few of us gathered at the Vegan
Community House for a meeting. Shortly before the meeting was scheduled
to begin, we received the news: a child was murdered by the army in Nil'n,
Minutes later, five of us quickly headed out o the village. When we got there,
‘hundreds of peaple were in the streets, rioting out of sheer fury over the death
of their neighbor, friend, brother and son. The army, too, was rioting, It had
invaded the village, with its armored jeeps and M16-toting soldiers.

About an hour earlier, 10-year old Ahmed Musa along with a small group of
kids and teenagers had approached the wall's construction site and were mess-
ing with the razor-wire installed around it by the army. A military jeep ap-
proached them, shooting rubber bullets. The kids ran away, but in his escape,
Abmed Musa lost his sandal. When he retumed to pick it up, a soldier got out of
the jeep and shot a single live bullet into the little boy's forehead, killing him on
the spot. The others, including his own brother, carried his lifeless body back to
the village, leaving thick trail of blood through the ancient olive groves, From
there he was transferred to the hospital in Ramallah, where, shortly afte, his
body was sent to the morgue.

Faced with the despair and deep sadness that slowly started accompanying
the initial rage, the five of us eventually headed towards Ramallah as riots qui-
eted down, hoping for something. A confirmation of the unbelievable maybe, o
‘perhaps simply o offer the family our support. However, the family was already
gone when we got there. For a reason I cannot clearly remember, we were taken

a7
o the morgue by one of the doctors, where Ahmed's tiny body lay inanimate.

The sight hit me with shock. I had never seen a dead body before, let alone.
that of a child. I didn't know how to react or what to say. Anger, frustration and
pain flooded my body. Though the army’s cruelty and violence are nothing new,
T could not understand how a 10-year old could have ever been perceived as a
threat to a soldier.

The following day, at the funeral, thousands of people from all over the West
‘Bank came to show their solidarity and share their pain with Ahmed Musa's
family. We were there too, lost for words.

In the evening, afer the funeral, rage took over the streets of Nilin once
again, and clashes erupted as the army invaded the village. Yousef Amirah, 17-
‘years old, was in a yard close to the clashes, observing. An armored jeep pulled
up at the street in front of him, and a soldier shot three rounds of rubber-coated
bullets from inside the jeep through the firing loophole. Two bullets ended up
Todged inside Yousef's skull. Minutes later, he was pronounced clinically dead
at the Ramallah hospital, and died of his injuries a few days after.

“The shock was once again terrible. Two murdered kids in two days. When
we returned from the village, we joined others in an impromptu demonstration
in front of the home of the minister of defense, Ehud Barak. Despite our rage,
surrounded by dozens of cops, all we could do was to very shortly block one of
“Tel Aviv main roads, and shout slogans while we hold the murdered children's
pictures in our hands.

Though I stood there and shouted along with others, my rage was certain-
Iy not only directed at Barak. Indeed, Barak is responsible for the murder of
Ahmed and Yousef, and countless others before them, but he and the govern-
ment he represents are certainly not the only ones. To me, Israeli citizens are the
ones to point the finger at; they are the ones who elected these politicians; they
are the ones who wholeheartedly support the government as it commits murder
and wages war. sraeli citizens are the ones that do not revolt against racism,
Apartheid and ethnic cleansing. In fact,all these are no more than & crystalliza-
tion of Isracli public opinion.

Israeli children are brainwashed, from their very birth, to believe that Isracl
‘must be a Jewish state, that Palestinians are the enemy, that military service is a
sacred duty - n0 matter the cost, no matter who is hurt. But despite this power-
ful indoctrination, we are all responsible for our actions. Though conscription
is compulsory, decent peaple can always make a decent choice.

Faced by such widespread Israeli compliance with the crimes of our govern-
ment, | cannot escape the conclusion that we are all accomplices through our
silence, thorough the lack of deed.

FROM ZIONISM TO ANARCHY

1 was not born in Israel, nor was I born an anarchist. 1 immigrated to Israel
from Canada in 2001. I wes a Zionist and believed my place in the world was in

38
Isracl, the only haven for Jews. In 2006, a friend who often attended demonstra-
tions in the West Bank, showed me the other side of my reality. It took me a full
year to grasp the essence of the occupation, and journey the road to rid myself
from the brainwash I never knew I had undergore.

One Friday in May 2007, I arrived at the village of Bil'in for the first time,
where Israel's wall was being built on villagers' land. There, for the first
time, all the pieces came together - I could see, with my own eyes, Isracli
Apartheid. From then on, demonstrations became a weekly thing, the forming.
of a habit. .

Before [ knew i, I started joining Anarchists Against the Wall's meetings and
demonstrations, becoming more heavily involved. Soon enough I was organiz-
ing the transportation for our Friday expeditions. Being part of those who de-
cide, those who do, was an empowering experience. I met people from different
backgrounds, ages, shapes and colors... all different, yet united by the same
cause. We are all driven by the wish to fight the occupation and Apartheid. We
hardly ever bother with promoting our various grand-scheme-of-things-ideas.
Once the occupation will be behind us, we will have the luxury to discuss our
diverse opinions.

T am perfectly aware that our actions alone will not end Israeli Apartheid. It
‘will take much more than that. But I believe (or want to believe) that we disrupt
Israel and its notion of "peace and quiet". 1 want to believe that when we march
down the streets of Tel Aviv with banners calling for an end to the war, bystand-
ers are forced to think. Perhaps our mere presence in the streets, our actions,
‘will bring the consequences of the occupation to their backyard - and not some
20km away. Even those who call us traitors or self-hating-Jews are n fact react-
ing to the occupation. To an extent, I derive some comfort from such comments,
since they show we are forcing people to be aware that there is an occupation
and that Palestinians do exist.

‘The massacre in Gaza, in which more than 1,300 people were killed, was for
us the ultimate proof that Isracl is doing ethnic cleansing. Again, though I am
perfectly aware of the government's capability to commit such crimes - even to
feel comfortable while committing them - something about how this "war” was
conducted felt revolting in new, unfemiliar ways. Even more appalling wes the
fact that 80% of the Isracli public supported the slaughter.

During those days, the sense of frustration and hopelessness overwhelmed
us all. We organized demonstrations daily, we joined others® demonstrations
in Palestinian villages and cities, inside Isracl and in the West Bank, but there
‘was nothing we could do 10 stop the wheels of that runaway train: Isracli fas-
cism.

‘There was something elsc, t00, apart from the incomprehensible dimensions
of the catastrophe in Gaza. In the West Bank, we have gotten used to things
being accessible. When, for instance, a murder occurs somewhere in the West
Bank, we are able to get there, physically; the Apartheid segregation is not as

£
total. The Strip, however, is impenetrable for us.

‘This time, we could only demonstrate, shout slogans and read the news.
‘There was a fecling of being imprisoned within Israel's borders. Though utterly
different, I could suddenly understand, personally, what it meant to have my
‘movement restricted.

But perhaps we did manage to disrupt something, because the police and the
Israeli secret service targeted Palestinians living in Isracl, and to a lesser extent,
activists in Anarchists Against the Wall. Many were arrested, interrogated for
hours without any reason other than intimidation. In one of the court hearings, a
prosecutor actually said that our actions "damage the morale of Isracli soldiers".
Indeed, the only democracy in the Middle East.

Personally, I do not think I will see the end of the occupation in my lifetime
~1am 30 years old. Most Israclis do not care about Palestinians, or, for that mat.
ter, even about crimes against humanity committed against them, Palestinians
are far too remote to be present in the pains and minds of most Israelis. Who
needs to feel the occupation while sitting in a coffee shop or eating hummus
in Jaffa? Israel exists in a bubble. When I see the path of the wall I ask myself,
‘who s locking who in? Isracl can only look towards the sea on its West, as it
has locked shut all doors to the Midde East.

‘Though I believe that our work within Israel is crucial, I am also aware of
the fact that our voice is faint and hardly heard. The occupation and Isracli
Apartheid can only come to an end if such an end is forced pon it, mainly
through boyeott sanctions and other forms of international pressure. As the
status quo continues, boycott - economic, academic, cultural - is the only
effective way to pressure Israel. But I have no illusions; it seems as if the
world has not yet scen enough Palestinian blood. The road ahead of us is
still long.

Unil then, the struggle continues

(December 27, 2008)

VICTORY!

B Busel Mansour
[The following are excerpts from remarks made in Seplember 2007 by Basel Mansour, rep-
resentativeof Bil'n’s Popular Comiltee, to Iraells tha partiipated inthe demonstration
inthe village following Iraels High Court rling to change the route of he Apartheid Wall
on Bil'ins lands]

Lovers of peace, friends of freedom and justice... our partners in the struggle
and in the creation of this partial victory - I bless you in the name of our Palestin-
ian people, in the name of the residents of Bil'n, that you came to know, and that
came to know you, and by whose side you stood ever since they began their oppo-
sition to the fence and the settlement that squats on a large part of their land. You
came to us without considering the consequences - the Zionist occupational gov-
‘ernment attempts to implant the deceptive and distorted idea that the Palestinans
are your enemy and want to kill you. By way of this shared journey, we proved
the opposite and together we demonstrated the truth: that Israclis can stand beside
Palestinians and live with them in peace and security, and even struggle with them
against injustice and occupation, on the fundamental basis that this occupation is
an enemy of humanity.

‘You succeeded in overcoming the army's roadblocks in order to arrive here through
a difficult, mountainous path, and were vulnerable to its shooting atacks. In ths way
many of you were wounded by bullts that originated from the merciless occupation
army - and not from Palestinians, that the occupation attempts to istort and poriray as
a vicious animal that wants to devour Israels or throw them into the sca.

You were braver than your fearful government. You participated in the struggle
actively and in cvery way - morally, physically, in the courts and in the media. In
the battlefield, you were on the frontlines, calling with us for freedom, in your
belief that only the manifestation of justice will guaraniee the creation of peace
and security for our two peoples, and not the building of walls and the expanding
of weapons warehouses.

‘You have been real partners - awake with us late at night, in confronting the
alimost daily invasions of village homes by the army; together with us you opposed
‘many attempts o arrest, and you yourselves were injured and arrested - and you
‘conveyed the true picture to the Isracli society. You disputed the positions of the
government and the army in every arena - until the entire world was a witness to this
special connection that was created on the land of Bil'n, that united conversations
and meetings between cultures, creeds and religions. A connection like this must
be victorious, history must immortalize it

Honorable sudience, one of the biggest diffculties in this campaign was how
to organize and manage the connection with the Israclis in solidarity, after our
Palestinians people have always suffered injustice from the Zionist occupation. This
‘was done while Palestinians aspire to lives of freedom, respect, and culture, and
the mobilization of the biggest number of Israelis and international representatives

a
possible to stand up to the injustice. Once the Israelis in solidarity understood all
of this, they became dedicated to the work and became real warriors that earned the
trust of all. They contributed much by revealing the true face of the occupation - its
tactics, ts lies and its organized terror against Palestinians - in opposition to those
‘who attempt to normalize and whitewash the occupation.

‘These people were always willing to take upon themselves whatever was asked
ofthem by the Popular Committee, and moreover, often took the intiative, offering
ideas and suggestions. In this way, they demonstrated that they were true fighters -
not only fans or friends, or cogs in the machine of the occupation. They are heroes
in the non-violent campaign of the brave.

Honorable audience, recently a decision was taken by the body called the Israeli
High Court of Jusice, o cancel sections of the fence in Bil'in and to return a small
‘amount of the stolen lands. This decision was taken after a long campaign with the
pasticipation of peace workers from every land, and the shooting injuries of almost
a thousand demonstrators, in addition to tens of arrests and many more assaults,

‘We weat to this occupation court not out of faith in it, but to prove that these.
courts are nothing but tools of the occupation. They are like a soldier that shoots
you in the head and kills you, and then wraps your head in a white cloth, to be
portrayed as & first aid worker. In ts decision, this court proved to be cowardly
and caused injustice, and we turn your attention to the fact that our campaign way
against the principle of the wall and ot in opposition to its specific route,

Therefore we wil continue in our struggle, until the occupational government
destroys the wall and th settlements in al of Palestine, and we will build ogether,
‘with our bodies, eal bridges of love and security and peace in order to conquer the
wall, and we will crush all the occupation’s plans until we reach the ocean that knows
D0 border - and on s safe shores, we wil sing the song of freedom and peace, together
- far from the injustices of the occupation and its roadblocks and barrers

Blessings and respect to all of the Israclis, cach and every one individually, that
believe in peace and in our legitimate rights, and welcome to Bil'n.

. (September 7, 2007)

P.O.Box 721
lomewood, IL 60430 I

AWALLS 0RG