ISRAELI MINISTER WANTS ARAB BOYCOTT
▶ Defence minister Lieberman says ‘Israeli Arabs don’t belong in Israel’
Tensions over Donald Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital are simmering inside the country as well as the occupied territories, with the defence minister, Avigdor Lieberman, yesterday calling for a public boycott of Arab businesses in the area where vehicles were stoned by protesters.
The driver and two passengers on a bus were injured when masked Arabs pelted police and other vehicles with stones on a motorway in the predominantly Arab Wadi Ara region in northern Israel on Saturday night after what had been a peaceful protest against Mr Trump’s move.
Arab citizens make up a fifth of Israel’s population and have voting rights, but face discrimination and are on the defensive as the Benjamin Netanyahu government puts increasing emphasis on the state’s Jewish character. They share the anger of Arabs throughout the Middle East over what they see as the US president’s endorsement of the occupation of East Jerusalem, the site of Islam’s third holiest shrine and the hoped-for capital of a Palestinian state. There have been no reports of violent Arab responses to the US other than in Wadi Ara.
Mr Lieberman said the Wadi Ara Arabs, including 50,000 citizens in Umm Al Fahm city, should not be considered part of the Israeli polity. “Those people don’t belong in Israel. They must be part of the Palestinian Authority, there they can get unemployment benefits and idleness benefits. They are part of Ramallah. They have no connection to the state of Israel and I call on the citizens of the state of Israel simply to boycott Wadi Ara,” he said.
“One shouldn’t go into the stores or receive any services,” he said. “These people work to harm the state of Israel … these people have to understand they are not wanted here.”
When the interviewer suggested that all the area’s residents could not be judged on the behaviour of the stone-throwers, Mr Lieberman said that thousands of people had taken part in the funerals of two gunmen from Umm Al Fahm who in July killed two policemen at the entrance to the Temple Mount – Al Haram Al Sharif.
“Let us not delude ourselves. We are talking about people who act against Israel, who are incited against Israel. All that they learn in their schools is to hate Israel. Therefore, they have to be transferred to the Palestinian Authority in the framework of an exchange of territory” in which the settlements of Ariel, Maale Adumim and Givat Zeev are annexed.
Mr Netanyahu’s office made no comment about Mr Lieberman’s calls.
The leading Arab politician in Israel, Ayman Odeh, suggested it was reminiscent of Nazi boycotts against Jews.
“Lieberman is the representative of fascist regimes in the extremist government of Netanyahu,” said Mr Odeh, the head of the Joint List, which includes most Arab members of the Knesset. “The call for a boycott against citizens just because of their national and religious origin remind us of dark regimes in human history. The idea that such a person is responsible for the security of the state has to worry every sane person.”
Mohammed Barakeh, the head of the High Follow Up Committee, the senior leadership body of Arab citizens, told
The National: “We are in our homeland not by the grace of Lieberman and if anyone is a foreigner here it is not us. This is the behaviour of a colonialist government.”
Other ministers failed to condemn Mr Lieberman’s statements. Yoav Gallant, the housing minister, issued a statement in the same vein, suggesting that Arab MPs might well find themselves removed to the Palestinian Authority areas.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel interpreted Mr Liberman’s remarks as a call to cancel citizenship for Israeli Arabs. “We want to remind the minister of defence that the appropriate framework for dealing with violence during protest events is investigation and indictment of those who violated the law. This racist and inciting statement sullies an entire public. The message it transmits is extremely grave: that in the eyes of a minister of the government of all the citizens of Israel, forced cancellation of the citizenship of Arabs appears to be a legitimate.”
Sami Abu Shehadeh, a member of the nationalist Balad party’s central committee and former member of the Tel Aviv-Jaffa city council, said: “There is nothing surprising about the racism of Liberman. But the issue is that none of the ministers or the prime minister thought that this was racist and that they should condemn it.”
From its lowest point, the Palestinian cause can rise to its greatest heights. Consider the immediate response to US president Donald Trump’s unilateral recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Three “days of rage” were announced, the Palestinian Authority gravely expressed disappointment and Hamas called for another intifada. There were some clashes between Palestinians and Israeli troops, but largely, the Palestinians have appeared to be preparing for the long war rather than waging small, briefly satisfying skirmishes.
They have, thus far, been helped in this moderate course by the wider Arab and Muslim world. This has been the case even in Tunis, where the Palestinian issue has a lot of supporters (the PLO was based there for nearly a decade from 1982 in the dark years when it was considered a terrorist organisation). On Friday, 24 hours after Mr Trump’s announcement from Washington, I watched as extraordinary security measures were employed around the US embassy in the Tunisian capital, while protesters had their noisy say some considerable distance away.
Thus far – and those two words are worth repeating over and over – everyone’s worst fears have not come true.
The world has not yet descended into the “ring of fire” that Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan predicted as the outcome of Mr Trump’s high-handed decision to willfully ignore international law, multiple United Nations resolutions and the principle of natural justice.
Of course it’s early days yet, but thus far, Palestinian leaders (other than Hamas) have adopted a sober tone that mixes honest regret with measured horror at the massive blow so cruelly struck at them by Mr Trump. Thus far, that “Arab street” – so beloved of western commentators and policy wonks – has not lived up to its billing. Thus far, Arabs have not responded to Mr Trump’s outrageous provocation as an unthinking people who will burn down the neighbourhood without stopping to think that their own house is in it.
To date, the US administration has not managed to provoke Arab and Muslim violence in a way that would justify more extreme domestic security measures. In other words, Mr Trump cannot use the fallout from his Jerusalem announcement as a political tool to further demonise and marginalise Arabs and Muslims.
Some say the relatively muted response to Mr Trump’s cataclysmic announcement is because the Palestinian issue has slipped in importance, especially in the Arab world.
There’s a lot of talk about various Arab leaders having other things on their minds and other deals to cut. It’s true the region has many more and very different things – caution and conflicts – to worry about than in the 1980s and 1990s, when the Palestinian issue was at the top of the agenda.
There is regional caution after the Arab Spring uprisings, with governments keen not to encourage discontent. And there is conflict in parts of the region.
The wider Muslim world too is increasingly seen as a house divided and consequently, unable to provide coherence and unity on the Palestinian issue.
So, this much is true. Arabs and Muslims can no longer be defined by the Palestinian problem. There are other preoccupations, not least managing change in a networked world.
This is all to the good. The Palestinians’ plight should not be just an Arab or a Muslim issue.
It should be a world issue. One that mobilises people and governments all over the world in the fight against injustice.
Mr Trump’s Jerusalem decision must be opposed around the world because it makes a mockery of international order in the 21st century by legitimising the annexation of a territory seized in war. Ukraine would object. So might other countries right the way round the world if
National Geographic is correct that “there are more than 150 disputes under way that involve territory, mostly in Africa, Asia and the Pacific region, but also in Europe and the Americas”.
It wasn’t that long ago, just in 1980, that the UN passed Resolution 478 deeming Israel’s claim to Jerusalem as its “complete and united” capital to be in violation of international law and urging member states to withdraw diplomatic missions from the city.
Now, Mr Trump has internationalised the Palestinian issue in an unexpected way. He has united the UN Security Council against the United States and will hopefully trigger a whole new international movement that actively campaigns for justice for the Palestinians and thereby, for the rule of law.
Right now, there is but one right course for Palestinians. Hundreds of Mohandas Gandhis, Rosa Parks and Martin Luther Kings must emerge, rising up to lead non-violent resistance to a system that seeks to crush them.
They must stand and sit on principle, demanding justice from the oppressor. Palestinians must take control of their struggle, setting its non-violent terms.
Trump cannot use the fallout from his Jerusalem announcement as a political tool to further demonise and marginalise Arabs