At about 3:30 this morning, July 27, Special Forces of the Israeli Army attacked the Freedom Theatre in the Jenin refugee camp.

Ahmad Nasser Matahen, a night guard and technician student at the theatre awoke to the thud of stone blocks being hurled at the theatre door.  When he opened the door he found masked and heavily armed Israeli Special Forces surrounding the theatre.

Ahmed says, “They told me to raise my hands and forced me to take my pants down.  I thought my time had come, that they would kill me.  My brother that was with me was handcuffed.”

The location manager of the Freedom Theatre, Adnan Naghnaghiye, was arrested and taken away to an unknown location together with Bilal Saadi, a member of the theatre board.  When general manager Jacob Gough and co-founder Jonatan Stanczak arrived, they were forced to squat next to a family with four small children surrounded by about 50 heavily armed Israeli soldiers.

Jonatan says: “Whenever we tried to tell them that they are attacking a cultural venue and arresting members of the theater we were told to shut up and they threatened to kick us.  I tried to contact the civil administration of the army to clarify the matter but the person in charge hung up on me.”

Attacks like this occur every day throughout occupied Palestine.  In fact, as the international movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions grows, and the Palestinian statehood initiative gathers support, Israeli attacks appear to be escalating.

Still, this one comes as a particular shock, perhaps because the Freedom Theatre is so familiar to me (see Our Way to Fight, chapter 2).

This is the second major blow to the theatre in four months.  On April 4, co-founder Juliano Mer-Khamis was murdered here, by one or more killers who remain at large. (See blog post #15, Live theatre.)

As a popular symbol of non-violent resistance to military occupation, and a haven for free thought and expression, inevitably the Freedom Theatre is a target.

In June, the theatre premiered a new play, Sho Kman (What Else), featuring students of the Freedom Theatre acting school.  Two weeks ago the student actors took their play to six cities in France.

Sho Kman explores how the unrelenting violence of the external military occupation can lead to internal chaos, corroding friendship, family, society and state, a cruel cycle of entrapment and suppression with no end in sight.

For young people in the Jenin refugee camp, the play is another step in the struggle to break free from the many layers of chains that imprison them.

This is why the Freedom Theatre continues to be a target.

An increasingly isolated and desperate Israeli regime is rapidly escalating its attacks on Israeli citizens that dare to criticize its actions.

On July 18, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman labelled as terrorist organizations several prominent Israeli peace and human rights groups: New Profile, Adalah, Yesh Din, and Breaking the Silence.

A glance at their websites makes quite clear the real threat they pose to the Israeli regime: they question and challenge, indispensable functions for any authentic democracy.

In the Israel context,  labelling a person or group as “terrorist” is dangerous incitement.  It provides automatic permission for a full scale attack on their civil rights, their freedom, even their lives.  After six decades of occupation, Palestinians experience the bitter results of this tactic constantly.  Now increasingly it’s the turn of Israeli citizens — in my view the best of Israeli citizens.

Several members of New Profile are featured in Our Way to Fight, chapter 11, and a prominent member of Yesh Din is featured in chapter 6.  They struck me as thoughtful, deeply principled, determined and courageous.

New Profile responded this morning to the attack:

“New Profile rejects and denounces Minister Lieberman’s choice to call New Profile and other human rights organizations “terrorist organizations”.

“New Profile is a civil feminist movement active against institutionalized violence and for dialogue and peace, for demilitarizing Israeli society, for freedom of conscience, equality and justice for all – Arabs and Jews, women and men, including those choosing not to serve in the IDF.

“New Profile persists in its commitment to non-violence and encourages true, open civil discourse in Israel.  Minister Lieberman kindles and leads incitement against human rights and civil society organizations in this country.

“The attempt to slur as “terrorist” any view critical of the ruling power’s ideas expresses a basic misunderstanding of democracy and presents any controversy as an existential threat that must be eliminated.

“We call upon the public in Israel to ask itself and its elected representatives why criticism and independent thinking threaten them as much as terrorist actions.

“Inflaming fear and trembling of real and imagined foes perpetuates the situation whereby war, inequality and racism are regarded a must, manifest destiny.  It is not.  The choice is in our hands, we the citizens – choosing to live in an egalitarian, non-violent, civil and democratic society.”

Adalah, Yesh Din, and Breaking the Silence announced on July 18 that they will sue Avigdor Lieberman for libel.  “His comments constitute mendacious, wild, and thuggish incitement,” their joint statement said.

The Israeli government continues to receive unconditional support from their counterparts in Canada, the United States, Britain, Australia and other countries.  These elites collaborate to undermine democracy, human rights and the environment across the globe.

The only chance for positive change, for a just peace — perhaps even for survival — rests with us.  As New Profile says, “The choice is in our hands, we the citizens.”

In response to the Israeli government’s latest assault on democracy, the anti-boycott law, the people of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel have just announced their refusal to comply with “this deliberate violation of basic human rights”:

“Passed by the Knesset on July 11, 2011, the ‘Bill to Prevent Harm to the State of Israel by Means of Boycott’ constitutes a harmful blow to egalitarianism, free speech, and the right to organize, and seeks to de-legitimize non-violent protest.  Boycotting is a legitimate act of non-violent political protest.  It allows followers to express opposition to policies that conflict with their core political beliefs and principles.  The right to protest is an integral component of the practice of free speech. Israeli citizens should be permitted and entitled to protest peacefully, so as to prevent the prolongation of controversial or illegal policies.

“We are aware of the complex environment in which the State of Israel exists, yet as human rights activists, we do not accept this deliberate violation of basic human rights.  As citizens, we are convinced that there is no other way to contend with this law but to engage in civil disobedience.  Out of a deep concern for democratic values, a firm commitment to human rights and a genuine concern over the path our elected officials are taking, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel expresses our firm opposition to the Boycott Law and announce that we will refuse to comply with it.  We call on NGOs, activists, members of civil society, and fellow citizens to defy the boycott law and join us in insisting unequivocally on our right to practice and engage in free speech.”

In the continuous wash of propaganda from the Israeli regime and its backers, the essential goal of boycott, divestment and sanctions is easily forgotten or obscured: to end the illegal, ever-deepening military occupation of Palestine, to attain human rights and equality for Palestinians, and to win a just, enduring peace in Israel-Palestine.

In pursuing its mandate, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel has been openly critical of Israeli government actions more than once; as a result, it has become a target for right-wing attack.  Another bill currently before the Knesset would ban funding to political organizations and human rights groups, including PHR-Israel, making their work even more difficult than it is now.

Their current call for defiance is a stark recognition that in a context where human rights are under escalating assault, silence is complicity.

For an inside look at Physicians for Human Rights, see Our Way to Fight, chapter 9.

In today’s Today in Palestine, I noticed this item:

“IOF units stormed five villages in Jenin province at dawn Tuesday and rounded up two young men in Burqin village after searching their homes and combing the vicinity of the village…”

The bulletin goes on to list similar Israeli military assaults on several villages.  Another day under occupation.  By the way, IOF stands for Israeli Occupation Forces.

On my first trip to the West Bank, I visited Burqin village, the site of the Canaan Fair Trade processing plant.  From there, extra virgin olive oil and other delicious fair trade products from Palestinian farmer cooperatives go out to fifteen countries on three continents.

Nasser Abufarha, the dynamic founder of the Palestine Fair Trade Association and Canaan Fair Trade is featured, along with two Palestinian farmers, in Naming Palestine, a chapter in Our Way to Fight.  Nasser described fair trade as an effective way to resist the occupation.  It enables Palestinian farmers to make a decent living, and it supports production of a food that’s essential to the Palestinian diet and culture.  Farmers told me that fair trade has been transformative for them, making it economically viable for them to do what they do best.

An excerpt from the chapter:

Shortly before the new processing plant opened, Nasser Abufarha gave me a tour.   In any context it would be impresssive, but under the strictures of military occupation it’s astounding.  Set in an olive grove, the plant is huge, 4300 square metres (46,000 square feet) on three levels, the lowest of them carved deep into bedrock.

Olives arrive here from farmers across the West Bank, to be pressed, filtered, and stored underground at a precise temperature in oxygen-free tanks, preventing the build-up of peroxide that would cost the oil its highest quality extra virgin status.  From storage it goes to bottling, labelling, packing and shipping.  In other parts of the plant, olives, sun-dried tomatoes, spices and grains are processed into a growing range of Canaan fair trade products.

Under military occupation, assembling the necessary materials was a staggering challenge.  The tanks came from Italy, the grinding stones from Turkey, the ecologically-friendly furniture from reclaimed lumber in Indonesia.  The plant even has its own nitrogen-generator.  “This is because we live under conditions which might make it difficult to get nitrogen tanks refilled,” says Nasser, with an ironic smile.

The ‘conditions’ he mentions are never far away.  While we stood on the roof of the new plant, an Israeli military helicopter hovered above.  Like many other Palestinians, Nasser hardly notices the shriek of war-jets any more, as long as they aren’t actually shooting, but up on the roof he stopped talking to watch the helicopter warily.  Why the difference?  “Unfortunately a helicopter often means they’re going to assassinate someone in the area.”

In ‘Anin village I ask the two farmers how the occupation affects them.  By way of response they take me out to see where their land is, downhill from the village, more than half of it now cut off by the wall – a broad white slash through the landscape, wavering in the heat.

To reach their olive groves, now on the other side, the farmers have to request permits from the military authorities.  If a farmer is lucky enough to get one, often it allows him only one hour on the other side.  Any longer and he will be arrested.  Whether farmers can plough, prune, maintain and harvest the trees when these functions need to be done depends entirely on the whim of the soldiers.

Olive groves throughout Palestine are also subject to attack by both settlers and the army.  Since the occupation began in 1967, it’s estimated that at least a million trees have been destroyed, and the wall threatens to destroy or cut off twice as many.  Even in a land so richly endowed with olives, the loss is catastrophic.

We emerge from the cool interior into encircling olive trees, the heart of this enterprise.  I ask Nasser Abufarha about a particular tree, thick and gnarled, with a broad canopy – it must be very old.  “No,” he replies, “that one is young.  It’s only three to four hundred years old.”

Sources for Palestine Fair Trade Association products:

In Canada, Zatoun.

In the UK, Zaytoun.

In the US, Canaan Fair Trade, LLC-USA.

Also Dr Bronner’s Magic Soaps.  They buy 95% of their fair trade olive oil from Canaan Fair Trade.

For other sources, check the Canaan Fair Trade list.

FYI, this eloquent, clear-sighted essay arrived this morning.  It concerns the vital role of civil society (that’s us) in resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestine, and the active complicity of western governments, without which the occupation would collapse.  Lawrence Davidson is a professor of history at West Chester University, Pennsylvania, US.

FLOTILLAS AND THE LAW

Lawrence Davidson – Redress – 9 July 2011

When it comes to the struggle against Israel’s policies of oppression there are two conflicting levels: that of government and that of civil society.  The most recent example of this duality is the half dozen or so small ships held captive in the ports of Greece.  The ships, loaded with humanitarian supplies for the one and half million people of the Gaza Strip, are instruments of a civil society campaign against the inhumanity of the Israeli state.  The forces that hold them back are the instruments of governments corrupted by special interest influence and political bribery.

Most of us are unaware of the potential of organized civil society because we have resigned the public sphere to professional politicians and bureaucrats and retreated into a private sphere of everyday life which we see as separate from politics.  This is a serious mistake.  Politics shapes our lives whether we pay attention to it or not.  By ignoring it we allow the power of the state to respond not so much to the citizenry as to special interests.  Our indifference means that the politicians and government bureaucrats live their professional lives within systems largely uninterested in and sometimes incapable of acting in the public good because they are corrupted by lobby power.  The ability to render justice is also often a casualty of the way things operate politically.  The stymying of the latest humanitarian flotilla to Gaza due to the disproportionate influence of Zionist special interests on US and European Middle East foreign policy is a good example of this situation.

There are small but growing elements of society which understand this problem and have moved to remedy it through organizing common citizens to reassert influence in the public sphere.  Their efforts constitute civil society movements.  Not all of these efforts can be deemed progressive.  The “Tea Party” phenomenon in the United States is a radical conservative movement that aims at minimizing government to the point of Self-destruction. But other movements of civil society, in their expressions of direct action in the cause of justice, are much healthier.

The worldwide movement for the boycott, divestment and sanctioning (BDS) of Israel, of which the flotilla movement is an offshoot, is one of these.

The forum of international law

The resulting struggle between the corrupt politics that keeps the West aligned with the oppressive and racist ideology that rules Israel and the civil society movement that seeks to liberate the victims of that ideology goes on worldwide and in many forums. One is the forum of international law. Presently, the debate revolves around the legality of Israel’s blockade of Gaza and the effort of the flotilla movement to defy it. Let us take a look at this aspect of the conflict.

1.  The well known American lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, a strong defender of Israel, has blatantly stated: “Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza is legal under international law – anyone who tries to break it can be arrested and prosecuted in a court of law.” Of course, Dershowitz is not an expert on international law. Rather, he has made his reputation as a defence lawyer with a passion for murder cases (which makes him quite suited to defend the Israeli state). This being said, what is the basis for his assertion that the Gaza blockade is legal?

2. The argument for the legality of the blockade is based on the 1909 Declaration of London and the 1994 San Remo Manual on Armed Conflict at Sea. Both are part of an international treaty system that sets down the parameters of much international law. According to these documents, two states engaged in armed conflict can legally blockade one and other for clear military reasons. However, any blockade would cease to be legal if “damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade”.  Defenders of Israeli actions, such as Dershowitz, do a very superficial reading of the documents and reason that Israel is in an armed conflict with Hamas, which is the ruling authority in Gaza, and so Israel can legally blockade Gaza so as to stop the importation of weapons and “terrorist” fighters.

3.  The holes in this reasoning are big enough to sail a flotilla of small ships through (if only they were not imprisoned in Greek ports).  Thus, Israel certainly does not consider itself engaged in an armed conflict with another state.  If you doubt this just ask any member of the present Israeli government whether he or she would define Palestine, including Gaza, as a state.  In truth, the proper definition of Israel’s presence in the West Bank and Gaza is that of an occupying colonial power whose policies and actions are stark violations of the Geneva Conventions.   That is, by virtue of its colonizing actions and treatment of residents of the occupied territories, its presence in Palestine beyond the 1967 borders is not legal (one can also argue over the legality of Israel within the 1967 borders).  That means those they are in armed conflict with are those resisting illegal occupation.  There is no international law that makes it legal for Israel, itself acting illegally, to blockade those legally resisting its actions.  The arbitrary labelling of those resisting as “terrorists” does not change this legal situation.

4. As noted above, “legal” blockades must have a military objective and must not do excessive harm to the civilian population.  Yet there is evidence that Israel’s goals for the blockade are not primarily military but are, instead, aimed at committing excessive harm to the people of Gaza.  The Gaza blockade was not done out of fear of weapons smuggling or terrorist infiltration, but rather constituted a conscious act of economic warfare against the people of Gaza for having the audacity to be ruled by Hamas, the winner of a 2006 free and fair election.

There is documentary evidence for this interpretation of events.  For instance, in 2006 Dov Weisglass, an adviser to then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, publically stated that the goal of Israeli policy in Gaza was to “put the Palestinians on a diet, but not make them die of hunger”.  Then, in June 2010 McClatchy Newspapers published Israeli government documents attesting to the fact that Jerusalem primarily saw the blockade as an act of economic warfare, and not as a security measure.  To this you can add the fact that Israeli gunboats keep shooting at Gaza fishermen who they know are doing nothing except fishing.  What we have here is the collective punishment of 1.5 million Palestinians.  As such it is not legal, it is illegal – a violation of the Geneva Conventions.  The UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-Moon, usually so responsive to US demands, momentarily broke free and in his 2009 annual report told the Israelis they should end their unwarranted blockade. He was ignored.

We cannot count on governments or international law

So how is it that the Israelis can get away with these crimes?  It is because, at the level of government, their lobbyists and advocates wield enough influence to successfully warp the policy formulation of Western governments.  Against this corruptive influence, international law means very little.  Even embarrassing historical analogies mean little.  Nima Shirazi, who blogs at Wide Asleep In America, wrote a very good piece entitled “The deplorable acts: the ‘Quartet comments on Gaza“.  In this piece he points out the relative similarity between the Gaza blockade and the blockade of Boston set up by imperial Britain in late 1773.  The Americans of that time labelled the action, “the Intolerable Acts”.  Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and her boss in the White House ought to consider this analogy, but then there is that lobby power factor that would prevent them from ever acknowledging it.

As a consequence, those who seek justice for the Palestinians must, for the moment, not place much hope in government or international law.  They must act within the realm of civil society, building the BDS movement and its offshoots.  Where government moves in and attempts to block civil society actions, these actions must be turned against government if only by using them as campaign tools to expand the BDS movement further.  If we persist there will come a time, as was the case with South Africa, when the power of civil society will be such that politicians and bureaucrats will see the cost of defying popular opinion as greater than defying Zionist lobbies.

For all intents and purposes, when it comes to the Palestine-Israeli conflict, the United States and Israeli governments have placed themselves above all law.  That means not just international law, but selective domestic law as well.  The ubiquitous and improper use of such categories as “terrorist” or “rendering material aid to terrorists” are the corruptive vectors here.  The only hope for justice and the integrity of law is in the realm of civil society which might in the future redeem not only Palestine, but the US and Israel too.

Lawrence Davidson is a professor of history at West Chester University, Pennsylvania, US.  He is the author of numerous books, including Islamic Fundamentalism and America’s Palestine: Popular and Official Perceptions from Balfour to Israeli Statehood.