Anti Semitism and the Israel/Palestine Conflict:

by Professor Stuart Rees

My observations may release a volley of anti Semitism charges. I simply ask those who may be tempted to respond in this vein to go to the West Bank

Stories from my recent meetings with Palestinians who live in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank have been overshadowed by the recent suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, the killing of children in Nablus and the slaughter of innocents on a Gaza beach on June 9th. If a just peace is ever to be achieved, however, the ongoing stories deserve to be told and should not be stifled by charges of anti Semitism. Before prospective critics reach for their telephones, pens or keyboards let me say that this opening statement does not condone violence nor does it minimize the consequences of speaking or writing which is anti- Semitic and which should always be opposed.

A prologue to aspects of life in the Occupied Territories refers to other events which highlight uncritical use of the anti Semitism accusation. In the USA several weeks ago, two distinguished political scientists from the universities of Harvard and Chicago wrote a paper which identified the influence of Israel on American foreign policy p1)Despite decades of evidence of such an influence, documented in US government archives and in impressive books, these authors were branded as liars, bigots and anti Semites. Two weeks later, in Britain, the parents of Tom Hurndell a peace worker who was shot dead while trying to escort Palestinian children away from an Israeli tank, were attempting at a jury inquest to hold the Israeli defence forces (IDF) accountable for their son's death. Although an Arab Israeli soldier had been jailed for shooting Hurndell, the IDF reportedly did not cooperate with the British inquest. The implication was that Israeli officers would never order such a shooting and Tom Hurndell's parents should be very careful in their accusations.

Every day in the Occupied Territories, Palestinians are subject to checks, controls and numerous forms of humiliation. Journalists are punished by having their passes withdrawn. Medicines are denied to the sick. Children in hospitals on the wrong side of a checkpoint have been denied visits by parents on another side. Water supply is limited and controlled. Young men are arrested and interrogated for being young men. Journeys which should take thirty five minutes, as between Ramallah and Nablus, can last as long as five hours. Citizens of East Jerusalem pay a substantial proportion of their earnings in taxes but their rights to travel, to speak and to write are severely curtailed. In their own land they are non citizens. Their option is either to die, to leave if they can or to be confined in enclaves, the Israeli equivalent of apartheid South Africa's bantustans.

The experiences of one senior Palestinian journalist highlight the absence of a free press in the West Bank and hence the difficulty of telling an outside world about human rights abuses and other features of people's lives. Dara – though it would be dangerous to identify her real name – works for a major news agency. Although Israel does not officially have pass laws, Dara cannot travel within the West Bank and cannot leave the country. ‘For nine months I have been confined to Nablus because I once wrote a story about Israeli soldiers battering to death a Palestinian guard. I discovered this story when I covered the man's funeral. The evidence was overwhelming but the Israeli government press officer in the Interior Ministry refuses to give me a pass. He says that my article is evidence of hostility towards Israel even though most of my criticism has been focussed on the conduct of the Palestinian Authority.

He says openly, unashamedly that all Palestinians are insects and suicide bombers. He calls me an instigator of riots. ‘We don't want her here.' He likes to punish me so I am unable to move.'

The holy town of Bethlehem is cut off by a wall which looms twice as high as the Berlin monolith. The previous eighty flourishing shops on main street towards the Church of the Nativity have become ten almost deserted businesses. Sixty per cent of the young people are unemployed and have few hopes for the future. ‘They are trying to strangle us', said 27 year old Wahlid, a Bethlehem resident, unemployed and desperate about his future. Carol Dabdoub of the Open Bethlehem project insists, ‘This wall is allegedly for security but is really another means of stealing our land. Look at those olive groves. Look at the shepherds' ancient slopes. The wall is stretching towards them. Soon they will be swallowed. These groves and slopes will no longer be part of Bethlehem. The Christian tourists and their coaches may still visit but they will not be told about this illegal grabbing of land.'

This modest litany of the humiliations and cruelties suffered by Palestinians includes the building of this wall, the determination of an Israeli government to draw permanent boundaries and the persistent stifling of criticism with the charge of anti Semitism. These events have produced a crisis for Palestinians and a not completely dissimilar crisis for Israelis. They are all hemmed in, all constrained by the desire of leaders to speak of security as though it is a military phenomenon and has nothing to do with human rights.

My observations may release a volley of anti Semitism charges. I simply ask those who may be tempted to respond in this vein to go to the West Bank, visit several military checkpoints, listen to residents of all ages from East Jerusalem, from Nablus, Bethlehem, Ramallah or the refugee camps of Gaza and Qualqilya. Check and double check about those people's human rights, or experience their generosity and hospitality irrespective of their daily humiliations. If you cannot stomach hearing the voices of ordinary Palestinians, please interview leading Israelis who feel ashamed and pessimistic about a future where justice is denied. Please do not dismiss them as being from the left.

This lazy label often means very little because it is used derisively, snuffing out reasonable debates as easily as the accusation ‘anti Semitic'. To discuss peace with justice for the people of the Occupied Territories requires analysis which challenges those mind sets which are more deep seated than the foundations of that appalling barrier which is making justice in the Holy Land ever harder to find. A mind set which will shout anti Semitism in response to the above observations negates democracy, mocks free speech and is determined that we can seldom hear even modest criticism about that injustice which is a source of so much anger, alienation and violence.

* Stuart Rees is Professor Emeritus & Director,

Centre for Peace & Conflict Studies, Uni of Sydney