The RAIN Newsletter (7-12-9)
The Interview with Ali Abunimah that Ha'aretz Doesn't Want You To See
Rehaviya Berman conducted an interview with Ali Abunimah, for Ha'aretz, a
few weeks ago. The Interview was never published. Berman decided to publish
it on his blog [Hebrew] and I decided to translate it, for your reading
pleasure:
http://www.uruknet.info/index.php?p=m60823&hd=&size=1&l=e
Exclusive: One On One with the Leader of the Electronic Intifada
By Rehaviya Berman
December 6, 2009
Meet Ali Abunimah, the son of a Jordanian diplomat, a Palestinian activist,
and the man who brings the hottest news of the struggle to thousands of
people. His message: Forget two states, one will be tough enough to get it
right.
The Interview before you was commissioned by one of the the big newspapers.
For a reason that has yet to be clarified, this paper decided not to publish
the interview. It's published here, because it's the opinion of the editor
that it's important that this be read by the Israeli public.
"First of all, it's important for me to clarify that I'm not a leader, and
I'm
not interested in being a leader." That's how Ali Abunimah, 38, opens our
two and a half hour interview. A Washington D.C. Born Palestinian, son of
Palestinian parents of different villages in the Jeruusalem area, his mother
a native of Lifta, a 1948 refugee, and his father, a native of of Battir, a
1967 refugee. Abunimah (@avinunu on Twitter) may renounce the label of a
leader, but in the history that will one day be written, it's probable that
he'll be described as the "harbinger of electronic revolution", as the
Electronic Intifada- the name of the website that Abunimah is of his
founders and active members. There are Twitter users with many more
"followers", but there are very few who seriously deal with the
Isreli-Palestinian issue, feeds voraciously on the web and doesn't follow
"@avinunu" and "E-Intifada". He's also a sought after and articulate
interviewee on news networks such as CNN and MSNBC, for his consistent
representation of the Palestinian position.
Abunimah is one of the most active people on the web in Palestinian Hasbara,
and this without being identified with any of the political factions. His
father, Hasan, served as a senior diplomat of Jordan, among other things its
ambassador to the United Nations. But Ali doesn't hesitate to criticize the
kingdom where most his relatives live today, when he finds it's time to do
so. A portrait of a leader in the internet age- Unidentified, not
representative, and doesn't owe any one.
Recently, Abunimah surfaced into consciousness, after ruining [Ehud]
Olmert's
little apearance-for-profit at Chicago University, when he abruptly cut his
speech with the piercing question about the dissatisfyingly discriminatory
killing that the IDF executed in Gaza, a year ago. Abunimah was joined by
more protestors and Olmert couldn't go through his speech as planned.
A few days later, Olmert tried to give a speech in San Francisco, and as in
Chicago pro-Palestinian students got up and drowned his voice in shouts and
protest. Ali Abunimah, in Chicago, wasn't there for the second silencing of
Olmert, that included an attempt of a "citizen's arrest", but he was there
with immediate reports, updates and links to videos and Twitter, before
anyone else, at the front lines of the unfolding events, as is the case, in
the past few years. Nothing of importance happens in the field or in the
virtual space that has to do with Palestine (but not only) without
Abunimah's
keyboard being there to distribute, sharply comment, connect the
incriminating dots, point fingers and supply background and context to each
event.
Inviting Olmert? A "Miserable Decision"
The man himself, as I mentioned, is humble, on the conversation I had with
him on the computer program, Skype. "I organized nothing that had to do with
San Francisco, and I don't want to talk second hand about how and what other
people are planning." He also doesn't want to talk about other internet
activists such as himself, for the possibility that he may forget to mention
someone and that'll open a possibility for offense. When I persist,he
obliges in mentioning the International BDS committee, the Palestinian
action organization for boycotting Israel, students and many activists
across the USA and the BDS movement- acronym for Boycott, Divestment,
Sanction.
In addition to the clear protest against Olmert's actions and against
Israel, Abunimah and others wanted to protest the actual decision to invite
Olmert to speak.
"I think it was a miserable decision by The Harris School of Public Policy
Studies, in my university, the University of Chicago, to invite a man who
is- forget the war crimes- suspect of serious corruption offenses, by his
own state, and to pay him tens of thousands of dollars for a speech. It just
inappropriate."
Be honest, it may have been inappropriate, but it created a great
oppertunity to get your struggle some headlines.
"It helped, but at the same time, the school could have invited judge
Richard Goldstone to speak about the findings of his report, that way we
would have gotten a debate about the subject and the school wouldn't have
put itself in a the compromising position of paying an enormous sum to a
corrupt person".
Similar to the Struggle Against South Africa
I try to stir the conversation to the methods of organization that have been
bringing Abunimah and his colleagues success, lately. But it seems he's
pleased- in an impeccably polite manner- to disappoint me.
"Not only did I not organize anything, I don't think there's such a quick
organizers the likes of which you're describing," He says. "These are very
spontaneous actions. Information is very decentralized today on the web. It
reaches many people simultaneously. I feed on the flow of information more
than I contribute to it. I almost want to say that I'm sorry we're not more
organized, but this is the reality and I think that in the grander scheme of
things, it doesn't matter."
It's a bit strange to hear from a man that grew up in the house of a
professional diplomat that organizing doesn't matter for the public
struggle, but Abunimah persists: "It's a fact that the Zionists are much
more organized than we are, in the campuses and an the US in general, and
they have a huge budget, nevertheless, they haven't achieved similar success
in spreading their message. It's not that I'm more skilled at using Twitter
than anyone else. It's because they're trying to sell a 19th century message
in the 21st century, and apparently even with 21st century technology, you
can't sell that merchandise."
"It's very similar to the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, on
campuses," he continues. "The struggle was very decentralized there, too,
and succeeded because of the undeniable justness of the cause." This is
where Abunimah doesn't forget to mention that one of the lone states to keep
tight relations with the apartheid regime in South Africa was Israel.
Beyond the massive volume of his online dealings with the issue, his
education and what he had absorbed in his father's home, one of the reasons
that people turn to him in order to understand the Middle East conflict is
his considerably rational stance that he vigilantly keeps: "We don't boycott
Israelis just because they are Israelis or work for an Israeli institution.
If Chicago University would have invited some Israeli professor, then
cutting him off in protest would have been silencing of freedom of speech.
But Ehud Olmert isn't a private citizen and it's obvious he's a legitimate
target for this purpose."
If You Give Up Territory, You'll Take it Out on Your Arab Citizens
That said, those of you hoping to find a partner for a rational debate about
coexistence within the two-state framework will be highly disappointed.
Abunimah believes in a single-state solution, bi-national, completely
democratic, in which there's no state expression of Jewish/Israeli
nationality. He also wrote a book about it: One Country: A Bold Proposal to
End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.
"It's not that I oppose the two-state solution. I don't think this solution
exists. Those who try to repeat the mistakes of 1948 will find out that it
won't end less tragically, this time around," he claims.
And still, let's say that tomorrow we're informed that Netanyahu and
Abu-Mazen have signed an agreement that includes the pulling out of all
that's
east of the separation fence and the founding of some sort of Palestinian
state within the confines of what exists?
Before he answers this question, Abunimah specifies the way he sees the
roots of the conflict: "First of all, expulsion of refugees from their land
on a racial basis."
Are you sure it's correct to insist on the term "racism" in this context?
It's
tribalism, our side and your side.
"Religious-ethnical basis, if you wish. It's obvious that if they would have
converted, they would have been allowed to stay. The second point is the
racist treatment discriminating Palestinians citizens of Israel, and the
third point is occupation and colonization. Something resembling a state,
headed by Abu-Mazen, or anyone else, only solves the third point, because
you can't forfeit the right of return in the name of others."
There's a contradiction, or maybe discrimination, because you expect
Israel's
government to give up holy places and historic regions in the name of the
whole of the Jewish people, but reject the right of the Palestinian
government to do so.
"We must discern "rights" that are based on a historical, half-mythological
narrative that refers to events of over 2000 years ago, from the rights of
people that some of which are still alive and were physically expelled,
themselves, from their homes and lands. It's obvious that the latter is more
pressing than the former," he argues.
"Referring to your question," he continues, "do you really believe you can
evacuate half a million settlers from their homes?"
I personally believe so, if there's a will. It was also thought that it
would be impossible to evacuate the Gaza Strip. Most of the people that need
to be evacuated aren't ideological settlers. They'll give him money and
he'll
leave, and with the ones that persist all the way, the security forces will
deal with them.
"I don't believe it's possible, but even if it is, do you know what will
happen? There won't be two states that live side by side in peace. I'll tell
you why: The Israelis will be so full of a feeling that "we gave up so much,
we gave so much. And we're still stuck with a million and a half Arabs that
only want more and more", until the nationalism, aggression and will, that's
hidden within most, to ethnically cleanse, will surface, so the evacuation
of the West Bank won't solve anything, and will only change the identity of
the Palestinians that are Israel's victims. I think Meyron Benbenishty sees
the situation clearer than most Israeli analysts. I often disagree with him
about the conclusions, but hi- analysis of the situation is very correct, in
my opinion. He calls this land, Palestine, the state of Israel, whatever you
call it, "a de-facto bi-national state", and I agree with this turn of
phrase".
Using the Neighbor's House as Collateral
Look, the essence of Zionism was to build a shelter where all Jews could
flee in case of pogroms. Will this bi-national state that you envision
insure this right?
This is where Abunimah's answer splits in two: "Personally, I wouldn't
object that a bi-national, democratic, equal, state, after all the wrongs
that were done to the Palestinian people are emended, would make a
commitment to receive every persecuted Jew at a time of need. Palestine has
a rich and ancient tradition of as a place of refuge to the persecuted, near
and far, including Armenians, Caucasian tribes, Africans and also Jews,
single people, families and sometimes whole communities, for generations,
have used Palestine as a place of refuge."
"But principally speaking," Abunimah retracts, "It' important to understand
the the Jews of the world aren't allowed to hold someone's house as
collateral in case the house they live in now burns. This idea that it's the
right of a limited number of Jews to hold on to this land, while oppressing
the indigenous population as an insurance policy for people who don't live
here is absurd. Zionism presumed to create a safe haven for Jews. In effect,
the majority of world Jews choose not to live in it, it's a safe haven for
no one, and to the people who live in it, an insurance policy is citizenship
in another country, preferably one in the European Union."
You ask me if I believe it's possible to uproot half a million settlers. Do
you really believe that Israelis and Palestinians can merge into one state?
"I understand your question. Hate exists within both sides and in order to
examine it, we must examine the root of the conflict. But the major mistake
of those dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the thought that
it's so unique. It's not. In northern Ireland there are two communities,
with a longer lasting conflict, and each one with its own contradicting
narrative, just like us. The colonial dynamics are also similar. In order to
solve the conflict, first there's need of recognition of its root causes,
recognition of the wrongs, and recognition of the rights of the victims.
Yes, each Palestinian and his family that has been uprooted from his land
has a right to return to their homes. It's also not as impossible as it
sounds. The state of Israel has backup plans to receive a million
immigrants, if the need be. So the possibility is there.
But first of all there must be recognition of the right. Then there can be
talk of application. No one promises that thousands of Palestinians living
well in the Middle East and the rest of the world will run to live in the
homeland, and of course there's the ability of the existing population to
receive immigration, to consider. But the right has to be acknowledged.
First of all there's a need to erect institutions and policies and
mechanisms that will foster true equality. Quality accommodations, police
that is perceived as an honest broker and not as a one sided militia. Like
Northern Ireland, like other places, human beings find a way to reconcile
and shatter imposed structures of hate".
Northern Ireland as an Intermediate Stage
So you do support a solution like in Northern Ireland? Because there the
land was distributed.
"It's true that the island has yet to be united there, and I believe that in
the end it will happen. If there will be an intermediate stage in which
there's one state for the local indigenous population, like the Republic of
Ireland, and also a completely bi-national state, with complete equal rights
and specific immigration arrangements for each population (the Northern
Ireland Protestants, for example, have a right to freely immigrate to
Britain), then maybe it could work. But who wants that? There's this kind of
religion of two-states, and I call it a religion because it doesn't base
itself on evidence. They say that Israelis really want that, and that Fatah
really wants it, and almost 20 years they're working on it, so how is it
that it isn't happening? It isn't happening because no one wants it to
happen, because both sides understand that it's impossible. It's only Israel
deluding itself that it can continue sustaining occupation forever, when
occupation itself is an anachronistic term. There can be occupation for a
few months, maybe even a few years, but 40 years of occupation and
settlements and assimilation? The world is beginning to understand what's
going on and it won't have it."
And this is the point where we return to the aims of sites such as the
information site Electronic Intifada and of the BDS movement.
"That's right. We believe that in spite of the existence of a very small
Israeli left, the majority of Israelis will be delighted to continue going
to the beach, watch movies and shows and it in good restaurants, while at a
distance of less than a hundred Kilometers from there children are starving.
As long as they don't understand that the current policies only bring them
suffering, that it constricts their stride and detaches them from all they
want, they won't want to listen. We're waiting for them to be ready."
Do you know the terms "switch a disc" and "burn in the consciousness"?
Abunimah elegantly ignores the opportunity to savor the irony and answers
seriously: "There must be a struggle of ideas to change all our current
ideas about our possible future. These are the struggles I believe in.
There's
nothing that binds these struggles to the spilling of blood."
A Culture Lesson and Optimism (depends for whom)
You read Hebrew, follow the media here and you also chose to take a course
in Hebrew poetry in the university. Among your writings we can also find a
small effort to promote the works of Jewish artists of an Arab ethnicity,
especially those who created in Arabic.
"Yes, I think that one of the biggest crimes of Zionism was actually
perpetrated against the Jews and their spiritual world. In that it debased
all that was "exile-esque" [?????], it detached itself and the people under
its authority from their roots. There was harsh oppression of both the
Yiddish culture and the Jewish-Arabic culture."
This is correct, and in the past generation there's a growing awareness of
this, and already a whole generation's-time it isn't shameful to become
interested in where the grandparents came from and to revive their culture.
On the contrary.
"That's right, and it's wonderful."
And what about the new Hebrew culture? Is there something, out of the huge
variety that has been created here, that you can relate to?
"Without a doubt there's an existing Israeli-Jewish culture, but it's very
tough for Palestinians to view it out of the prism of the conflict, not to
mention that Israel uses culture explicitly for Hasbara purposes. The
solutions I suggest may free the Israeli-Jewish culture from these confines
and find recognition and respect within broader circles."
To conclude, you're one of the biggest promoters of a bi-national state in
what is today referred to as Israel and the Palestinian territories. Are you
optimistic?
"I'm very optimistic. I think it will happen in the lifetimes of the 1948
refugees. There's not much time and they should be able to see justice
before they pass on."
And then you'll come to live here?
"I can't say for sure that I will. I don't know. But I won't give up my
right to do so."
No comments:
Post a Comment