JTA posts: Australia will refer to West Bank as ‘Occupied Palestinian Territories’ in policy change
(JTA) — Australia will resume referring to the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza as the “Occupied Palestinian Territories,” an unofficial policy change after the term fell out of favor over the past decade.
At the Labor Party’s caucus briefing on Tuesday, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said the government was strengthening its opposition to Israeli settlements in the West Bank by “affirming they are illegal under international law and a significant obstacle to peace.” The West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza were occupied by Israel following the 1967 Six-Day War.
[...] Wong’s announcement was criticized by members of the parliamentary opposition, who questioned her timing just before the Labor Party’s national conference next week.
[...] The decision also drew ire from the Zionist Federation of Australia and the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, which issued a joint statement calling the change in language “inaccurate, ahistorical and counterproductive.”
“Describing East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza as ‘occupied Palestinian territories’ effectively denies any Jewish claim to the West Bank and Jerusalem,” said the groups.
However, Wong said the language is consistent with United Nations Security Council resolutions and used by Australia’s key partners, including the United Kingdom, New Zealand and the European Union.
The U.N. Security Council’s resolution 2334 states that “the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under law.”
Last month, the Australian government issued a joint statement with Canada and the United Kingdom to express “grave concern” about Israel approving over 5,700 new settlements in the West Bank, after changing the approval process to allow for faster construction of settlements. A similar statement from the governments of Australia, Germany, Italy, France, the United Kingdom and the United States condemned Israel’s plan to build 10,000 settlements in the West Bank earlier this year.
[...] The controversy over language comes amid the bloodiest period the West Bank has seen in decades. More than 190 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli military raids and settler violence this year, setting 2023 on track to be the deadliest year for Palestinians since the U.N. began recording fatalities in 2004. Over two dozen Israelis have also been killed in Palestinian attacks this year.
Disproportionate death in an apartheid state.
The U.N. resolution is unambiguous, and is dated 23 December 2016.
Readers may recall after the 2016 election the Obama-Biden administration declined to use its Security Council veto power to forestall passage.
An act of courage, and a message, to depart from prior continuing protection of Israel from official international scorn. The world has judged, yet the settlement and land theft continues.
The knee-jerk "antisemitism" cliche trotted out against any American telling the truth about what is going on there suggests a new counter-term: antioccupation, or antiapartheid. Simply telling it as it is.
____________UPDATE____________
So Australia moved in a direction most of the affluent world already is at. This occupation-and-apartheid problem is on the other side of the world from us, among and between people who are not ours. We can look to the truth there, and judge.
But what is an outrage against every citizen of our nation is past unequal handling of Israel questions by mainstream media.
PLEASE NOTE HOWEVER: The situation may be getting better. And it is nuanced.
Consider online handling of a progressive congress woman revising and extending her remarks after extensive criticism for having said Israel is a "racist" state.
Readers are invited to explore the spectrum of items returned by that above-noted websearch. Crabgrass found that the best complete and objective coverage is dated July 16, from Axios. Excerpting:
A group of Jewish House Democrats is circulating a letter denouncing Rep. Pramila Jayapal's (D-Wash.) since-withdrawn comments calling Israel a "racist state," Axios has learned.
Why it matters: It's the latest example of Democrats' bitter divide on Israel bubbling up in recent days as several progressives prepare to boycott the Israeli president's speech to Congress on Wednesday.
Driving the news: After pro-Palestine demonstrators disrupted a panel discussion that included Jayapal at the progressive Netroots Nation conference on Saturday, the Congressional Progressive Caucus chair responded by playing up her anti-Israel bona fides.
- "I want you to know that we have been fighting to make it clear that Israel is a racist state, that the Palestinian people deserve self-determination and autonomy, that the dream of a two-state solution is slipping away from us," she told the protesters.
The latest: Jayapal walked back the comments on Sunday in a statement, saying: "Words do matter and so it is important that I clarify my statement. I do not believe the idea of Israel as a nation is racist."
- Instead, Jayapal said she believes Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's "extreme right-wing government has engaged in discriminatory and outright racist policies."
The other side: The draft letter, a copy of which was obtained by Axios, calls Jayapal's comments "unacceptable," adding, "[W]e appreciate her retraction."
- "Israel is the legitimate homeland of the Jewish people and efforts to delegitimize and demonize it are not only dangerous and antisemitic, but they also undermine America’s national security," it continues.
- "We will never allow anti-Zionist voices that embolden antisemitism to hijack the Democratic Party and country.”
Zoom in: The letter was authored by Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), Greg Landsman (D-Ohio), Brad Schneider (D-Ill.), Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) and Kathy Manning (D-N.C.), Axios is told.
- All seven lawmakers are Jewish and are moderates or swing district members. The letter is still being circulated for signatures. [...]
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) also put out a statement on Sunday, saying: "Israel is not a racist state."
[...] What we're watching: The dustup comes as several high-profile progressives say they plan to boycott Israeli President Isaac Herzog's address to a joint session of Congress later this week.
- These include Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
- Asked by CNN if she is attending the speech, Jayapal reportedly said, "I don't think I am. I haven't fully decided," adding: "I think this is not a good time for that to happen."
Yes, but: Not every progressive is sitting out the speech.
- "I am [going]," Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told Axios, saying of Herzog: "I met him when I was in Israel, and he's actually much more moderate, liberal."
There is history touching the American Way. The question is not shallow, nor easy to take to heart and ponder. European history has involved changing borders up to and including the Crimea. Kosovo before that.
Constantinople fell to the Turks in 1453, prompting effort at finding alternative routes to the East Indies, e.g., 1492.
As to land theft Israel is a piker compared to U.S. indigenous ousters and our Mexican War. Also to Teddy Roosevelt engineering a coup with Panama withdrawing from being a part of Columbia, being an "independent state" where we could build and for decades own a strategic canal.
In short, we took. Might makes right. Israel currently is taking. Might making right?
We've done our share as a nation. Having that in mind when considering Israel as a new nation, 1948 to the present, existing only by taking land others occupied, we can judge but not from a point of innocence that way. After WW II an expanded attention internationally to human rights violations has been bedrock of the U.N.
There is a context beyond Jayapal making a recent unscripted comment. Axios coverage properly linked to the circulated letter critical of the off-the-cuff phrasing Jayapal used, as well as linking to Jayapal's expansive commentary after the fact.
Letter text, judge it as you will, it has repeatedly been said before -
“We are deeply concerned about Representative Pramila Jayapal’s unacceptable comments about our historic, democratic ally Israel, and we appreciate her retraction.
Israel remains the only vibrant, progressive, and inclusive democracy in the region. Arab parties serve in the Knesset, women serve at the highest levels of the military, and the country remains an oasis for LGBTQ+ people in a region hostile toward the community. Pluralism flourishes in Israel.
Israel is the legitimate homeland of the Jewish people and efforts to delegitimize and demonize it are not only dangerous and antisemitic, but they also undermine America’s national security. Israel is critical to our fight against terror, and our defense and intelligence collaboration continues to strengthen our leadership in the world. Israel remains our greatest partner for peace in the Middle East.
Regardless of extremist views from groups aligned with either party, efforts to rewrite history and question the Jewish State’s right to exist, or our historic bipartisan relationship, will never succeed in Congress. We remain committed to peace between Israel and the Palestinians to establish two-states that exist side-by-side in peace, prosperity, and mutual security.
We will never allow anti-Zionist voices that embolden antisemitism to hijack the Democratic Party and country
Jayapal's extended statement, judge whether it is a "retraction" in the narrow sense -
At a conference, I attempted to defuse a tense situation during a panel where fellow members of Congress were being protested. Words do matter and so it is important that I clarify my statement. I do not believe the idea of Israel as a nation is racist. I do, however, believe that Netanyahu’s extreme right-wing government has engaged in discriminatory and outright racist policies and that there are extreme racists driving that policy within the leadership of the current government. I believe it is incumbent on all of us who are striving to make our world a more just and equitable place to call out and condemn these policies and this current Netanyahu government’s role in furthering them.
I have always worked toward a two-state solution that allows both Israelis and Palestinians to live freely, safely, and with self-determination alongside each other and that is still what I am absolutely committed to. I also know that the many policies of the current Israeli government, including rampant settlement expansion, make it extremely difficult for Palestinians who simply want the same rights as their Israeli neighbors to believe such a solution is possible. On a very human level, I was also responding to the deep pain and hopelessness that exists for Palestinians and their diaspora communities when it comes to this debate, but I in no way intended to deny the deep pain and hurt of Israelis and their Jewish diaspora community that still reels from the trauma of pogroms and persecution, the Holocaust, and continuing anti-semitism and hate violence that is rampant today.
As an immigrant woman of color who has fought my whole life against racism, hate, and discrimination of all kinds and viscerally feels when anyone’s very existence is called into question, I am deeply aware of the many challenges we face in our own country to live up to the ideals of our nation here. The only way through these difficult moments is to have real conversations where we develop our own understanding of each other and the traumas we all hold. These are not easy conversations but they are important ones if we are ever to move forward. It is in that spirit that I offer my apologies to those who I have hurt with my words, and offer this clarification.
We know that the status quo is unacceptable, untenable, and unjust. It will take all of us — elected officials, movement activists, advocates, and communities — to work together for real progress.
Saying, roughly, not a racist state but currently infected with a racist government seems more a clarification than a retraction, but read it as you'd like. Closing words, "the status quo is unacceptable, untenable, and unjust," suggest Jayapal honed a message where "racist" mattered little, in balance.
WaPo coverage, politicization apparent:
House GOP conference chairwoman Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) told reporters on Tuesday that she and her GOP colleagues “look forward” to hearing from Herzog, a position she said stands in “stark contrast to the vile antisemitic comments you hear coming out from some of the prominent leaders within the Democrat caucus.”
“Every member should condemn those statements of Rep. Jayapal,” Stefanik said.
But several Democrats stood by Jayapal, including Rep. Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), the only Palestinian American member of Congress. Tlaib, in remarks delivered on the House floor ahead of a vote on the resolution, noted that numerous human rights organizations, including the United Nations, Amnesty International and B’Tselem, a Jerusalem-based human rights nonprofit, have agreed that “Israel is an apartheid state.”
“We’re here, again, reaffirming Congress’s support for apartheid, policing the words of women of color who dare to speak up about truth about oppression,” Tlaib said. “Let’s just get this record straight here: This is not something that’s made up.”
Bowman, another member of the Progressive Caucus, said in a tweet ahead of the vote that, while Herzog is “viewed as a centrist statesman, he has not yet shown the actions of pro-democracy and a pro-peace agenda.”
“I’ve had the opportunity to meet President Herzog in Israel and voice my concerns and understand this pathway towards freedom and safety for Israelis and Palestinians alike,” Bowman tweeted. “His responses to my inquiry were not aligned to moving us toward a two state solution.”
Words do matter. In that sense "vile antisemetic comments" per Stefanik are the galling hackneyed bullshit segue hurled against any criticizing of human rights violations by Israelis, denigrating others via stooping to usage of such wording as "vile" and "antisemetic" as a kneejerk reflex, thought being absent most often.
There should be more outrage about what Stefanik said, than what Jayapal said. It is more incorrect, and more "vile" in the judgement of the host of nations that passed that one Dec. 2016 anti-settlement U.N. resolution which unlike all others aimed at Israeli human rights abuses was not vetoed at the outset by the U.S.
Zionist expansionist-occupationist abuses are wrong, and Zionists hold no copyright on the word "antisemetic." As noted in earlier posting, Palestine Arabs, in fact, are a Semetic people speaking a Semetic language, hence, extreme violations of their rights are, honestly phrased, antisemetic.
So Zionist settlement expansionist touts, please stop abusing that hackneyed and inaccurately used word "antisemetic" as it unnecessarily cheapens the remainder of any comment by its inaccurate usage and its super-cliche status, whenever Israel is discussed absent genuflection and praise.