From the River to the Sea 2

” a) The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.”

This is the first tenet of the Nethanhayu’s Likud Party’s original Platform statement of 1977. Any claim by Zionists that From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free is a call to genocide is disingenuous and obfuscatory. In 1942, European and American Zionist’s set forth the seminal Biltmore Conference Declaration which laid claim to the whole of the British Mandatory Palestine for their new settler colonial state –

“8. … The Conference urges that the gates of Palestine be opened; that the Jewish Agency be vested with control of immigration into Palestine and with the necessary authority for upbuilding the country, including the development of its unoccupied and uncultivated lands; and that Palestine be established as a Jewish Commonwealth integrated in the structure of the new democratic world.

Indeed, it is the Zionist version of From the River (the Jordan) to the Sea, that is founded on acts of ethnic cleansing, starting with the Nkabah of 1948 and continuing on through the last 75 years by way of sustained apartheid oppression, relentless settlement activity, crushing military rule, and murderous wars on civilian populations. It is Israel, that is an exclusive and exclusionary ethnocracy. Before the imposition of this Jewish state upon its territory, Palestine was a multiethnic, multireligious land of Arabs, both Christians and Muslims, Bedouins and Jews. There is nothing to suggest that either contemporary Palestinian national aspirations or the slogan uttered in this cause, is genocidal or hateful in any way. It is not a call for ridding the land of Jews. From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free should be understood in the context of the above declaration and the second tenet of the Likud Party Platform which explicitly refuses the establishment of a Palestinian State anywhere on this land.-

” b) A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a “Palestinian State,” jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace.

While it must be acknowledged that a liberation slogan can mean different things to different people, From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free, when interpreted in its proper historical context, is simply a cry for freedom, across all the land, for all the people.

See also From the River to the Sea

Image: https://sd.keepcalms.com/i/from-the-river-to-the-sea-palestine-will-be-free-1.png

https://www.palquest.org/en/historictext/6723/biltmore-conference-declaration

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

This is not a Religious Conflict

This is the Palestinian flag used in 1938 during the revolt against the British Mandate. As evident in the design, Christians and Muslims were represented equally in this movement. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), formed in 1964, was also very much a secular resistance movement and remains so to this day. It was only after the Iranian revolution in the 1980s, that Islamic groups like Hezbollah, and Hamas began to take the lead in the Palestinian resistance. Even today Christian Palestinians identify with their fellow Muslim Palestinians in the struggle against occupation. Framing the struggle in religious terms, as a struggle between Jews and Muslims is at best a misunderstanding, and at worst, it serves to divide Palestinian identity, rendering Palestinians more vulnerable to Israeli subjugation.

Image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_flags

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/tricontinental-revolution/plo-and-the-limits-of-secular-revolution-19751982/8C0DC0B35609FF5F646B5B3037F262F1

https://www.deseret.com/faith/2021/5/20/22442290/dont-forget-palestinian-christians-israel-palestine-conflict-escalation-protests-bethlehem-jerusalem

Forms of Government 2

2. Ethnocracy: A form of government based on communalism. It is more widespread than you might think. Sometimes it is an explicit premise, at other times, it is just an unstated reality. Wherever the communal organization is stated explicitly in law, we find the formal ethnocracy that we call apartheid.

Here are three instances of legislated ethnocracy –
1) Canada, the quintessential settler-colonial ethnocracy, based on the Indian Act, status identity cards, and native reservations, upon which South African apartheid was based.
2) Malaysia, where there is a constitutionally enshrined ‘special position’ for the indigenous Malays by which they assert their supremacy over immigrant Indians and Chinese who settled under the auspices of colonial rule.
3) Israel, where there is an ongoing occupation of Palestinian lands effected through an apartheid system that involves limiting the Palestinian’s right to movement, denying them the right to vote, and subjecting them to a separate legal system. The seal was set on this ethnocracy, when Israel passed a law in 2018, symbolically affirming that it was the nation-state of the Jewish people.


Teka Teki: Malaysia, Canada, Israel; Apa Persamaannya?
Jawapan: Semuanya mengamalkan Ethnocracy!

UPDATED 13.11.2023

https://en.everybodywiki.com/Apartheid_in_Malaysia

https://troymedia.com/politicslaw/indigenous-apartheid-system-canada/

https://www.vox.com/23924319/israel-palestine-apartheid-meaning-history-debate
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/7/31/17623978/israel-jewish-nation-state-law-bill-explained-apartheid-netanyahu-democracy

The Situation in Palestine

Michael Walker and the British communist commentator Ash Sarkar discuss Israel’s ongoing bombardment of Gaza in terms of Western geopolitical interests. They deconstruct the blatant media bias in covering the conflict, which they set in the context of Israel’s ongoing settler colonialism and apartheid. The critique is centered on Omar Badder’s analysis and questioning of the entry point for Western media reporting, which is as follows –

  1. Status quo: occupation/ apartheid is violence against Palestinians
  2. Then Israel escalates through evictions/beatings/ shootings
  3. Then some Palestinians respond w/violence.
  4. Then Israel “responds” w/massacres

“If you start reporting at #3. you are misleading your audience”