Category Archives: Uncategorized

Israeli Peace Week is the result of individual cognitive dissonance and institutionalized whitewashing

By: Ahmed Elsayed

In an article by Miranda Lapides advocating Israeli Peace Week recently submitted to the GMU Psych Blog, positive psychology is quoted as being “the study of what makes the life worth living”. However, what I read throughout the article had by no means made any argument towards how the life of any minority in Israel is made bearable in the overlooming shadow of occupation, subjugation, mistreatment, and ethnic cleansing. What I read instead was regarding efforts to make an attempt at “shedding a positive light” on a situation in which there are clear cut oppressors and oppressed. What is most interesting is that the article is written by member identifying with and advocating the former who is actively trying to delegitimize the grief of a suffering population and those who identify with it.

As an undergraduate in psychology, myself, I am quick to being able to spot a classic cognitive dissonance reaction such as this, one in which; the subject is confronted with a conflict in moral standards set against a long term socialization and normalization of occupation. When one is embedded in such an environment of activism and social justice such as the grounds of a college campus, yet is raised bearing ideals supporting an inherently unjust system such as Zionism, what else can one do other than try to “put a positive spin on things”?

Israeli Peace Week does the exact opposite of this, instead; the event is organized around convincing people that a two sided conflict exists in which the problem is attributed to mutual disagreements. The article states that Israel  “has tried numerous times for peace”, failing to realize that these attempts have been a facade covering up further expansion of colonization (ex: Oslo Accords, Camp David Accords, and the Geneva Initiative, all of which have resulted in the loss of Palestinian land to Israeli settlers).¹ Constant denial of rights, seizure of land, and dehumanization experienced by indigenous populations in Palestine can in no way have a positive impact on the psychological disposition in the minds of members of these populations. Furthermore, Israeli Peace Week paints an image of advocates for the rights of indigenous populations in Palestine as being radical deviants failing to have any “understanding”. This condemnation, however positively connoted in the article, of members identifying in and advocating for an oppressed population only isolates and rejects the very people with whom you supposedly want to make peace.

It is my desire that people take notice to how events such as this are a blatant attempt at covering up a grim truth. Israeli Peace Week, like so many other whitewashing campaigns held by the Zionist agenda, exist only to portray an unreal image of equality and democracy like turpentine on an ugly painting. Israel claims to be advocating for peace, yet they continually bomb Gaza, force evict indigenous residents out of their homes, and further drive settlements into what little land the Arabs have left.² Israel claims to be advocating for marriage equality, yet the Israeli Citizenship and Entry Law prevents the reunification of spouses which carry identification cards of “enemy states”, fragmenting families due to their ethnicity. ³ Israel claims to be advocating for a land where people can “travel without fear”, yet if a Palestinian wishes to travel to two separate regions in Gaza (a distance roughly equivalent to the distance to campus from my apartment, which takes 30 minutes in the worst traffic situations), he or she would have to suffer the harassment of multiple checkpoints turning a normally 24 minute trip into a 5 hour one. 4  Israel claims to be advocating for racial equality, yet palestinians are condemned behind separation walls, Arab citizens are prohibited from using “Jew only” roads, and African migrants are subjected to harassment from Israelis who protest their very presence.5 Is it starting to seem hard to “put a positive spin on things” now, or is it just me?

Footnotes:

__________________________________________________

1.This is explained in depth in “Abuminah, A. (2006). One country: A bold proposal to end the israeli-palestinian impasse. New York: Metropolitan Books.” Throughout chapter two p55-p88

 

2. Evidence of these violent attacks usually goes uncovered in media. There had been a recent attack on Gaza in mid March this year. This most media covered one of these attacks is Operation Cast Lead occurring in late 2008. More Info: http://imeu.net/news/article0021968.shtml

 

3. Sources:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.580463

http://electronicintifada.net/content/taking-direct-action-against-israels-racist-marriage-law/13011

 

4. Evidence of this is shown in the documentary: Machssomim by Israeli flimmaker Yoav Shamir

shown here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSTbnzyGyyc

 

5. Evidence of the African migrant situation can be seen in depth in Max Blumenthal’s documentary: Israel’s New Racism: The Persecution of African Migrants in the Holy Land. Shown here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPxv4Aff3IA

 

Quotes by Israeli demographic guru Arnon Soffer on the separation of Israelis and Palestinians, taken from One Country (cited in footnote #1) showing the true intention of the wall (rather than the “security” excuse that is usually given):

 

“Unilateral separation doesn’t guaranteed peace, it guarantees a Jewish Zionist state with an overwhelming majority of jews. [The] day after separation, the Palestinians will bombard us with artillery fire–and we will have to retaliate. But at least war will be at the fence (behind the separation wall), not in the kindergartens in Tel Aviv and Haifa. We will tell the Palestinians that if a single missile is fired over the fence, we will fire 10 in response. And women and children will be killed and houses will be destroyed. When 2.5 million people live in a closed off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe.  Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today, with the aid of an insane and fundamentalist Islam. The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day.”

 

Statement of Support for the American Studies Association

Students Against Israeli Apartheid Statement of Appreciation and Solidarity with the American Studies Association

As student activists in the international social movement for equal human rights for Palestinians, we greatly appreciate your bravery in challenging the discourse on Palestine in academia. We wish to thank you for your contribution in the endeavor to end Israeli oppression and we hope your decision inspires others to challenge the status quo on their campuses.

Even though the resolution has been widely criticized, know that you have taken the appropriate approach for justice by boycotting the systematic discrimination that is reinforced by Israeli academic institutions. While today you are berated for your actions, tomorrow, you will be applauded for being the forerunners of social justice.

We deeply appreciate this resolution, and it continues to inspire our work towards dismantling the false dichotomy that has surrounded Palestinians and Israelis for all too long.  Your decision will not only empower Palestinian academics, but everyone else who will enjoy the political space that you have created.

We support and give thanks to the ASA and its remarkable resolution to boycott Israeli academic institutions. We will continue to stand in solidarity with the occupied people of Palestine until freedom and equality are the status quo.

GMU President Cabrera’s Racist Tweet Opposing Academic Boycott

Yesterday, GMU President Ángel Cabrera tweeted his support for the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities “Statement in Opposition to Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions.”

Shortly following this endorsement, he tweeted his statement to the Washington Post:

 His line that “Universities exist to build bridges of understanding, not to blow them up” insinuates that being in solidarity with Palestinians is on par with terrorism. Not only is this metaphor racist and distasteful, but it was also irresponsible. Supporters of the academic boycott are endangered when their activity is distorted through fear mongering. Cabrera’s use of damaging language is a blatant response to the support GMU SAIA received from faculty as a result of the NO HONOR IN APARTHEID campaign. His response is only a small part of the national “McCarthyite” campaign to destroy the positive learning environments student organizations have created regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict on campuses. While academic integrity is often cited as a value of the administration, Cabrera’s rhetoric serves to limit discussion, exploration, and academic freedom around critical issues. While President Cabrera’s support for Israeli apartheid is no secret, his allegiance, to the best of our knowledge, is linked to position and profits.

President Cabrera’s opposition to the resolution, like any university administration’s, denouncement, comes as no surprise. Historically, university presidents are not forerunners of social justice or equality. Now more than ever, their roles resemble that of a CEO of a corporation. Cabrera’s loyalty belongs to the university’s board of trustees, not the faculty or the students. His priority is to increase the university’s endowment, not to uphold its academic integrity. When president Cabrera opposes the ASA’s resolution to boycott Israeli institutions he is not only suppressing the academic freedom of Palestinian academics, but he is also challenging his own faculty’s right to self-determination.

Cabrera’s most recent action is a deliberate attempt to stifle any form of faculty organizing on the GMU campus.  Today, we are fighting for a faceless Palestinian academic, but tomorrow we may be demanding better working conditions and pay for you and your colleagues. For this reason president Cabrera opposed the ASA’s resolution, because the former will lead to the latter, and the latter is an administrator’s worst fear.

GMU Students to Walkout of Winter Graduation

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

GMU Students to Walkout of Winter Graduation

Action Protests Shari Arison, Israeli Billionaire and Apartheid-Profiteer

Fairfax, VA, 17 December 2013

On Thursday, December 19, 2013 at 1:00pm, Students Against Israeli Apartheid (SAIA) will lead a walkout of George Mason University’s Winter Commencement ceremony at the Patriot Center on GMU’s Fairfax Campus. University administrators contacted Students Against Israeli Apartheid, responding to this public outcry. After a week-long period of discussion, the university met SAIA’s demand for accommodations for graduating students who did not wish to have their ceremony marred by Arison’s presence, and released the following statement:  “Graduates seated on the arena floor will be able to leave through an exit at the rear of the hall. These individuals will be provided an option of waiting in a reserved room. (…) An event staff member will inform those waiting when the commencement speaker’s remarks have concluded.  Graduates and guests can then re-enter the arena.” This is a historical opportunity for graduating students to demonstrate their commitment to human rights and stand in solidarity with the Palestinian students that have been personally affected by the on-going occupation of Palestine by Apartheid Israel. As the first campus that has resisted the Arison Group’s influence, Mason can set a strong precedent for rejecting the Arison Group’s whitewashing of Israeli Apartheid.

Shari Arison, owner of the Arison Group, is receiving an Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters and speaking at the commencement ceremony. An open letter written by faculty sponsor Craig Willse and graduating SAIA President Tareq Radi that raised concerns about the Arison Group’s complicity in the occupation of Palestine and highlighted the hypocrisy of an apartheid-profiteer funding an endowed chair to teach “Doing Good Values” was widely read by the campus community. Many students, faculty, and staff who were previously unaware of the nature of the Arison Group’s involvement at Mason were outraged at the prospect of an apartheid-profiteer using the University as a publicity tool.

In the past two weeks, SAIA publicized Arison’s profiteering through a variety of methods. SAIA put up flyers with the slogans “Arison Investments: Colonizing Curriculum” and “No Honor in Apartheid” to resist the trend of privatization at the University and demonstrate how honoring Arison directly contradicts GMU’s new vision and guiding principles. On social media, SAIA utilized #arisonIDEA to show how apartheid would look on Mason’s campus. On the Fairfax campus’ North Plaza, SAIA constructed an eight-foot tall wall to further publicize the campaign. In combination with the open letter, these efforts sparked a discussion within the New Century College, the home of Arison’s endowed professorship. Dean Lisa Gring-Pemble called a meeting on Friday, December 6, for faculty and staff of NCC to air their concerns. As resistance against Arison’s role at George Mason mounts, these conversations are expected to continue.

Students Against Israeli Apartheid

Email: gmusaia@gmail.com

Website: gmusaiablog.wordpress.com

Twitter: @GMUSAIA

Facebook: facebook.com/GMUSAIA

END

Be a part of this historical moment.
Be a part of this historical moment.

Slim Peace’s Slim Chances for Justice

by Tareq Radi

In the face of growing international solidarity with the BDS call, normalization projects are on the move. Recently, a project titled Slim Peace has made its way from Israel into the United States. Slim Peace has started initiatives in Portland, Reno, DC, New York, and Boston. Within the United States, Slim Peace claims it merely wants to facilitate “nutritionally-based dialogues” between Muslim and Jewish women. While this may appear an innocent attempt to promote interfaith dialogue and nurture better eating habits, it is in reality a normalizing project that exploits the dieting insecurities of women.  Don’t let Slim Peace’s name deceive you, the project is equally as aggressive as its counterparts, going to the lengths of sending a representative to promote at the US Campaign to End Israeli Occupation’s conference this past September. Although, normalizing projects are amorphous, they most commonly take shape on university campuses. It came as no surprise that Slim Peace’s DC representative targeted Muslim Student Associations (MSA) and Arab Student Associations (ASA) in the Washington metropolitan area, promoting the project as a simple nutritional dialogue between women of different faiths.

Slim Peace’s showcasing of their project exposes that its true purpose is to create a false parity between the colonizers and colonized. Their appearance on the Today show and featured article in the New York Times did not attempt to hide the goals of the project, as did the DC recruiter. A quote from the organization’s founder, Yael Luttwak, caught my eye in particular as she, “…wondered if the leaders at the time, Ariel Sharon, Israel’s prime minister, and Yasir Arafat, the Palestinian Authority president, might be more likely to talk peace if they tried to lose weight together.” Luttwak’s comment trivializes the occupation of Palestine, casting it instead as a “disagreement” between parties who must learn to see eye to eye, shedding their differences as well as pounds. Adding insult to injury, Slim Peace’s diet plan acts as a distraction to Israel’s imposition of food scarcity in Gaza. I highly doubt the diet Bethany Saab, Slim Peace’s DC representative, refers to in her article I’m in: A Palestinian Diet for Peace is anything like the diet Dov Wiesglass, former aide to Ariel Sharon, joked about amongst Israeli officials. “It’s like meeting with a dietitian. We need to make the Palestinians lose weight, but not to starve to death”. Slim Peace’s concern for dieting appears to have no intention to address the rising trend of chronic malnutrition facing Gazans today. Slim Peace’s preying on young women’s insecurities concerning body image is no more than an attempt to create space for Zionist alumni to persist in their efforts to normalize apartheid outside of the campus environment.

The Adverse Effects of Normalizing

In recent years, efforts to expose Israel for its human rights violations and isolate the pariah state from the international community have gained tremendous headway. While Zionists find it increasingly difficult to dispute the call for equality in an undivided, secular state, they attempt to undermine the BDS movement through normalization projects. These projects create a façade of equality to obscure disparities between Palestinians and Israelis. Zionist normalization not only perpetuates the notion that Palestinians and Israelis are equals with petty differences over land and religion, but it is additionally harmful to the psychology of both the oppressor and the oppressed. Normalization lessens the disparity of the relationship in the mind of the colonizer and colonized, which in reality increases the power imbalance between the two. A negative correlation is formed as increases in perceived equality of the colonized decreases the magnitude of their demands.

Normalization projects serve as publicity stunts where the overt content is agreeable to everyone. As in Slim Peace’s case, the dialogues are not concealed behind closed doors, but rather showcased for the world to applaud. We must ask ourselves, “What is the true goal behind these events that are paraded in the name of peace?” Images of Palestinians and Israelis laughing together, arm in arm, whitewash the reality of the ongoing occupation, colonization, and apartheid against the Palestinian people. They do not acknowledge the military incarceration and violence directed at Palestinian youth. They fail to recognize violence brought on by settlers and the appropriation of not only land, but culture.

Dialogues, cultural education, and events focused on reconciliation are not the issue; in fact these methods will be imperative to the development of a one state solution. The problem lies when these events precede reparations of Israel’s violations, and the disestablishment of the oppression and racism facing Palestinians today. The notion that Palestinians and Israelis can co-exist or pave a way to peace through such actions only benefits Israel as it further legitimizes the illegal state and nurtures complacency towards the occupation amongst segments of the Palestinian community. Despite our intentions, when we participate in normalizing activities without keeping in mind their political implications, we undermine efforts challenging the oppressive and discriminatory policies of the colonial state. Additionally, these initiatives, directly or indirectly, wrongfully alleviate the conscience of Israelis while forcing Palestinians into accepting their fate as a colonized people.

Critics often claim that anti-normalization discriminates against individuals, whereas in actuality the strategy targets the institutions that attempt to normalize the occupation.  Anti-normalization does not protect individuals from being sanctioned when they are complacent or complicit with organizations and institutions that strive to undermine the self-determination of Palestinians. Prior to forming coalitions or joint events, Palestinian solidarity organizations must ask themselves if they are in compliance with PACBI’s framework. More simply put, organizations must analyze whether they are co-resisting or co-existing with the oppressive Israeli state apparatus.

In the case of George Mason University, Slim Peace failed in its efforts to recruit the Arab and Muslim community through the MSA and ASA as a result of Students Against Israeli Apartheid’s (SAIA) resistance to normalizing campaigns.

While SAIA members were able to persuade the ASA and the MSA to refuse the invitation to endorse Slim Peace on our campus, our campus Student Government’s official endorsement granted legitimacy to the project. Like other universities, George Mason’s Student Senate has direct ties to the Israel Student Association. Shortly after his election, active ISA member and Student Government Senator, Aaron Yohai established his goals on his official “Senator Aaron Yohai” fan page.

“There are a couple of important things that I would like to accomplish before my current term in the senate ends and the next one begins: (1) The GenEd “Global Understanding” requirement must be reexamined and possibly rewritten, and (2) allegations by some students that Sabra Hummus is responsible for human rights violations overseas must be addressed and debunked, so that Mason Dining does not feel compelled to have Sabra removed from the shelves. I’m looking forward to the last few weeks of my first term! Please do not hesitate to send a message to this page if you have concerns over either of these topics.” (April 7, 2013)

 

 Recognizing the threat that the BDS movement poses to the non-democratic, Jewish supremacist state, Zionists strive to hold seats in Student Government as they do in the US government.  Through utilizing the Student Government, Zionist organizations attempt to undermine the efforts of groups that exercise anti-normalization.  By comparing groups, such as SAIA, to their sellout counter parts, who support a two-state solution and enjoy participating in normalizing dialogues, Zionists audaciously label the anti-normalizers, supporters of egalitarianism and secularism, as “radicals”.

Zionist organizations on campuses strategically try to co-opt events with organizations such as the ASA and MSA as a means to gain legitimacy in the eyes of the student body. Despite these concerted and well-funded efforts, Palestinian justice organizations, particularly student organizations, are actively resisting normalization. One of the simplest methods of determining if an event, action, or initiative is a normalizing event is observing its language. Obviously, these actions will never refer to any land as a colonized or occupied territory, but at best as “disputed land.” Typical themes to take note of are: 1) attempts to find commonalities between Arabs and Jews, which may occur while eating hummus or smoking hookah’ 2) slogans bearing a desire to end the “conflict” or desiring to achieve long-lasting peace with no mention of justice’ 3) referring to the colonization and occupation as a “conflict,” “situation,” or “problem” that both sides are responsible for. Slim Peace’s advertisement for the campaign is an archetype of normalization. Reducing occupation, ongoing settler-colonialism, and apartheid to a “situation” or “conflict” obscures the reality of what is actually happening further perpetuating the pretense that Palestinians and Israelis are on an equal footing.

slim chance

While these events claim to be “apolitical” and for “shared causes,” any event with a Zionist organization is political regardless of its claims or purported causes. Organizations such as the Israel Student Association and Hillel are Israeli state apparatuses operating under clear guiding principles that make them directly complicit with the ongoing occupation and colonization of Palestine. Hillel and Israel both promulgate Jewish identity as a means to obscure the Zionist projects they both propagate. For those who refuse to believe Hillel is a political institution, the organization provides plenty of evidence regarding their opposition to BDS and their alliance with Stand with Us. Additionally, the implementation of the Birthright Israel campaign indoctrinates Jewish youth into accepting their superiority to the indigenous population. This reality makes it impossible to stand in solidarity with the Palestinians while simultaneously co-organizing events with groups that support such political perspectives. More detrimental to the movement than any Zionist presence on campus are Middle Eastern associated groups who legitimize Israel through normalizing events. While the MSA, SJP, and ASA are very different from each other, the unfortunate truth is that we live in a society where Orientalism is rampant, and making all groups monolithic in the eyes of the general public. Therefore, the actions of one group affect all others.

Colonized Consciousness

The psychological threat and magnitude of existing trends to normalize are exemplified by an unfortunate experience I recently had with a fellow Palestinian from a nearby SJP. The SJP had an exemplary group of non-Arab solidarity activists who were vehemently against normalizing projects, but unfortunately, the club was hindered with a Palestinian on the executive board who believed that the best strategy to increase membership was participating in normalizing projects in order to attract Jewish members to the club. It was not until he attempted to justify his pursuit of such a ludicrous strategy that I understood the miscue of his psychology. In one sentence he delineated the logic behind his “brilliant” strategy, “One of them is worth fifteen of us.” His consciousness had been infiltrated by the pervading Zionist myth. He had begun to believe that he, and other Palestinians, were worth less than Jewish people. The Palestinian narrative in the Diaspora has been deeply affected by the Zionist master narrative in America, and many Palestinians have lost sight of their own power to affect change. Normalizing projects not only affect the overall discursive battle within society over the Israel/Palestine conflict, but also reinforce negative self- perceptions of moral incompetence or responsibility for the current disaster within the population of the oppressed.

Of course we are all subject to effects of normalization and should not be in despair if we have inadvertently supported normalization projects in the past. Especially, within the last 20 years the only “acceptable” method or invitation we’ve received to the conversation of our plight has been limited to the boundaries and language set by our oppressor. Anti-normalization not only serves as a tool to deconstruct and delegitimize the apartheid and colonial policies of Israel, but also opens the door for us to break free from the confines of “negotiation” we’ve been subjugated to in the post-Oslo era.