Is Israel obligated to provide Palestinians in the Occupied Territories with the same level of COVID vaccination it provides its own citizens? The answer is yes
The debate on Israeli responsibility on COVID vaccines in West Bank and Gaza is an opportunity to think of the competing and overlapping frameworks: occupation vs. apartheid.
[Thread]
2/ On vaccines, Israel's responsibility as an occupying power towards the occupied population is clear, based on the 4th Geneva convention. The Palestinian Authority, the Oslo agreements, or claims for Palestinian statehood do not change that.
3/ Israel could meet its obligation through the PA, but it is ultimately its obligation.
And this shows the strength of the occupation paradigm. On some things - like responsibility towards local population, or settlements - it's very clear.
Given its weaknesses, I can see two reasons to promote the IHRA. The first, primarily as a symbolic gesture; the second, because if its "edge" on defining anti-Israel discourse as antisemitic.
If your reason is the first, consider carefully the IHRA's weaknesses; the message that it sends, that antisemitism is substantially different from other racisms; and that it pits directly diaspora Jews against Palestinians and Palestine advocacy. theguardian.com/news/2020/nov/…
As for "anti-Israel discourse", this is what the Jewish Chronicle called "political antisemitism" in its famous front page editorial. The IHRA was needed because Labour would only address "racial antisemitism" but not "political antisemitism".
1. The core definition is poorly phrased and is very restrictive. It defines antisemitism as hatred - that is, an emotion - but does not mention discrimination, prejudice, or other forms of anti-Jewish racism which do not necessarily manifest as "hatred".
The CST website, in its page on Antisemitism definition, starts with the sentence
"Antisemitism is hatred, bigotry, prejudice or discrimination against Jews."
Three of these terms do not appear in the core IHRA definition.
By neo-Zionism I mean the current hegemonic political project in Israel. Explicit view of Israel as ethno-state over entire Israel/Palesine, Jewish-Israeli domination and rights for Israeli Jews, limited or no rights for Palestinians, ongoing colonisation, effective annexation 1/
Neo-Zionists are allied with the global populist right. Diaspora communities understood by neo-Zionists as extensions of Israel, they are not expected to immigrate to Israel. Welcome if they do, but a Jewish Trump supporter in the US is as-good as a settler in the West Bank. 2/
A significant share, probably plurality, of Israelis, support this model. Most diaspora Jews disagree with parts or all of this - including most of those identifying as Zionists. But there is a minority that supports this. 3/
I agree with every word here.
The IHRA has become a symbol for the fight against antisemitism, which leads meany to underestimate its shortcomings.
The definition is especially wrong for universities, and will introduce confusion rather than clarity.
The imposition of IHRA on universities will likely escalate campus wars, rather de-escalate them. We need to disaggregate the issue of antisemitism from Israel/Palestine, as much as possible. The EHRC report showed it can be done, but this move sends us in the wrong direction.
If you read Gavin Williamson's letter, the verb "demonstrate" repeats five times. This is the politics of symbolic gestures, rather that of substance. He makes no claim regarding the actual value of the IHRA for fighting antisemitism - because there is no such evidence.
My Saeb Erekat story.
----------------------
In December 1998 I was a subtitles translator in the Israeli TV news department (channel one). Bill Clinton arrived to Israel (4th visit) and for the first ever presidential visit to the Palestinian Authority. Very busy 3-4 days 1/
Clinton's Gaza itinerary included meeting kids whose fathers were in Israeli prisons. Saeb Erekat did the simultaneous translation for the President. One boy (8yr?) recounted some bare details about his story. The boy was shy and subdued. 2/
Erikat translated the child's sad factual account and then added "we just want peace now". Which the child didn't say. I remember staring at the screen with amused admiration. Erikat's quickness of improvisation, the moulding of a feel-good Hollywood monologue 3/