Showing posts with label Arab Americans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arab Americans. Show all posts

Sunday, May 19, 2024

Historian, Scholar, and Activist Robin D.G. Kelley On the Real Story Of What is Actually Happening and Why at UCLA In the Student Activist response to the Genocidal Israeli War in Gaza

https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/uclas-unholy-alliance/

PHOTO:  Getty Images

UCLA’s Unholy Alliance

House Republicans accuse student protesters of vicious anti-Semitism, but it is administrators who are courting violence. 

In December the House Committee on Education and the Workforce held a hearing on anti-Semitism on college campuses that forced University of Pennsylvania president Liz McGill and Harvard University president Claudine Gay to resign in its wake. In April the committee held another hearing, reducing Columbia University President Minouche Shafik, keen to avoid the fate of her counterparts, to a groveling mess. On May 23 it will hold yet another, under the title “Calling for Accountability: Stopping Antisemitic College Chaos.”

This time the committee has summoned Michael Schill, president of Northwestern University; Jonathan Holloway, president of Rutgers University; and Gene Block, Chancellor of the University of California, Los Angeles. We expect another show trial, where committee chair Virginia Foxx (Republican of North Carolina), Elise Stefanik (Republican of New York), and their friends pressure “liberal” university leaders into confessing that anti-Semitism has run amok on college campuses, that Jewish students are the real victims of a Hamas-backed genocide being plotted in Gaza solidarity encampments and the classrooms of tenured radicals, and that the source of Jew hatred is critical race theory. The committee has promised that it will not sit idly by. In a press release, Foxx warned “mealy-mouthed, spineless college leaders” that “College is not a park for playacting juveniles or a battleground for radical activists. Everyone affiliated with these universities will receive a healthy dose of reality: actions have consequences.”

The House Committee hearings chose only to summon college presidents for a public tongue-lashing and dressing-down. This is because House Republicans are less interested in anti-Semitism than racking up “gotcha” soundbites for their fundraising campaigns, advancing the right-wing assault on DEI and what they define as “critical race theory,” and attacking the university as a whole. According to Inside Higher Ed, Foxx confirmed that “the inquiries could broaden to include the universities’ diversity, equity and inclusion politics.” If Foxx, Stefanik, and fellow House Republicans were genuinely concerned about anti-Semitism, they would investigate the white nationalists, neo-Nazis, and QAnon conspiracy theorists who make up part of their base and participated in the January 6 insurrection. Parroting Donald Trump, Stefanik referred to the men and women convicted on charges ranging from obstruction to assaulting a law enforcement officer as “hostages.” Foxx not only voted against certifying the 2020 election but, like Stefanik and fellow House Republicans, vehemently opposed the commission to investigate the capitol riot.

The charges Chancellor Block will face exonerate those responsible for the worst incident of anti-Semitic violence in UCLA’s history.

Unlike the January 6 hearings, Foxx’s committee has produced very little evidence of anti-Semitism outside of words and slogans either taken out of context or misinterpreted. Stefanik, for example, managed to turn “intifada,” which literally means “shaking off” or “uprising,” into “genocide of Jews.” But Chancellor Block’s testimony will be different. It will give the committee an opportunity to investigate not only a verifiable and egregious incident of anti-Semitism, but one involving white nationalists and neo-Nazis.

Between April 25 and May 2, UCLA experienced the worst episode of both anti-Semitic and anti-Palestinian/Islamophobic/racist violence in the university’s century-long history. White nationalists and neo-Nazis joined forces with Zionists (including some saying they were Israelis) to attack UCLA’s Palestine Solidarity Encampment, whose residents included a large number of Jewish students. The assailants were not affiliated with the university. One neo-Nazi was heard shouting, “we’re here to finish what Hitler started,” without any apparent protest from the self-identified Zionists. At least one person present has been identified as an associate of the Proud Boys. Using metal pipes, wooden planks, fists, knives, bricks, noise, chemical weapons, and incendiary fireworks, the mob sent at least twenty-five students to the hospital for broken bones, head trauma, and severe lacerations, while police stood by and watched for hours, electing to neither detain nor interrogate the perpetrators. No arrests took place that night. The following day, only students and faculty defending the encampment were arrested.

Although Block has promised to launch a full investigation, reporting from various media outlets (including outstanding coverage by our student paper, The Daily Bruin), along with hundreds of hours of video captured by students, faculty and observers, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Palestine Solidarity Encampment—a nonviolent occupation erected to protest U.S. support for the genocide in Gaza and to demand that UCLA divest from companies that fuel Israel’s war and occupation, exercise financial transparency, break ties with Israeli universities, and acknowledge the loss of Palestinian life—came under brutal attack from its very inception and the administration did nothing to protect our students.

Given Block’s fervent opposition to anti-Semitism and his unwavering defense of Israel and Zionism, why are House Republicans going after him? Are they really concerned about the assault on the encampment and the health and safety of our students? To the contrary, Foxx has crafted an indictment designed to shield white nationalists from accountability and prosecution for their rabid anti-Semitism by magically recasting neo-Nazis as encampment defenders rather than assailants, and by twisting information, repeating misinformation, and conveying outright falsehoods fed to the committee by Israel advocacy organizations such as the AMCHA Initiative, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and Stand With Us; right-wing media outlets such as Campus Reform, Legal Insurrection, and Fox News; and isolated tweets and Instagram posts. Foxx’s letter notifying Block of the charges against him makes the wildly specious claim that “a van displaying the Star of David inside a Nazi swastika, as well as antisemitic writing referring to Jews as ‘puppet masters,’ was parked on UCLA’s campus in support of the encampment.” It repeats false claims that journalists who tried to enter the encampment were “assaulted,” but never mentions the documented fact that in the wee hours of May 1, four student journalists with the Daily Bruin were tracked down, maced, and severely beaten by members of the mob —sending one, Catherine Hamilton, to the hospital. The letter also repeats the thoroughly debunked rumor that “anti-Israel activists shoved a Jewish student counter-protestor . . . kicked her in the head, and stepped on her. The assault left her bleeding and caused her to lose consciousness and to be rushed to the hospital.” Immediately after the story began circulating on social media, the Los Angeles Times interviewed the woman in question who explained that she had been accidentally shoved by a fellow counterprotester “while attempting to retrieve her fallen [Israeli] flag.”

The letter never mentions that self-proclaimed Zionists took part in the attacks, nor does it acknowledge that the encampment had actually been attacked. Instead, Foxx labels the victims of mob and police violence “antisemitic rioters.” She finds evidence of rampant anti-Semitism in the Undergraduate Student Association Council’s (USAC) resolution calling for amnesty for those arrested, the elimination of police on campus, and, in her words, “a “permanent ceasefire” and an end to what they allege is a “genocide in Palestine.” Finally, she makes the absurd claim that the resolution asks professors to hold Muslim and Palestinian students “to lower academic standards.” In actuality, it asks for temporary academic leniency “and to take into account the needs of all students during this time, but especially those of Palestinian and Muslim identities who are the most unsafe and targeted individuals on campus right now.”

There are many more examples of misinformation that I will address below. My point is that the list of charges Chancellor Block will face on May 23 performs double duty in that it defends Israel’s genocidal war and exonerates white supremacists and Zionists responsible for the worst incident of anti-Semitic violence in UCLA’s history. Foxx and Stefanik will undoubtedly demand Block’s resignation. A large proportion of the faculty and students at UCLA is also calling for Block’s resignation, but for very different reasons.

UCLA’s Task Force on Anti-Palestinian, Anti-Muslim, and Anti-Arab Racism, of which I am a member, conducted its own investigation, and released a report with its findings earlier this week. The report holds Block and his administration, along with various branches of law enforcement, responsible for failing to protect our students. UCLA’s administration, it finds, not only failed to direct law enforcement to arrest and remove the armed mob but indirectly incited the violence by inviting “counter protesters” to come on to our campus, hold inflammatory rallies a few feet from the encampment, and allow them to remain in the name of protecting “free speech” and upholding their responsibility as a “public university” to grant the “community” access to campus. It seems clear in hindsight that permitting hostile groups to harass and attack the encampment is one strategy to avoid the optics of sending in the police to attack students. If that was the strategy, it didn’t work. The administration probably did not anticipate an unholy alliance of neo-Nazis and Zionists working together, but those of us who spent more than a decade criticizing Chancellor Block’s unremitting hostility toward critics of Israel and his fervent defense of Zionism could have predicted this outcome—especially after October 7.

The following account draws on findings from our report and provides a broader context but does not purport to speak for the entire task force.


Intolerance and its Discontents

As I write, UAW Local 4811, representing some forty-eight thousand postdocs, teaching assistants, academic and student researchers, tutors, and readers across the University of California system, is preparing to strike over the administration’s conduct with respect to the encampment. The union is demanding, among other things, amnesty for all academic employees, students, faculty, and staff facing criminal or disciplinary charges for protesting; the right to free speech; divestment from UC’s known investments in weapons manufacturers, military contractors, and companies profiting from Israel’s war on Palestine; and disclosure of all funding sources and investments. UCLA faculty are pushing for a vote of no confidence, or at minimum, “censure” of Chancellor Block for failing to keep our students safe. Some argue that the vote is merely symbolic, both because the faculty do not have the power to remove the Chancellor and because Block is just two months from retirement.

The administration probably did not anticipate an unholy alliance of neo-Nazis and Zionists working together.

By most standards, his seventeen-year tenure has been a success. Under his leadership, UCLA rose in the U.S. News and World Report rankings from the twenty-sixth best public university in the country to the first, and its endowment swelled from $2.2 billion to $7.7 billion. The grandson of working-class Eastern European Jews, Block proudly identifies as a liberal who believes in diversity and racial equity. He often speaks of his experiences as an undergraduate at Stanford (1966–70) when he opposed the war in Vietnam. He is way too liberal for House Republicans, who are poised to make him their latest punching bag. But his liberalism ends when it comes to Palestine.

Since I joined the UCLA faculty in 2011, I’ve seen colleagues targeted for teaching critical perspectives on Israel, and Muslim and Arab students profiled by campus police and subject to racist epithets and graffiti. In 2012 a UC “President’s Advisory Council” issued a report on the campus climate asserting that Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and “anti-Zionism and Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movements and other manifestations of anti-Israel sentiment” created a hostile environment for Jewish students. It warned faculty that criticizing Israel or Israeli policies in the classroom was tantamount to using “the academic platforms to denounce the Jewish state and Jewish nationalist aspirations.” The report recommended, among other things, suspending support for Palestine Awareness Week from any university sponsorship and adopting a hate speech policy that would not only mute criticisms of Israel but prohibit outside speakers deemed advocates of hate.  The report was so extreme and biased that over two thousand faculty signed a petition asking the UC Regents to reject its findings. Ultimately, UC President Mark Yudof rejected the report, since its recommendations violated the First Amendment. But while we succeeded in pressing the UC Regents, students and faculty at UCLA could not persuade Chancellor Block to openly denounce it.

In 2014 students seeking to divest student council funds from companies doing business in the Palestinian occupied territories learned that some members of student government had accepted paid-for trips to Israel sponsored by the ADL, AIPAC, Hasbara Fellowships, and other organizations that not only lobbied on behalf of Israel but promoted “discriminatory and Islamophobic positions.” SJP argued before the student judicial council that the members who accepted these trips had a conflict of interest in any government resolutions regarding divestment, since the organizations furnishing them were firmly opposed to campus divestment movements. They also asked candidates running for student government to take an ethics pledge committing to decline free trips to Israel paid for by those organizations—provoking a vicious backlash from the AMCHA Initiative, who accused the students raising these issues of “intimidation,” “harassment,” and making Jewish students feel unsafe.

In reality, pro-Zionist retaliation made pro-divestment students actually unsafe. Zionist organizations not affiliated with the university came on campus, filmed students without their consent, engaged in online harassment, and arranged visits by Israeli soldiers in full military uniform. Rather than condemn these intimidation tactics, Block chastised the students for proposing divestment in the first place. He stated flatly that the UC Regents “does not support divestment in companies that engage in business with Israel” and that “divestment decisions should not hold any one organization or country to a different standard than any other.” He refused to meet with SJP, but he did meet with representatives of the AMCHA Initiative to hear their demands to investigate SJP. The divestment campaign also triggered a resolution from the Los Angeles City Council condemning SJP’s actions as “bullying” and “harassment” and requesting that UC administrators “refer cases of ‘intimidation or harassment’ to ‘the proper law enforcement agencies.’” And while Block’s administration was busy painting campus divestment advocates as closed-minded and intolerant, it was the other side who was moving to shut down  opposing speech. That same year, UCLA Hillel worked with a public relations firm to “‘isolate’ SJP on campus and to paint the group as ‘unrepresentative,’” in the words of a leaked email.

Despite these tactics, in November 2014 a coalition of more than thirty student groups passed a resolution calling on student government “to divest from companies engaged in violence against Palestinians.” In response, the David Horowitz Freedom Center (DHFC)—which has been designated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center—plastered posters all over campus and in the surrounding neighborhood accusing SJP and individual faculty members of terrorism and anti-Semitism. The names of individual students and faculty were printed on posters under the slogan “Combat Jew Hatred on College Campuses.” At the time, only the Vice Chancellor of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Jerry Kang, issued a strong campuswide statement condemning the posters as racist fear-mongering. Chancellor Block was silent.

Student council remained a contested terrain over Israel and divestment. In 2015 three students unaffiliated with SJP questioned Rachel Beyda, a nominee for USAC’s Judicial Board, about her ability to remain objective on the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” because of her Jewish identity. Foxx resurrects this incident as evidence of USAC’s “deeply concerning history of retribution against students who speak against anti-Jewish bigotry on campus.” What she omits from the story is that the students who opened the line of questioning were swiftly censured and offered apologies, and that Beyda was unanimously appointed to the committee. SJP also condemned “the questioning of Beyda or anyone else based on their identity,” adding that its members “believe in the inherent equality and right to freedom for all people, a stance that inspires us to both support the Palestinian call for BDS as well as to oppose incidents like that which befell Beyda.”

We can point to many more examples, such as Block’s November 2018 Los Angeles Times op-ed explaining why he “allowed” SJP to hold its National Conference at UCLA. After claiming that “some” feared the conference “will be infused with anti-Semitic rhetoric” expressed by people who embrace “a double standard that demonizes the world’s only Jewish state while other countries receive less condemnation for dreadful behavior,” Block invoked the principle of free speech to justify his decision to let it proceed. But the damage had been done.  

Block was silent when a hate group plastered posters all over campus accusing SJP and individual faculty members of anti-Semitism.

This decade-long trail of evidence indicates that Block has maintained a consistent anti-Palestinian bias, giving Zionist and pro-Israeli groups such as AMCHA Initiative outsized influence over university policy and carte blanche to come onto campus and intimidate students and faculty without consequence. The mere fact that DHFC could access our campus under the cynical guise of protecting Jewish students presaged the crisis we now face.


The Winds of October

Our students were deeply affected by the events of October 7. The nearly 350 students enrolled in my lecture course on the history of neoliberalism were genuinely shell-shocked, saddened by the immediate loss of life. When a couple of Jewish students told me they felt unsafe on campus, I encouraged them to stay home and listen to the recorded lectures. We mourned the loss of life—not just the 695 Israeli civilians, but the 26 Arab-Israeli citizens (mostly Bedouin), the 71 Thai and Nepalese migrant workers, and even the 373 police and soldiers who were official combatants.

But before the official death toll and hostage count were complete, Israel had begun its breathtaking war of extermination. As the death toll in Gaza rose exponentially, students and colleagues told of losing dozens of family members, including cousins they had never gotten the chance to meet. They felt betrayed when Block and UC President Michael Drake spoke on behalf of the university, affirming that “we” stand with Israel but saying nothing about the slaughter of Palestinians, the leveling of universities, schools, hospitals, and homes, and the displacement of more than 75 percent of Gaza’s population. When students and faculty began to criticize the war and deploy the word “genocide,” many were threatened, doxxed, and subjected to investigation by colleagues who weaponized Title VI complaints and the university grievance process to attack anyone critical of Israel or Zionism. Statements decrying the loss of Palestinian life, Israeli war crimes, and U.S. complicity were deemed anti-Semitic and “pro-Hamas.”

Unfazed by these patently false accusations, SJP and the UC Divest Coalition organized a mass march and rally on campus on October 25, calling for an immediate ceasefire and divestment. Unsurprisingly, Block found the speakers’ rhetoric “hateful” and “antisemitic,” cherry-picking a few ill-informed and unsanctioned actions unrepresentative of the spirit or intent of the march. More significant is the fact that the administration ignored the Undergraduate Students Association Council’s Cultural Affairs Commission (CAC) warning that

Zionists who do not attend this school are being allowed entry into UCLA to freely harass students. It speaks volumes of the level of unsafety that our students are facing. . . . Various attacks like these have been happening on campus for weeks and UCLA has not done a sufficient job to intervene or even condemn harm against students who support Palestine.

They made a direct appeal to UC leaders to

protect students from the violence that is waged by both students and non-students on your own campuses. We call on campus resources to be more accessible to students facing imminent and indirect danger from islamophobic, zionist, and anti-Palestinian violence. It is unacceptable that agitators, especially non-students, are able to access student-led spaces like Kerckhoff [Hall] to harass and threaten students.

The attacks on faculty and students ramped up when a group calling itself “UCLA Faculty Against Terror,” led by Professor Judea Pearl, branded the student antiwar movement as anti-Semitic and “incitement.” Pearl himself labeled these students “pro-Hamas,” endangering antiwar students, faculty, and staff and putting a chilling effect on speech as well as on the urgent effort to secure a ceasefire. In response, well over 250 of our colleagues signed a letter expressing our concerns over the attack on academic freedom, the safety of our students, and the administration’s indifference to Palestinian suffering. A meeting with Chancellor Block and Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Darnell Hunt in November ultimately led to the creation of our group, the Task Force on Anti-Palestinian, Anti-Muslim, and Anti-Arab Racism, along with a Task Force on Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Hostility. Our taskforce’s goals were to inform campus leadership of the hostile climate faced by Arab and Muslim students as well as student groups protesting Israel’s assault on Gaza; to urge Block to affirm the value of Palestinian life publicly and unequivocally, to make a clear statement rejecting the conflation of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism; and to back up any statement with action. To date, none of our objectives have been met.


A Beautiful Experiment Under Siege

Five months later, the UCLA Palestine Solidarity Encampment was up. Erected on Royce Quad on Thursday morning, April 25, it was one of the greatest examples of principled protest, nonviolent civil disobedience, collective education, and political resistance I have ever seen. The encampment was a multiracial, multinational, and gender-diverse assembly, composed of undergraduate and graduate students from across campus. Residents were required to sign a community agreement outlining shared principles and behavior, and those who were willing to risk arrest or assume security duties underwent training in de-escalation tactics. All faiths were welcome, and so were families with children. The encampment fed everyone, thanks to donations, volunteers, and the labor of Strike Kitchen—an autonomous student-run outfit formed during last year’s historic UC-wide graduate student workers’ strike.

Protesters took special care to ensure everyone’s safety. One member of the community had a banana allergy, so signs were posted prohibiting bananas in the encampment. They made art, created a People’s Library, watched and discussed films, organized reading groups and teach-ins on a range of topics:  Kashmir, Frantz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth, local tenants’ rights struggles, and of course, Palestine. They never lost sight of why they were: to stop the genocide in Gaza, divest, and fight for a free Palestine. The encampment offered a more enriching and interdisciplinary learning space than what many students found in their classrooms. As one fourth-year student explained to me, “My time in the encampment was actually a very positive experience. Yes, the shit was scary. I’m not going to lie. . . . I loved the community, and I felt safer in the encampment than I felt on any other part of the campus.” Another young woman, a first-year student of mine, was awestruck by people’s eagerness to share with and care for one another, and the fact that she could eat without having to pull out her meal card or wallet. “Is this communism?” she asked.

As with any experiment, the encampment was hardly perfect. Managing security, food, hygiene, health, space, negotiations, personalities, and political disagreements while establishing a certain level of discipline among hundreds of young people is hard enough. I don’t doubt that there have been tensions, divisions, and missteps within the ranks, but encampment leaders created a system of accountability to address and redirect these disruptions critically and empathetically.

One agitator shouted at students, “We’re not American Jews! We’re Israelis! You stand up against us, we’ll fucking slit your throat.”

They soon had to operate under a state of siege. Counterprotesters who identified as Zionists began trickling into the camp around noon on the first day. They heckled people with racial and homophobic slurs and comments: “You’re cool with rape?”, “You’re a jihadist,” “You’re a terrorist,” “Hamas would kill you fags.” Some entered the encampment without authorization and physically attacked the students. On April 25 a man walked through the encampment carrying a sign that read “Israel is not apartheid. Come talk,” and proceeded to steal a student’s keffiyeh, pour water over chalk art, and assault a Black woman who tried to take his sign. Even as the harassment intensified, lead security organizers urged students to stand down. “By engaging with them we’re only opening the risk for the community to get hurt,” one organizer texted me. “I understand they make really heinous comments, but we need to keep in mind that these people should not be the focus, we should be the focus, our community should be the focus, and sustaining this encampment until we reach FULL DIVESTMENT is our focus.”

The agitators showed up around 4:00 a.m. the next morning, shouting “Death to Hamas,” “Wake up commies, it’s time to work,” and “Fuck Allah” and spraying students with bear spray and other chemical agents. As their numbers grew over the next couple of days, the mob became more aggressive. They sexually harassed women in the encampment, blasted loud music, screamed throughout Muslim prayer times, and brought bunches of bananas to throw into the encampment—which terrified and drove out the student with the allergy. Instead of barring the agitators from campus and providing more security, the UCLA administration granted counterprotesters a permit to assemble a Jumbotron adjacent to the encampment for a pro-Israel rally on Sunday, April 28. The massive concert-grade flat-screen TV equipped with powerful speakers was paid for by a GoFundMe account that had raised over $70,000, and was protected by private security guards employed by the Apex Security Group. Supporters of the encampment regarded the university’s decision to permit outside groups to rally against a peaceful student-run assembly, which the administration refused to recognize or authorize, as a hostile act of incitement.

The rally, sponsored by the Israeli American Council, attracted between eight hundred and one thousand people. Speakers included State Assembly member Rick Chavez Zbur, Hillel at UCLA executive director Dan Gold, student council candidate Eli Tsives (who had been photographed shaking hands with a UCLA Police Department (UCPD) officer), regional Consul General of Israel Israel Bachar, and ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt. In between speeches denouncing the encampment as anti-Semitic and defending Israel’s aggression, the Jumbotron blasted the U.S. national anthem and clips about the October 7 attacks, and counterprotesters carrying Israeli flags verbally and physically attacked our students. They were pushed, punched, spat upon, called “dogs,” “whores” (sharmuta in Hebrew), “bitch-ass n—,” and told to “listen to your master” and that “Hamas would rape and murder you for what you’re wearing, sweetheart.” One agitator shouted, “We’re not American Jews! We’re Israelis! You stand up against us, we’ll fucking slit your throat.” The attacks continued well into the night. At around 1:30 a.m. someone emptied a backpack full of mice injected with an unknown substance into the encampment.

The permit for the Jumbotron expired Sunday afternoon, but the university allowed it to remain, where it continued to be weaponized against the encampment. All students passing by the quad, whether or not they had anything to do with the encampment, endured near-continuous video loops of the October 7 attacks, audio clips with graphic descriptions of rape and sexual violence, sounds of gunshots and screaming babies, clips of President Biden pledging unconditional support for Israel, and loud music, including the children’s song “Mamtera Im Matara,” which Israeli soldiers and West Bank settlers have been documented playing on hours-long loops for captive Palestinians. The taunts and harassment continued throughout the day. One inebriated agitator harassed several Black women and femmes working security, calling them “slaves” and threatening rape. Later that night, several agitators broke through the encampment barriers and attacked students and pepper sprayed one of the security guards hired by UCLA.

Students complained about the attacks to UCPD, administrators, and trusted faculty. Several filed reports to our office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion. Campus security’s failure to protect our students prompted a faculty walkout on Monday, April 29. The next day Block issued a statement calling the encampment “unauthorized” and condemning tactics he found “shocking and shameful.” He did not mention the violence committed by the Zionists, the slurs and epithets, the Jumbotron, or the mice attack. Instead, he only identifies reports that “students on their way to class have been physically blocked from accessing parts of the campus. . . . These incidents have put many on our campus, especially our Jewish students, in a state of anxiety and fear.”

The problem is, it wasn’t true. All buildings and classrooms remained accessible. Campus security closed off particular entrances to buildings facing the quad, but that decision was authorized by the administration. Student-appointed security leads asked passers-by to go around the encampment in order to limit congestion and the risk of Covid infection (masks were required). Nevertheless, a video taken by a Jewish student demanding to pass through the encampment rather than walk around went viral. The student’s mother circulated the video as evidence that Jews were being denied access to classrooms. This was Block’s smoking gun. Soon it would become Virginia Foxx’s as well, evidence that Jewish students were subject to “pervasive civil rights violations and harassment.”

If Block’s statement was intended to quell potential violence, it had the opposite effect. The video and the message paved the way for the April 30 assault. That night Zionist agitators, alongside neo-Nazis, came armed with bear mace and other chemical irritants, hammers, knives, stink bombs, high-grade fireworks, metal and wooden rods, and, according to some reports, a gun. The attack began with loud recordings of screaming babies, followed by a fusillade of fireworks shot directly into the encampment. Men in full-faced white masks broke down the barriers and began attacking students with metal rods, chunks of wood, stink bombs, bear mace and tear gas. One student recalled seeing “planks of wood come sailing into the camp and strike some girl in the back of the head and she just fell to the ground.” Another student was struck in the back of the head by fireworks and had to be hospitalized. The medics were simply overwhelmed, forcing students with little experience to attend to wounds. “People were crying and being like, ‘Can you call my mom, I need to call my mom, please help me’. . . . We were trying to do the best that we could but we ran out of saline needed to flush the chemicals out of people’s eyes,” one told me.

As of this writing, not a single assailant has been arrested or questioned.

As objects rained down on them, the leads shouted “Don’t throw back! Don’t engage!” and implored campus security to intervene. They refused, choosing instead to retreat inside of Royce Hall. UCLA alumnus Ismael Sindha, who was later treated for chemical burns, heard attackers shout, “I’ll kill you,” “I’ll rape your sister,” and “What Israel does to Gaza, we’ll do to you.” Students under siege and their family and friends inundated UCPD with calls for help, only to be told that the situation was “under control” and for the operators to hang up on them. The California Highway Patrol and LAPD showed up just before midnight but sat idle for three hours watching the violence unfold. People inside the encampment were left on their own to care for the wounded and protect the barricades.

One student was rushed to the hospital by his classmates after being struck twice in the head. His injuries were serious enough to require stitches and staples. “I thought I was going to die. I thought I’d never see my family again,” the student recalled. “The only thing that kept me moving forward was my . . . classmates who were brave enough to protect the encampment from these terrorists.” What also kept him going was remembering why they were there in the first place: “I had the luxury of getting sedated as they stapled my head back together. Currently, in Gaza, there are zero fully functioning hospitals.”

It was nearly 3:00 a.m. when CHP officers began moving in to quell the violence. They permitted the mob to leave without questioning or arresting a single assailant. The next day, Block issued a statement bemoaning the violent attack on the encampment by “a group of instigators.” While acknowledging that the students and faculty protecting the encampment were the victims of violence, he refused to link the pro-Israel rally that the university authorized to the attack or to recognize that the attacks had been ongoing since April 25. “Physical violence ensued,” he declared, “and our campus requested support from external law enforcement agencies to help end this appalling assault, quell the fighting and protect our community.” The administration issued all sorts of excuses for the failure of campus security and the UCPD to act. But we were especially outraged by the inaction of our Chancellor, who, along with the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Darnell Hunt, watched the violence unfold in real time via a security camera. Members of our Task Force texted back and forth with Hunt into the early morning hours. He was responsive and seemed genuinely concerned, but explained that once the police are called in there is nothing they can do. The claim strained credulity; if it is indeed true, then it exposes a dangerous imbalance in university-police relations.

In yet another statement, issued on May 1, Block condemned the attacks, acknowledged the trauma our students experienced, and expressed “sympathy” for those injured. He called for an investigation, urging “those who have experienced violence to report what they encountered to UCPD, and those who have faced discrimination to contact the Civil Rights Office.” Students and faculty not only found Block’s concern to be disingenuous but suspected that by declaring the encampment “unauthorized” he actually emboldened the mob. Our suspicions were confirmed when, shortly after issuing his statement, he announced plans to clear the encampment by 6:00 p.m. that day. The timing is important: UC Divest and SJP were scheduled to begin negotiations with Hunt at 4:00 p.m. The meeting was doomed to fail, in part because the administration did not try to negotiate in good faith and gave students no time to recover from the horrific violence they had suffered just hours before. Angry and disenchanted, organizers refused to give up.

With the encampment slated for destruction, the mob grew, as did the number of police officers. The encampment population also grew, as faculty showed up in significant numbers in an effort to protect students. One colleague was shocked to see assailants viciously attacking students in front of the police. “Not one of the attackers was detained or arrested. Some of the attackers were older—definitely not students. Some of them looked like they had militia training.” When police finally intervened, LAPD snipers on the roof of Royce Hall trained their guns on the people defending the encampment, and California Highway Patrol officers in riot gear moved within close range and allowed the mob, once again, to pass by unmolested. Once in formation, they fired stun grenades and rubber bullets at students and faculty, hitting them in the face, head, legs, and chest. The police command blocked EMS from entering the encampment to aid the injured. The medics were already overwhelmed, leaving the remaining students and faculty to administer first aid.

Police arrested over two hundred people, the vast majority of them students. As of this writing, not a single assailant has been arrested or questioned.


Aftermath

If Chancellor Block believed clearing the camp would restore order and balance, allowing him to enjoy a hero’s retirement, he was mistaken. UC Divest, SJP, and Faculty for Justice in Palestine continue to push for divestment and focus on ending the genocide in Gaza.

Our students did not pitch tents and risk arrest to save the university; they’re trying to save lives.

On May 6 students attempted what has long been an effective strategy of university-based civil disobedience by occupying Moore Hall, a large building at the center of campus that houses the School of Education and Information Studies—but with an expanded police presence on campus, the administration has ramped up repression. The LA County Sheriff and the LAPD arrested some forty-three students as well as legal observers, confiscated their cell phones, and plan to charge them with conspiracy to commit burglary. Block also announced plans to expand and reorganize UCPD under a newly created Office of Campus Safety. The proposal is wildly unpopular, as is the expanded police presence on UCLA’s campus right now. As we state in our report:

With such a heavy police presence, students and faculty reported feeling unsafe and on high alert. As visibly armed police patrol near classrooms and student centers, immigrant, undocumented, and formerly incarcerated students have reported feeling afraid to be on campus. Staff have also expressed reluctance to report to work. UCLA has become a militarized space, where peaceful protest and the right to free speech have become pervasively criminalized. They have alienated and isolated students from their right to learn and from each other.

Chancellor Block represents the status quo in U.S. higher education, which not only has a record of stifling criticism of Israel and initiatives in support of Palestinian freedom but is also heavily invested in firms with ties to Israel and weapons manufacturers fueling the ongoing war in Gaza. The rise of the Palestine solidarity encampments, a UC-wide graduate workers strike, and the proliferation of acts of civil disobedience led by organizations such as Jewish Voice for Peace and If Not Now are proof that the status quo is no longer tenable. But rather than reinvent higher education—modeled for us by the encampments as a free space of deep learning, dissent, and experimentation, divested of all ties to militarism and state violence and genocide—our universities are becoming police states. Policing is not just armed uniformed officers. Policing entails monitoring our communications and classrooms, doxxing, intimidation, curtailing academic freedom, maintaining the Palestine exception, and refusing to grant amnesty for those arrested for trying to stop a genocide. Chancellor Block’s right-wing inquisitors encourage the repressive turn; they want to lock up our students, crush dissent, and replace the university with fortresses of “patriotic” Christian education.  

But our students did not pitch tents and risk arrest to save the university; they’re trying to save lives. Their eyes are trained of the people of Palestine, on the rubble where universities and schools and libraries and homes once stood, on the young people who continue to believe liberation is possible. Our students refuse to be complicit with their own universities in the unimaginable death and destruction occurring in Gaza right now. They have challenged all of us in the academy to ask the question Noam Chomsky posed in 1967 in the face of America’s war on Vietnam: “As for those of us who stood by in silence and apathy as this catastrophe slowly took shape over the past dozen years—on what page of history do we find our proper place?”

 

Correction: An earlier version of this article stated that a member of the Proud Boys was present at the UCLA encampment. While Proud Boys founder Gavin McInnes was spotted trying to enter the encampment at Columbia, it has not been confirmed that a Proud Boys member was present at UCLA. According to the Guardian, at least one person present at UCLA has associated with Proud Boys in southern California.

 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

 

Robin D. G. Kelley is Gary B. Nash Professor of American History at UCLA and a contributing editor at Boston Review. His many books include Freedom Dreams: The Black Radical Imagination.

 

Wednesday, March 20, 2024

The Central Role That Systemic Racism Has Played in the Western World's Dehumanization of Arabs Generally and The Subsequent Normalization of War Crimes In Its Specific Support Of and Indifference To Settler Colonial Oppression, Exploitation, and Marginalization of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank


Anti-Arab Racism and the U.S. and Israeli War Machines
 
The West’s dehumanization of Arabs has helped to normalize war crimes.

Hammer & Hope
No. 3
Spring 2024



Hazem Harb, The Mother Land, 2023.

The state of Israel has unleashed the most brutal military bombardment since World War II on the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip. This siege came in response to Hamas’s breach of the wall that delineates the Israeli occupation and the group’s subsequent attacks on Israeli soldiers and civilians.

Israel’s more than 45,000 air strikes since October have far exceeded the nearly 15,000 air strikes the U.S. carried out on Iraq in its campaign against the Islamic State from 2014 to 2017. In December, U.S. intelligence sources divulged to CNN that 40 to 45 percent of the 29,000 missile strikes against Gaza were “dumb bombs,” or unguided missiles, which can be more dangerous to civilians in densely populated areas.

“When a 3-year-old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it’s because someone in the army decided it wasn’t a big deal for her to be killed — that it was a price worth paying in order to hit [another] target,” an Israeli military source told reporters as part of a bombshell report attributing the virulence of Israel’s assault in part to an increased reliance on artificial intelligence to generate targets. “Everything is intentional. We know exactly how much collateral damage there is in every home.”

Intense anti-Arab racism, Islamophobia, and what the Palestinian American intellectual Edward Said described as “Orientalism” has underwritten the West’s perpetual wars, sieges, and onslaughts against the Middle East, wars that America’s client state, Israel, has helped manage for multiple generations. This racism has normalized America’s and Israel’s war crimes in the Middle East.

But this is far more than a simple ideological project. As the largest recipient of U.S. aid in the region, to the tune of more than $3 billion each year, Israel has long been of use to the West as the Zionist project of building a state on the dispossession of the indigenous Palestinian population. The U.S. disguises its geopolitical designs to control access to the region’s oil supply under the guise of rooting out terrorism. Though America’s “war on terror” failed, its afterlife of security theater, surveillance, and abject racist demonization of a perpetual Arab or Muslim “other” lives on.

Soon after Israel began its siege, Joe Biden made a mockery of Palestinian grief and death. “I have no notion that the Palestinians are telling the truth about how many people are killed,” he said, echoing the Israeli government. His statement recognizing 100 days of the war on Gaza made no mention of the thousands of Palestinians whom Israel had killed. More recently, Biden enjoyed an ice cream cone with a late-night talk show host while blithely suggesting the possibility of a cease-fire. A week later, The Washington Post revealed that the United States has quietly delivered 100 weapons packages to Israel over the course of its assault, including thousands of precision-guided munitions, small-diameter bombs, and bunker busters.

Of course, the U.S. has long licensed Arab death. Consider the Clinton era. In 1996, when Lesley Stahl on “60 Minutes” asked UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright about the deaths of half a million Iraqi children caused by U.S.-backed sanctions on Iraq, Albright infamously said, “The price is worth it.” Activists confronted her the next year, and she responded, “I am as concerned about the children in Iraq as any person in this room.” But, she added, “Saddam Hussein is the one who has the fate of his country in his hands. … He is the one responsible for starving children, not the United States of America.”

George W. Bush claimed after the attacks on Sept. 11 that “the face of terror is not the true faith of Islam,” and “Islam is peace.” But the indiscriminate targeting of Arabs and Muslims abroad through various war efforts and domestically by federal and local police during the Bush presidency contradicted such overtures. The federal government’s gearing up for war reverberated across the country and fomented an atmosphere of fear, anxiety, and extraordinary racism. Polls taken soon after Sept. 11 found 58 percent of Americans supported “intensive security checks” for Arabs, 49 percent favored special identification cards for them, and 32 percent approved of “special surveillance” of Arabs.

The media played a significant role in providing bigoted justifications for racial profiling. Richard Cohen, then a columnist for The Washington Post, argued: “We have become driveling idiots on matters of race and ethnicity. One hundred percent of the terrorists involved in the Sept. 11 mass murder were Arabs. Their accomplices, if any, were probably Arabs, too — at least Muslims. Ethnicity and religion are the very basis of their movement. It hardly makes sense, therefore, to ignore that fact and, say, give Swedish au pair girls heading to the United States the same scrutiny as Arab men coming from the Middle East.”

Indeed, less than a month after the attacks, Bush sang a different tune from his earlier overture:
 
"They hate us because we love the idea that people can worship an Almighty God any way he or she sees fit. They hate us because we love political discourse and a free society. They hate us because of our free press. They hate everything about us, because of our freedom. And there’s another — there are a lot of distinguishing features, but one of the most clear ones to me is this: We value life in America. We say everybody is precious, everybody counts, every life has worth, every life has dignity. They don’t value life."

An emboldened American security state was activated. In the weeks after Sept. 11, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies rounded up and detained more than 1,200 people, mostly Arabs and Muslims. The Department of Justice initiated a program of “voluntary interviews” with 5,000 “non-immigrant” men who claimed citizenship from countries the U.S. insisted harbored Al Qaeda. Two years later, in preparation for war with Iraq, a new Iraqi Task Force, created by the FBI, interviewed 11,000 people of Iraqi origin living in the United States, many of them citizens.

The swell of anti-Arab suspicion and racism shaped the lead-up to America’s baseless war of aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq. Politicians’ xenophobia obscured the brutality of a war that killed between 150,000 and perhaps as many as 600,000 Iraqis. The widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure, already weakened by a decade of brutal U.S.-backed sanctions, resulted in even more deaths of Iraqis. It also helped to foment the conditions that allowed for the creation of the U.S. gulag in Guantánamo Bay — a military space controlled by the U.S. absent any rights or freedom. The climate of war allowed for torture and abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib, too. Tens of thousands more were killed in Afghanistan — the longest war in U.S. history, ending only in 2021.

According to a 2023 report from Brown University, researchers estimated that more than four million people were either killed or eventually died in the War on Terror. From Afghanistan to Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen, millions have died from what The Washington Post described as “waves of violence, hunger, the devastation of public services, and the spread of disease.” In fact, it was anti-Palestinian bigotry that drove the creation of and shaped the development of anti-terrorism laws, according to a new report by Palestine Legal and the Center for Constitutional Rights. In 1969, the first-ever mention of terrorism in a federal law “dealt specifically with restricting humanitarian aid to Palestinians and inaugurated a pattern of rendering Palestinians synonymous with terrorism.”

The characterization of Arabs and Muslims as forever enemies was built into politics and disseminated through popular culture, which endlessly portrayed brown-skinned men as terrorists.

Republicans have long worn their derision of Arabs and Muslims openly. The far right concocted a mass hysteria over the conspiracy theory that Muslims sought to implement Shariah law in the U.S. Since 2010, state legislatures have introduced at least 201 anti-Shariah bills. Breaking with longstanding international consensus, Trump moved the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to the contested land of Jerusalem. And he implemented a ban on entry into the United States from a handful of majority Muslim countries after he was inaugurated as president, a ban the Supreme Court upheld. More recently, in the weeks after Hamas’s attacks, Montana Representative Ryan Zinke introduced legislation (with 10 cosponsors) that would ban Palestinians from entering the United States. “I don’t even want to call it the Palestinian flag because they’re not a state,” Republican Representative Max Miller of Ohio complained after Michigan Representative Rashida Tlaib pinned a Palestinian flag to her office door. “They’re a territory that’s about to probably get eviscerated and go away here shortly, as we’re going to turn that into a parking lot.”

We have come to expect such racist dreck from the Republican Party. But this is the Democratic Party’s war. Democrats have mastered the art of performing grief even while Biden’s intersectional and multiracial cohort of UN ambassadors and functionaries oppose cease-fire resolutions that could immediately end the war. When Tlaib spoke out early in favor of a cease-fire and for an end to Israeli atrocities in Gaza, Biden press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, a queer Haitian American, described as “repugnant” and “disgraceful” statements from Tlaib and others in the Squad calling for a cease-fire or criticizing Israel.

Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi told Palestine solidarity protesters to “go back to China” and declared that calls for a cease-fire are “Mr. Putin’s message.” As if time-traveling back to the Cold War, she pressed on without evidence. “This is directly connected to what he would like to see,” she said. “Some of these protesters are spontaneous and organic and sincere,” but others “are connected to Russia.” Kathy Hochul, the Democratic governor of New York, joked that if Canada attacked Buffalo, N.Y., in the way that Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, “there would be no Canada” — an apparent endorsement of collective punishment and the right of Israel to annihilate Gaza.

Beyond such crass rhetoric, in early February, 46 Democrats voted for a $17.6 billion aid package put forth by Republicans to finance Israel’s siege of Gaza; it failed to pass. Instead of pressuring Israel to allow more aid trucks into Gaza, which is on the brink of famine, the Biden administration has dropped parachutes of food aid, some of which failed to open midair, killing people upon landing, and rushed to create a temporary port off Gaza’s coast for humanitarian aid shipments, a theatrical, cumbersome workaround.


Hazem Harb, Map of Land Series, #4, 2019.

But we are in a new moment. For the short life of this war, millions across the globe have roared in opposition, demanding a cease-fire, along with medical aid and food for Palestinians. The protests spurred a campaign spearheaded by South Africa at the International Court of Justice to make a surprising intervention, holding that Israel’s actions may constitute genocide. Opposition to Israel’s siege has activated a Palestine solidarity movement in the U.S. led largely by Palestinian Americans and young Jews. U.S. financing and arming of this war has made Biden politically vulnerable even as he continues to stand by it.

Biden’s polling among Arab Americans voters has plummeted from 59 percent to 17 percent, while progressives have threatened to withhold their votes in the fall’s presidential contest. His political future is further imperiled by widespread opposition to Israel’s actions in Gaza among Democratic voters, especially the young. Most recently, tens of thousands of Democratic Party primary voters in Michigan, Minnesota, and elsewhere voted “uncommitted” as a protest vote against Biden’s Gaza policy. The Democratic establishment downplayed the Michigan vote in public, but when Vice President Kamala Harris was dispatched to commemorate the 59th anniversary of the Selma civil rights march, she called for an “immediate cease-fire,” then paused for applause, “for at least the next six weeks.” Of course, the movement demands an immediate and permanent cease-fire and an end to the occupation. Harris’s use of “cease-fire” instead of Biden’s “pause” is the administration’s effort to co-opt an antiwar movement that has spiraled beyond their control or their imaginations. But that rhetorical shift is also evidence that the “uncommitted” movement is unsettling the party’s consensus, as was Senator Chuck Schumer’s surprising excoriation of Benjamin Netanyahu in a speech.

Palestinians have challenged the U.S.-Israeli war machine. The U.S. war in Vietnam was the first to be broadcast widely in the homes of Americans, and the Israeli onslaught in Gaza is the first genocide to be watched live on people’s smartphones across the globe. The sheer determination of the Palestinian people to document their own suffering has transformed our understanding of this lopsided war, slicing through state-generated propaganda that has, since Vietnam, sought to shield the public from the death and destruction that is the reality of all war.

As the West has moved toward remote war conducted by drones, the human costs have become more abstract. Mainstream media outlets reinforce that remove, refusing to show the extent of the carnage, obliquely sanctioning the dubious claims of “smart bombs” and other euphemisms meant to assuage the public’s concern about the deaths of innocents. Because Israel has locked Gaza’s doors, courageous Palestinian journalists have risked their lives to broadcast Israel’s atrocities, and dozens have died doing so. It is because of Palestinians that we know of the hunger they are experiencing, visible in the gaunt bodies of their children. We know of the sniper attacks outside hospitals, the bombings of residential housing, mosques, and universities. Palestinians have learned how to circumvent the mainstream media’s equivocation about the value of their lives. They have seized the technology to show the world the consequences of Israel’s actions. Activists around the world emulated those techniques to document global movements like Occupy, the Arab Spring, Fees Must Fall, and the Black Lives Matter movement during the Ferguson uprising in 2014.

But today it is not only Palestinians who document their genocide in real time. For months, Israeli soldiers have filmed their atrocities. There are the group selfies of soldiers huddling, smiling in the foreground of the smoldering remains of apartment buildings and neighborhoods. Male Israeli soldiers fondling the underwear and nightwear of Palestinian women. A soldier in a tank bragging about running over a Palestinian man. Israeli soldiers beating, degrading, belittling Palestinians on camera, as if to showcase their hatred as well as their imperviousness to human rights, international law, or the rules of warfare. Israel has made a mockery of all of it, as settlers build illegal housing units across the West Bank at record pace, murdering Palestinians in the process and arresting thousands to be held in indefinite detention. In doing so, it has betrayed the fake piety of U.S. officials who defend Israel’s every action while deflecting queries about a cease-fire or humanitarian aid for Palestinians. That these bureaucrats feel obliged to explain this particular foreign policy is because of the mass movement and Palestinians who, from a tiny strip, occupy the center of its moral universe.

The longevity of the Palestinian movement in Gaza and beyond allowed a core of activists to immediately jolt into action after Israel began to strike Gaza. Student activism organized around the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign has been a staple of the Palestinian solidarity movement for years. Now there are almost 100 new Faculty for Justice in Palestine chapters. The political atmosphere is still charged by a decade of Black Lives Matter activism and just three years removed from the paroxysmal marches in the summer of 2020. Solidarity activism replaced the political ennui brought about by an adrift Biden administration.

Even as young Jews and many of their parents have rejected Israel’s war, Israel’s propaganda machine has denounced the movement as antisemitic. Those accusations have created an academic year like no other, with student activists taking courageous action week to week, while being doxxed by right-wing activists and surveilled by paranoid college administrators. The punishment of Palestinian solidarity and activism can’t be attributed only to “Islamophobia.” In the U.S., Zionists and conservatives attack the language of decolonization along with Palestinian demands for self-determination, as captured in the old slogan “From the river to the sea,” as antisemitism. (The far-right Likud party used a version of that slogan in its original platform.) They seek to marginalize and ban Palestinian solidarity on college campuses. Here, the work of the right, liberal college administrators, and the donor class converge. There is little doubt that antisemitism is on the rise. But its ascendance must be understood alongside the simultaneous growth of anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia that Israel’s ruthless assault on Gaza has encouraged, and fear of the loss of a significant portion of young Jews for the Zionist project.

Today, the reputation of the United Nations is in tatters because of both Israel’s relentless criticism of the organization and America’s ability to unilaterally undo the sentiment of a body that claims to represent the international community. Of course, the U.S. has always used or ignored the UN for its own purposes, but never under a spotlight this searing. Consider how the U.S. relied upon the UN to launch its illegal war in Iraq after the specious claim that the country harbored weapons of mass destruction. As the world longs for a cease-fire, we all watch in astonishment as U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield erases the will of the world with a mere wave of her hand.

What will become of international law as Israel continues to flout every postwar convention intended to constitute a new global order based on human rights in the aftermath of the Holocaust? All were intended to prevent exactly the kinds of atrocities that Israel is carrying out in Gaza. Of course, we have never enjoyed such a global peace. The global north instrumentalized these legal frameworks to police and control the global south. But now the emperor has no clothes — the hypocrisy of Israel’s barbarism, bankrolled by the United States, has been exposed before a global audience not just on the internet but in the Hague itself, the embodiment of the supposed sacrosanctity of international law.

Israel is a state forged in the aftermath of the traumatic experience of the Holocaust. But it has long weaponized this trauma and displaced it from Europe onto Arabs. In this siege, Israel is not satisfied with only territorial conquest and the defeat of its enemies; its military and state leaders also seek to torture, humiliate, and revel in the murder of Palestinians and the ruin of Palestinian society. Despite the gruesome suffering of Gazans, in a December poll of Israeli Jews that asked “to what extent should Israel take into consideration the suffering of the civilian population of Gaza when planning the continuation of the fighting there,” over 80 percent said a very small or fairly small extent. Nearly 75 percent of Israeli Jews supported the invasion of Rafah in a March poll. Israel projects its own violence and hatred onto Palestinians in an orgy of racism, mass murder, and wanton destruction, while Western states, led by the United States, claim to be powerless to stop this madness.

But even amid a powerful backlash that conflates demands for a cease-fire and support of Hamas’s attacks, the power of Palestinians has propelled a global antiwar movement and in turn made the Western world finally see them and their righteous demands for freedom as legitimate — even urgent. No one in any country that has been colonized or invaded or occupied by Western imperialism needs to be told about either the atrocities or the hypocrisies of the world’s greatest democracies. Vietnam, India, Congo, Namibia, Mexico, Brazil, Chile, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, Belfast, and beyond do not need to be reminded of the compromised freedom of imperial democracy. Their own colonial and imperial histories, and their legacies of resistance, are being remembered by and for a new generation.

In the United States, disapproval of Biden’s handling of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues to rise — now among 79 percent of Republicans and 30 percent of Democrats. According to one poll, a stunning 67 percent of Americans support “calling for a permanent cease-fire and a de-escalation of violence in Gaza,” including 56 percent of Republicans. This may not translate into immediate support for Palestinian freedom, but Palestinian liberation is being seen in the new light of day.

This is the challenge for the left now, the one we are all focused on and the one we must think most sharply about. We are living through a revival of internationalism and another extended moment of mass protest. Even as we tire in the face of exhausting odds, a hulking imperial ship that refuses to acknowledge our power as it trembles, we must persist. A victory against the systems that oppress Palestinians is a victory against the systems that oppress us all. We hope this special edition of Hammer & Hope on Palestine provides some measure of the history, politics, and solidarity needed to support any liberation movement in its quest for freedom.


Hammer & Hope is free to read. Sign up for our newsletter, donate to our magazine, and follow us on Instagram, Threads, TikTok,

Saturday, February 10, 2024

Biden Continues to Play Extremely Cynical Politics with the Lives of Palestinians in Gaza as He Now Expresses Tepid "Regret" For His Role in Supporting/Enabling the Current Israeli Government's Genocidal War Against Palestine

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/09/us/politics/biden-aide-israel-regret.html

In Private Remarks to Arab Americans, Biden Aide Expresses Regrets on Gaza

In a closed-door meeting, the aide offered some of the administration’s clearest notes of contrition for its response to the Gaza war, a sign of rising Democratic pressure on President Biden.

A crowd of people standing outside a building on a sunny day. They are holding signs that feature the Palestinian flag and say “Abandon Biden” or “End the genocide in Gaza.”
PHOTO: A protest outside the Henry Hotel in Dearborn, Mich., where Biden administration officials met on Thursday with Arab American leaders. Credit: Nick Hagen for The New York Times

by Reid J. Epstein and Erica L. Green
Reporting from Washington

February 9, 2024
New York Times

In a closed-door meeting with Arab American leaders in Michigan this week, one of President Biden’s top foreign policy aides acknowledged mistakes in the administration’s response to the war in Gaza, saying he did not have “any confidence” that Israel’s government was willing to take “meaningful steps” toward Palestinian statehood.

The remarks came after months of public and private admonitions from the Biden administration for Israel to take a more surgical approach in a conflict that has killed more than 27,000 Palestinians, according to health authorities in Gaza. On Thursday, Mr. Biden himself declared that Israel had gone “over the top” in its response to the Hamas attack on Oct. 7.

The Biden aide, Jon Finer, a deputy national security adviser, offered some of the administration’s clearest expressions of regret for what he called “missteps” it had made from the beginning of the violence, and he pledged that it would do better.

During the meeting on Thursday with Arab American political leaders in Dearborn, Mich., Mr. Finer said, “We are very well aware that we have missteps in the course of responding to this crisis since Oct. 7,” according to a recording of the gathering obtained by The New York Times. A National Security Council official confirmed the recording was authentic.

Mr. Finer added: “We have left a very damaging impression based on what has been a wholly inadequate public accounting for how much the president, the administration and the country values the lives of Palestinians. And that began, frankly, pretty early in the conflict.”

Two people face the camera holding up protest signs. One sign reads: “Abandon Biden. Cease-fire now.” The other reads: “Bombing Palestinian kids is not self-defense!”
PHOTO: Protesters in Dearborn on Thursday criticized the Biden administration’s continued funding of the Israeli military. Credit: Nick Hagen for The New York Times

The war in Gaza has become part of a cascade of political problems for Mr. Biden, who has remained publicly supportive of Israel and resisted demands within the Democratic Party to call for a cease-fire. His position since Hamas killed about 1,200 people in Israel on Oct. 7, along with his remarks casting doubt on the death toll from Israeli airstrikes and calling the loss of life “a price of waging war,” has angered young people, Black voters and progressives who are more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

Mr. Biden himself has acknowledged the pro-Palestinian protesters who have become a frequent presence at his public events. Last month, a campaign rally on abortion rights in Virginia was repeatedly interrupted by protesters urging Mr. Biden to call for a cease-fire.

After that rally, Mr. Biden met privately with about 40 invited attendees and urged them not to view demonstrators as political enemies, saying that they deserved sympathy and that their cause was “really important,” according to three people who attended the meeting.

A Biden campaign spokeswoman declined to comment.

But the recording of the Dearborn meeting provides an unusual behind-the-scenes glimpse at the administration’s attempts to shore up support in the critical battleground state of Michigan, which has a large Arab American population in Dearborn and other Detroit suburbs. Mr. Biden’s support in the state has eroded, polls show. His allies there have warned the White House in recent months that he runs the risk of losing the state, which he carried in 2020.

Mr. Finer and several other senior Biden administration officials, including Samantha Power, the administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, traveled to Dearborn on Thursday for a series of meetings, including the one in which Mr. Finer’s comments were recorded.

Those sessions came a week after Biden campaign aides, including Julie Chávez Rodríguez, the manager of his 2024 bid, quietly traveled to the city and met with a few officials, including Representative Rashida Tlaib, a Palestinian American progressive who is at the forefront of Democratic calls for a cease-fire.

However, Mayor Abdullah Hammoud of Dearborn and several other local officials declined to meet with Ms. Chávez Rodríguez. Mr. Hammoud later issued a statement saying he wished to speak with policymakers instead of campaign officials. White House officials then scrambled to arrange a visit.

During the Thursday meetings, Mr. Finer articulated the American government’s efforts to bring a halt to the war in Gaza. Building a formal diplomatic relationship between Israel and Saudi Arabia, he said, is a critical step toward creating a Palestinian state. Doing so, he added, requires politically difficult sacrifices from both countries and the United States.

President Biden, William Burns and Jon Finer sitting in the Oval Office surrounded by staffers.
PHOTO:  Jon Finer, at right in a purple tie, during a briefing on Ukraine in the Oval Office in October. He is the second-ranking official on the National Security Council. Credit:  Brendan Smialowski/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

“We will have to do things for Saudi Arabia that will be very unpopular in this country and in our Congress,” Mr. Finer said. “Will Israel be willing to do the hard thing that’s going to be required of them, which is meaningful steps for the Palestinians on the question of two states? I don’t know if the answer to that is yes. I do not have any confidence in this current government of Israel.”

Mr. Finer also said the Biden administration should have been faster to publicly condemn statements made by some Israeli officials that, in his words, compared “residents of Gaza to animals.” He said officials had not done so because they were trying to work with the Israeli government.

“Out of a desire to sort of focus on solving the problem and not engaging in a rhetorical back-and-forth with people who, in many cases, I think we all find somewhat abhorrent, we did not sufficiently indicate that we totally rejected and disagreed with those sorts of sentiments,” Mr. Finer said.

He did not clarify which Israeli officials he was referring to, but in the conflict’s early days, Yoav Gallant, the Israeli defense minister, said, “We are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly.” Some other Israeli officials have also faced criticism for dehumanizing language.

Mr. Finer’s most explicit note of contrition was for a statement released under Mr. Biden’s name on Jan. 14, marking 100 days since the conflict began. The statement focused on the plight of American and Israeli hostages being held in Gaza and made no reference to Palestinians who had been killed.

“It did not in any way address the loss of Palestinian life during the course of the first 100 days of the conflict,” Mr. Finer said. “There is no excuse for that. It should not have happened. I believe it will not happen again. But we know that there was a lot of damage done.”

Mr. Finer, who declined to comment, is the second-ranking official on the National Security Council, under Jake Sullivan, who is Mr. Biden’s national security adviser.

Adrienne Watson, a spokeswoman for the National Security Council, said: “The president and Mr. Finer were reflecting on concerns we have had for some time, and will continue to have as the Israeli operation proceeds, about the loss of Palestinian lives in this conflict and the need to reduce civilian harm.”

The Michiganders who attended the Thursday meetings with Biden administration officials described them as intense and said they were disappointed that the delegation from Washington had not committed to policy changes.

For example, administration officials declined to say whether they had advised or would advise the president to call for a cease-fire, which attendees asked for.

“You’re not going to get that answer,” said Steve Benjamin, the director of the White House’s public engagement office.

But the officials committed to issuing a letter clarifying the administration’s support of the work of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which the United States temporarily cut funding for after Israel accused some of its staff members of participating in the Oct. 7 attack. The Biden officials did not engage with questions from the Michigan leaders about the president’s electoral prospects in the state.

“We emphasized that beyond communication, there needs to be a change in policies,” said Abraham Aiyash, a Democratic state representative who is the majority leader in the Michigan House of Representatives. “We were clear that there would be no follow-up meetings in any capacity if there was not a shift in policy based on the tangible steps that we outlined for them today.”

Abbas Alawieh, a former congressional aide who attended the meeting, said it was “outrageous” that it had taken more than 100 days after the war started for the administration to engage with Dearborn, and that Mr. Biden had not visited himself.

Abraham Aiyash gesturing as he speaks in a parking lot.

PHORO: Abraham Aiyash, a Democratic state representative who is the majority leader in the Michigan Statehouse, has called for the Biden administration to change its policies toward Israel. Credit: Nick Hagen for The New York Times

Mr. Biden met with Arab and Muslim American leaders in October, amid growing tensions inside and outside the White House, and apologized for questioning the Gaza death toll and for other messaging from the administration. But he largely defended his support for Israel’s war, pointing to foreign policy considerations.

In November, administration officials also met by videoconference with Palestinian American leaders who expressed concern about surveys showing the plunging support for Mr. Biden in their communities. The officials told them that polling numbers did not dictate the president’s foreign policy decisions.

“People feel not just a vague sense of betrayal, but a bone-deep sense of betrayal by President Biden,” Mr. Alawieh said.

Assad I. Turfe, the deputy Wayne County executive, who also heard from the Biden aides on Thursday, said Mr. Biden should be judged by how soon the conflict in Gaza is resolved.

“The Biden administration must act swiftly and decisively to end this violence, honoring the principles of justice and human rights,” Mr. Turfe said.

On Tuesday, a group of Arab American and Muslim leaders in Michigan, led by Ms. Tlaib’s sister, announced a campaign to persuade Democrats angry about Mr. Biden’s stance on Israel to vote “Uncommitted,” against the president, in the state’s Democratic primary election on Feb. 27. Though such a move would most likely have little practical effect, it could embarrass the president if enough voters chose to participate.

Former Representative Andy Levin of Michigan called the campaign “a constructive thing for the president” and said he was encouraging fellow Democrats to vote Uncommitted — though he declined to say how he planned to vote in the primary.

“On Gaza, we’re going to have to keep pushing him,” Mr. Levin said in an interview.

Osama A. Siblani, the influential publisher of The Arab American News, a Dearborn newspaper, had meetings with both Ms. Chávez Rodríguez and Mr. Finer’s delegation. He said Arab American voters in Michigan felt betrayed after backing Mr. Biden in large numbers in 2020, arguing that they had “received nothing” since then “but lip service.”

“I’ve been involved in this community day in and day out every single day for 40 years,” Mr. Siblani said. “I can tell you right now, I cannot convince my community to vote for Biden if I kiss their feet. They will not do it.”

 

ABOUT THE AUTHORS: 


Reid J. Epstein covers campaigns and elections from Washington. Before joining The Times in 2019, he worked at The Wall Street Journal, Politico, Newsday and The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. More about Reid J. Epstein

Erica L. Green is a White House correspondent, covering President Biden and his administration. More about Erica L. Green

A version of this article appears in print on Feb. 10, 2024, Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: U.S. Faltered With Israelis, An Aide Says. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper