FOUNDATION OF MIDDLE EAST PEACE - ISRAELI EMIGRATION - REPORT JULY 2011

The million missing Israelis - Israeli emigration
— filed under: Israeli Policy

Joseph Chamie, Barry Mirkin | Foreign Policy blog | July 5, 2011

Over more than six decades of statehood, successive Israeli governments have repeatedly stressed the centrality of Jewish immigration and the Law of Return of all Jews to Israel for the well-being, security, and survival of the nation. Yet while much is published on Jewish immigration to Israel, considerably less information is available about Jewish emigration from Israel.

Government estimates of the numbers of Israelis residing abroad vary greatly due mainly to the lack of an adequate recording system. Consequently, scholars and others have questioned the accuracy of government figures. Besides the statistical and methodological shortcomings, the number of Israeli expatriates is open to considerable debate and controversy because of its enormous demographic, social, and political significance both within and outside Israel.



At the lower end is the official estimate of 750,000 Israeli emigrants -- 10 percent of the population -- issued by the Israeli Ministry of Immigrant Absorption, which is about the same as that for Mexico, Morocco, and Sri Lanka. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government places the current number of Israeli citizens living abroad in the range of 800,000 to 1 million, representing up to 13 percent of the population, which is relatively high among OECD countries. Consistent with this latter figure is the estimated 1 million Israelis in the Diaspora reported at the first-ever global conference of Israelis living abroad, held in this January.

Current estimates of Israelis living abroad are substantially higher than those for the past. During Israel's first decade, some 100,000 Jews are believed to have emigrated from Israel. By 1980, Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics estimated some 270,000 Israelis living abroad for more than a year, or 7 percent of the population. Several decades later, the number of Israeli emigrants had swelled to about 550,000 -- or almost double the proportion at the end of the 1950s.

Of the Israelis currently residing abroad, roughly 60 percent are believed to have settled in North America, a quarter in Europe, and 15 percent distributed across the rest of the world. It is estimated that about 45 percent of the adult Israeli expatriates have completed at least a university degree, in contrast to 22 percent of the Israeli population. The Israeli emigrants are deemed to be disproportionately secular, liberal, and cosmopolitan. Furthermore, the emigrants are generally younger than the immigrants to Israel, especially those from the former Soviet Union, hastening the aging of Israel's population.

The often-cited reasons for Israeli emigration center on seeking better living and financial conditions, employment and professional opportunities, and higher education, as well as pessimism regarding prospects for peace. Consistent with these motives, one of the most frequently given explanations for leaving Israel is: "The question is not why we left, but why it took us so long to do so." And recent opinion polls find that almost half of Israeli youth would prefer to live somewhere else if they had the chance. Again, the most often-cited reason to emigrate is because the situation in Israel is viewed as "not good."

Another important factor contributing to the outflow of Jewish Israelis is previous emigration experience. As 40 percent of Jewish Israelis are foreign-born, emigration is nothing new for many in the country. Moreover, as Israeli emigrants cannot yet vote from abroad, they are likely to feel marginalized from mainstream Israeli society, further contributing to their decision to remain abroad as well as attracting others to do the same. Whether the Netanyahu government's effort in the Knesset to approve a bill granting voting rights to Israelis living abroad will slow the trend is uncertain.

Adding to emigration pressures, many Israelis have already taken preliminary steps to eventually leaving. One survey found close to 60 percent of Israelis had approached or were intending to approach a foreign embassy to ask for citizenship and a passport. An estimated 100,000 Israelis have German passports, while more are applying for passports based on their German ancestry. And a large number of Israelis have dual nationality, including an estimated 500,000 Israelis holding U.S. passports (with close to a quarter-million pending applications).

Population projections show that Jewish Israelis will remain the large majority in Israel for the foreseeable future. However, it will be a challenge for Jewish Israelis to maintain their current dominant majority of approximately 75 percent, primarily due to higher fertility among non-Jewish Israelis -- nearly one child per woman greater -- the depletion of the large pool of likely potential Jewish immigrants, and large-scale Jewish Israeli emigration. Consequently, demographic projections expect the Jewish proportion of the country -- which peaked at 89 percent in 1957 -- to continue declining over the coming decades, approaching a figure closer to two-thirds of the population by mid-century.

The emigration of a large proportion of a country's population, especially the well-educated and highly skilled, poses serious challenges for any nation. However, large-scale emigration is particularly problematic for Israel given its relatively small population, unique ethnic composition, and regional political context.

Moreover, not only is Israeli emigration increasing the influence of the orthodox Jewish communities, it is also boosting the need for temporary, non-Jewish foreign workers, especially in agriculture, construction, and care-giving. The presence of more than 200,000 foreign workers -- nearly half of whom are unauthorized and mainly from Asia (in particular Thailand and the Philippines, but also increasingly from Africa) -- is also contributing to the changing ethnic composition of the country.

The departure of Jewish Israelis also contributes to the undermining of the Zionist ideology. If large numbers of Jewish Israelis are opting to emigrate, why would Jews who are well integrated and accepted in other countries immigrate to Israel? Furthermore, up to a quarter of young Israelis in Europe marry outside their faith. The majority do not belong to a Jewish community and do not participate in any Jewish activities. As with other expatriate groups in Western nations, Israelis living abroad often profess their intention to return. However, Israeli emigrants are likely to remain in their adopted countries insofar as they and their families have become successfully settled and integrated.

Israeli governments have already consistently perceived immigration levels as too low and emigration levels as too high. In addition to policies encouraging immigration for permanent settlement, Israel has programs and media campaigns actively promoting the return of Israelis residing overseas. The government also maintains connections with the country's expatriates through mandatory registration in its consulates overseas and outreach programs and activities -- and provides counseling, guidance, financial assistance, and tax benefits to returning citizens.

Despite these efforts, it is doubtful based on past and current trends that these various incentives and appeals will be sufficient to entice the return of the million missing Israelis. Large-scale emigration has not only resulted in critical demographic and socioeconomic imbalances in the country, but more importantly poses grave political challenges and jeopardizes the basic Jewish character and integrity of Israel.

Joseph Chamie is research director at the Center for Migration Studies, and Barry Mirkin is an independent consultant.

PICKERING AND FRIENDS - ANTISEMITISM REARING ITS UGLY HEAD

Larry Pickering's obscene ravings leave little doubt about his hatred of Jews, but the disgusting hate speech ravings are such that they ought to be roundly condemned by the society in which we live. But who are Pickering's friends? Try doing some searches and find his interesting bedfellows! If you lie with dogs you get up with fleas!

PICKERING

RACISM:

The bleating Jews who actually believe they are God’s people are still combing the world looking for war-crime culprits. There are now more "searchers" than potential culprits.

The silent Chinese got on with business after the Japanese slaughtered twice as many of them as did Germans Jews and four times as many as did Germans Russians and as many as did Russians Russians…(thanks to Stalin).

There are more people being butchered to death right now in the Congo than there were Jews butchered.

Of course the "holocaust" happened but it was one of the many episodes of war and far from the worst in terms of human life. But Jews believe they are God’s people… so they are more important.

The vanity-driven, thieving Jews did not have a country so they stole someone else’s with the West’s (and the East’s) blessing… and we wonder why we are hated.
Sure, the Jews are more industrious and inventive than the lazy Arabs. The Arabs have used receipts from the West’s addiction to oil to build crass monuments to themselves. An oil drunk Arab’s benchmark of success is to have a hundred more Rolls Royces than his cousin. The Jews have built a highly sophisticated nation from worthless rocky ground… without the aid of oil reserves, but so what? It’s not their land to succeed with.

And occupation is always a basis for endless war.

Uganda’s foul black excuse for a human, Idi Amin, kicked every Indian out of the country. Fijii wants to do the same. The Solomons and new Guinea are hotbeds of violent racism. Why is it that only white people are accused of racism? Can we have white only universities? There are black only universities. Mmmmm.

Japanese only marry Japanese and won’t let Europeans buy land. Chinese allow Filipinos into their country but only to work as housemaids or hookers. Could we do this with New Guineans?

Asians actually believe that because they don’t have hairy bodies and we do, we are closer to the apes. They don’t say that to us but they say that among themselves. To the Chinese we are known as “gwai’lo” meaning a white ghost but that is not considered a racist remark to us. Yet if you reciprocate with a “yellow something” it would be more than politically incorrect and the Chinese would be up in arms trying to get you gaoled through the implementation of their ample anti-discrimination legislation… legislation framed only for the protection of the Chinese.

An Asian calls a European-educated Asian a “banana”! Yellow on the outside but white on the inside. So, we Europeans are the racists, eh?

If a man with a blue moustache bashes you each time you leave your house, will you come to fear, avoid, hate and vilify men with blue moustaches? Quite a normal reaction if you do, yet isn’t this a form of racism or discrimination against men with blue moustaches? I think so… oh, and I forgot to mention he was black, so now it will be racial discrimination! There is no legislation to cover blue moustaches.
Aborigines are considered exploited, but were others here before them? Who was really here first? Do we know? If we did know, do we care? Should we care? Who was really anywhere first in this vast world?

If original indigenes of every country had never been defeated we would all still be living in the stone age.

Aborigines are many times more racist than we are. Australia has Aboriginee-only bars in hotels. I was once told to leave one or risk having my head kicked in. "Whities" are banned from many parts of Australia.

LARRY PICKERING • 7 months ago

Check out that the Islam dogmas are a control freak of the Roman Church.
Are we all that naive that this is impossible.
Do we ask the questions as to why our governments allow other cultures and, so called religions, to invade our space.
Should we ask these questions…. then we should ask why?
GUS COSTELLO • 7 months ago

Europe has now woken up to the Islamisation of the West and the disastrous effect it has had... It will take us a while longer.
LARRY PICKERING • 7 months ago

Fred you hit the NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD, when are people going to wake up to the fact that Muslimism is just like a Tsnami (hope I spelt it right), there is a gentle shift of the water and next instand you are ubmerged with them.
GARRY MUIR • 7 months ago

Tell that crap to the muslims & the taliban.
FRED MAGPIE DEEKS • 7 months ago

I agree Michael… but the international bankers are just part of a elite that certainly do control us via their control over our media and our money.
People like the Packers, the Murdocks and the others that have controlled our press here in Aus are merely the soldiers for this elite and as long as they comply they get the benefits of that alliance. This is the story all over our propagandized world.
All the revolutions and wars in the twentieth century were forecast as was the now genocide in the Middle East. This most definitely means that these assaults against mankind were planned.
Anti-semitism is just another tag the media use to fool the mob… another is 'conspiracy theory' along with the many others that this controlled media has contrived to sing the songs of the elite.
The Jews have promoted the holocaust all over planet earth but we must remember that the Russian Revolution was controlled by Jews (over 80% of the then ruling elite were Jews) and over a period of some two decades there are suggestions that between sixty to one hundred million people were killed.
You will not see this in the media as you will not see the facts of the now Palestine conflict in the mainstream nor will you see the influence that Israel has over the US government and media as the Jewish lobby is a very powerful one and it is world wide.
For the record we must remember that the Jews in Israel are mostly the Russian Khazar Jews and not the original Sephardic Jews that lived in Palestine early days.
There are already conflicts of Jew against Jew in Israel and thanks to the alternative media and many other sincere journalists, both Jewish and other, the atrocities of these brutal Zionist leaders in Israel that are now being exposed may yet get their just dues.
This comment would now make me a anti-semite… can you believe that?
GUS COSTELLO • 7 months ago

well what is anti-semitism ? It's a made up special word for god's allegedly chosen people and it is supposedly describing a special kind of racism directed at jews however it's a con job as over 90% of jews are not of semitic origin (semitic applied to peoples who speak arabic languages from the word semite describes people from the middle east) but are of northern European origin hence the large amount of jews with blonde and red hair and blue eyes. I would disagree that nearly all wars are fought over religion, this may be an external factor created by the elites to stir up trouble and hatred to enable people to be duped into killing each other but in my opinion virtually all wars are created by the ruling elites to make money. The international banking cartel run by a few families stirs up trouble then loans money to both sides for profit then cleans up financially, it's disgusting as it's all about making money with no regard for loss of human life.
MICHAEL TAIT • 7 months ago

the word "racist" is over used and is a convenient word to use when someone is in the wrong and they are in the minority!
RON HAYDON • 7 months ago

A lion will not mate with a cheetah, although they are both cats. A sparrow will not mate with a starling although they are both birds. A blue-fin tuna will not even mate with a yellow-fin tuna although they are both fish. A bull-ant will not mate with a green-ant although they are both insects, etc etc... is it only we who are racist? Is it simply an innate wish to protect the integrity of one's own species? Is that wrong?
LARRY PICKERING • 7 months ago

ha ha ... well, whatever anti semitism is then. Nearly all wars have a religious basis or are fought between nations who do not speak the same language. A lack of communication?
LARRY PICKERING • 7 months ago

I support and agree with what you say - but what can we do about it?? What chance is there that an elected politician will speak up? Anyone putting voice to this in a (more) public arena would be howled down by the lefties.. And I agree with the comment by Michael Tait implying that religion plays a huge part in the problem; lets get that mass stupidity out in the open too....
GORDON SMILLIE • 7 months ago

Well said Larry except people who follow the RELIGION of judaism, jews, are NOT a race, never were , never will be. They come in all the colours of the human rainbow of skin colours. So you cannot be racist towards jews, it's impossible. However one could be bigoted towards jews from a religious point of view but from my point of view I HATE ALL religions equally ! ;)
MICHAEL TAIT • 7 months ago

too true
RON HAYDON • 7 months ago

BTW - I'm also the son of an immigrant refugee and I never take for granted that my father fled to this tolerant welcoming country where he found opportunity, planted his roots, raised a family of 6 sons who all went on to find their own opportunities and raise their own families. Whenever I was called a wog (rarely) I replied with some old fashioned Aussie return fire sledging and cartoons. I still do. It still works.
PAUL ZANETTI • 7 months ago
I read a Facebook post by a socialist left green urger asking his fellow comrades on Australia Day last year, "Is Australia a racist country?" Thick and fast they responded one after another, 'Yes', 'Yes', 'Yes', as they all fell into line. I watched and read the posts initially posted by the instigator whose surname is 'Donarski' the admitted son of an immigrant refugee. Many of the respondents also had surnames confirming foreign heritage. I finally posted , 'name one country that is not racist.' The posts stopped. Funny that.
PAUL ZANETTI • 7 months ago
You won't beat racism... It's in built into us... Many creatures tribe themselves with the similar species and shun other species... Like it or not we do what our instincts tell us to do right from the moment we pop out of our mother's you-know-what...
KAHLUM BARNES • 7 months ago

DISCUSSING LIFE 'AFTER ZIONISM' IN ISRAEL/PALESTINE

From Mondoweiss 250812

Discussing life ‘after zionism’ in Israel/Palestine
Aug 24, 2012 10:13 am | Antony Loewenstein

The drive from East Jerusalem to Tel Aviv takes around one hour. It’s a stinking hot day and I’ve come from Ramallah in mid-August 2012. Despite flying into Ben Gurion airport in the morning I am stopped and initially refused entry by the Israeli border guard police when trying to come back into Israel. I’m on a private Palestinian bus, taken at the Qalandiya checkpoint, and asked to get off to explain who I am.
I don’t have any Israeli stamp in my passport because I requested at the airport for the officials to stamp a separate piece of paper to avoid troubles when travelling around the Muslim world. A customs official took that paper as I exited and I’m told by activists that this is an increasingly utilised tactic that only affects people who want to travel back and forth between Israel and the occupied territories.
Even when I arrive at the airport I am held and questioned for more than one and a half hours and asked why I have recently visited places such as Pakistan and Afghanistan and “how many Muslims did you speak to there?”
Of course, none of this harassment comes close to what Palestinians and minorities face on a daily basis in Israel proper and Palestine.
I am in Israel and Palestine for an independently organised tour of my new book, After Zionism (co-edited with Ahmed Moor). It’s a collection of new essays on today’s reality and examines the ways in which a one-state solution could be implemented. It features chapters by John Mearsheimer, Sara Roy, Jeff Halper, Omar Barghouti, Diana Buttu, Joseph Dana, Jonathan Cook, Phil Weiss and many others.
The owner of East Jerusalem’s Educational Bookshop, Mahmoud, drives me to Tel Aviv. He tells me that the Israeli establishment is increasingly keen to censor views they don’t like. He recalls stories of having books briefly impounded at Ben Gurion airport, and some stolen, that feature examination of Hamas, Hizbollah and the armed Palestinian struggle. He laughs that sometimes the books are taken simply because there’s photo on the cover that features a gun. Mahmoud fears that outright censorship of books in English, currently an unknown factor, is likely in the coming years considering the amount of anti-democratic legislation in the Knesset.
The event in Tel Aviv has been complex to plan. The message of the book should clearly be heard by Israeli Jews - the destruction wrought by Zionism, the failures of the Israeli Left to bring justice for occupied Palestinians and the growing and blatant racism within Israeli society - but Ahmed and I wanted to make sure any event complied with BDS conditions.
Associating with any Israeli government organisation or one supported in any way by the Zionist state is frowned upon and I didn’t have any desire in discussing our book that backs BDS with an event that ignores its key points. This would be hypocrisy on a grand scale.
I emailed Palestinian Omar Barghouti to ask his thoughts. He said he wouldn’t personally appear in Tel Aviv and didn’t see the point anymore in engaging liberal Zionists but he suggested one venue, run by the feminist group and BDS national committee partner Coalition of Women for Peace, in the heart of Tel Aviv. It’s an organisation that has fought a long-running battle against Israel’s more draconian policies and paid a price for doing so.
The event attracts a full house and features +972’s Noam Sheizaf and political activists Hadel Badarni and Yael Ben Yefet. It’s a humid evening with an engaged crowd.
I begin by explaining the rationale behind the project, a desire to move away from the tired and redundant arguments about one-state or two and instead provide concrete examples of why true justice for Palestinians and Israelis can only come through one state. More essentially, I argue that Zionism itself is the issue. It can’t be reformed, re-defined or re-imagined. From its beginning, it was about subjugation of the Arab, a desire to colonise as much land as possible in the name of Jewish liberation.
From that perspective, the ideology has been remarkably successful at achieving complete domination of the land and today’s reality, something I see during my visit with hours waiting at checkpoints and clogged roads waiting for teenage IDF soldiers to let us pass, is now irreversible. The occupation is integral to Israeli society and resisted by very few. I tell the audience in Tel Aviv that it’s now our responsibility to both acknowledge the crimes in 1948, 1967 and beyond and imagine an inclusive future for both Israelis and Palestinians. What that state or entity will look like is the challenge. In my own personal view, it must equally include Palestinian and Israeli (not Zionist or exclusionist) culture and history.
Sheizaf says that his political journey has brought him to confusion today. A supporter of Oslo, then the two-state solution and finally the one-state and now uncertainty. He recalls a recent survey of Israeli public opinion that finds a majority of Jews happy with the status-quo. That’s my sense of the vast bulk of the Jewish Diaspora. Some are undoubtedly pained by the ongoing occupation but do little apart from mouthing platitudes against it. No sanctions. No boycotts. No divestment. A plea for both sides to return to the negotiating table. Just empty words.
Sheizaf talks about the website 972’s attempt to broaden the conversation about questions ignored in the Israeli mainstream but there are lines (and laws) that will not be crossed. It is often a liberal Zionist site, not that this stops Sheizaf calling Israeli behaviour “apartheid” - and they clearly struggle ideologically and even legally to openly discuss some of the more controversial issues of the day, including boycotts, a one-state equation and de-Zionising Israel.
The conversation with all the speakers - the Israeli women articulate well the challenges in getting past the ingrained Israeli fears towards Arabs, Palestinians, Iranians and non-Jews and Badarni especially acknowledges the struggles within Israel to imagine a country that treats all citizens equally - is indicative of that rare thing in Israel today; deconstructing Zionism from the Left and wondering what could replace it.
The Q & A session is spirited. Many of the questions express despair at mainstream Israeli opinions and the disconnect between what’s happening down the road in Palestine and the desire for many Israeli Jews to simply not care. It’s less known that most Israelis continue serving in the IDF reserves until 45 years of age, often in the occupied territories, so a continual connection to the conflict is there every year.
One older woman says she’s been arguing for years that the Israeli Left has fundamentally refused to tackle the underlying issues here, namely that believing in a two-state solution paradigm has perpetuated the strife. Nobody with any power has ever had any serious desire to implement it. Up to 700,000 illegal Jewish colonists in the West Bank make that clear.
A number of audience members question the viability of the one-state solution, wondering how Israeli Jews will be convinced to give up their privilege. I respond that they won’t - white South Africans didn’t voluntarily end apartheid because they suddenly loved blacks - but increasing isolation and condemnation may well reveal to more of the world that a fundamentalist Jewish state is what the country’s leaders and many in the public have always wanted. Deciding between Jewish and democratic is easy; the former was the goal from day one.
It’s a fascinating evening, not least because I’m told such discussions are so rarely held here. The Palestinian issue has largely been pushed out of public discussion, a deliberate ploy by the government and Right, with the supposed threat of Iran dominating the media (a point I explained on BBC Persian TV recently). It could be argued that many in the settler movement are far more engaged in a future reality for themselves than the Israeli mainstream and Left. “Feckless” is the way a good friend describes the Israeli Left’s unwillingness or inability to challenge the pro-colonist reality in the last decades since the Oslo peace accord. Some anti-occupation protest here. Involvement in the Palestinian non-violence movement there. But virtually no differences on the ground itself.
The following evening After Zionism is discussed in East Jerusalem with independent journalist Joseph Dana and Palestinian Diana Buttu at the New Educational Bookshop. Before the event begins, famed nuclear whistle-blower Mordechai Vanunu arrives, we make eye contact and he sits on his own in the back of a packed room. The audience is mostly Palestinians and foreigners. A few Israelis, too.
Dana argues that discussing one or two states ignores the broader questions, namely recognising the core of the problem, Zionism. “Israel long ago decided whether it wanted to be Jewish or democratic, it can’t be both.” It chose the former. Dana explains that spending any time in the occupied territories makes it very clear what Israel has had in mind since the beginning; colonisation, occupation and repression. Every Israeli leader has wanted the same thing and achieved its goal with perfection. The international community is neutered or complicit, including the EU.
Some of their diplomats are in the audience, including a senior one from Holland, who tells me afterward that the issue of Zionism never enters discussions with Israeli officials though the EU is trying its best to provide assistance to the Palestinians. I say that the EU is far too often happy to economically boost the Jewish state, including the recent news to upgrade Israel’s special trading status.
Buttu explains how the Oslo period has entrenched the rot inside the Palestinian Authority and allowed a Western and Israeli backed entity to manage the occupation for the Zionist nation. She offers no particular solution to this issue but states that the challenge for Palestinians especially is to create and imagine a different political reality where dignity and self-determination are central. She implies that neither Hamas or the PA will ever be able to prove this. The need for an independent Palestinian political movement, with mass appeal, is surely desperately needed. Buttu continued her arguments on a recent Al Jazeera English program filmed in Ramallah.
During the Q & A, a number of people questioned the viability of a one-state solution and Israel and the West ever allowing it to happen. The obstacles, detailed in After Zionism, are undeniably great, but the first step is once and for all excising the two-state equation as either feasible or just. It’s then the responsibility of all major players, both inside and outside of the region, to forge a future that brings peace with justice through a political framework.
Vanunu asks one of the last questions. “Tell me”, he says, “where is this conflict going?” Tough question. We all argue that that until there’s acknowledgement that the status-quo isn’t working, we’ll be stuck in the same tired formulations. A solution won’t come through a sound-bite or a return to “negotiations” with two unequal sides. Dana is perhaps the most pessimistic about the future, believing that any serious talk about one-state today is pointless when this falls into the trap of a paradigm that is tired and favours the more powerful entity, Israel. Besides, he continues, we haven’t even admitted what’s been happening since 1948, ethnic cleansing by force and stealth. With Israel’s huge natural gas reserves, its economic stability will need to be challenged in a variety of creative ways.
I disagree with some of Dana’s points, as surely it’s important to imagine a different, more just outcome. After Zionism offers some practical examples.
Speaking personally, I believe that until there is less ignorance in the West about Israeli behaviour - how often do we continue to hear talk about “democratic” Israel and its striving for peace in the region? - the responsibility of writers and other engaged parties is to remind the world that the Oslo rules were broken from day one and benefitted the occupier. If the idea of being an “intellectual” means anything substantial, it’s about not accepting the frame given by a state and its proud adherents and offering an alternative vision.
Speaking to The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) founder, Jeff Halper, during my stay confirms this paralysis. He, like so many other people I see, realise that there are increasingly limited spaces for any interaction between Israelis and Palestinians, as the anti-normalisation movement deepens.
***
A few days after the East Jerusalem event, I watch with Dana the wonderful new documentary, Under African Skies, about Paul Simon and his controversial visit to apartheid South Africa in the 1980s to record Graceland. It’s mainly about the glorious music but the issue of Simon breaking the cultural boycott of the country is canvassed. It’s relevant today, in the context of Israel, where Simon played last year, because the film reveals Simon to naively believe that music and art can overcome oppression and boycotting South Africa was not something Simon, without consulting the ANC, who strongly backed BDS, had any intention of following.
I find the film moving on a number of levels; being in Palestine and Israel and talking about the ways in which today’s deadlock can be shifted. BDS is one way of pressuring Israel and it’s already having a major psychological effect (with minimal economic pain, thus far). The black South African musicians were desperate to be heard internationally, despite the cultural boycott technically blocking locals playing outside the country. Their position was understandable, if still contentious. But Simon, who speaks the language of reconciliation, admits to arriving in South African with no real understanding of apartheid. He soon becomes an unlikely critic of the regime but willfully ignores the demands of the cultural boycott movement because he believes he’s more important than the wishes of an oppressed people’s leadership who were calling to completely isolate a repressive state.
Similar arguments are made today by musicians and artists who want to come to Israel. Talking will help. Understanding can only come when both sides get together. But this fundamentally ignores the inherent power disparity in the relationship between Israelis and Palestinians. Intellectual independence is vital in any political struggle but individuals don’t have the right to oppose a liberation movement with clear political goals if they believe that collective action is the only way to bring down oppression.
Simon’s recent visit to Israel shows he understands nothing more today than in years past, completely oblivious to the solidarity required. Any cultural association with the Israeli government (Artists Against Apartheid explain) must not happen because Palestinian civil society has demanded it. Groups under occupation are in a far better position to dictate these rules than (sometimes) well-meaning people in the Diaspora. However, it would be wrong to say that there aren’t Palestinians who challenge BDS dictates, including at the movie theatre in the West Bank town of Jenin.
***
The final event for After Zionism is in Ramallah at the Quaker’s Friends Meeting House with Omar Barghouti and Joseph Dana. Being the last night of Ramadan, the space was still quickly filled with a smattering of Palestinians, Western aid workers and writers. Barghouti explains how the challenge for a democratic future is to decolonise Israel both ideologically and practically. There needs to be a just way to compensate all citizens, Jews, Palestinians or others, who have been expelled since 1948. He says that a distinction between public and private land and property would be taken into account in one, democratic state. Barghouti’s chapter in After Zionism outlines how this could happen.
His key point is that colonial privileges currently enjoyed by Jewish colonists in the West Bank must stop immediately, like at the end of apartheid South Africa. I like his line that Jews living in Brooklyn can’t behave in a brutal way towards Arabs as they do if they move to the occupied territories. Barghouti sounds an optimistic tone by arguing a combination of the Arab Spring, BDS and a multi-polar world is making it easier to imagine the end of Zionist exclusion. It will be increasingly hard to maintain a ghettoised Jewish state in the heart of a democratic region.
I’m encouraged to hear Barghouti say that in the last 12-18 months, BDS is suddenly taking off across the world. He says he can’t keep up with the number of university campuses wanting to initiate programs against Israel firms and campaigns to convince Western musicians and artists not to play Israel. I’m told that Israeli music promoters are paying 2-3 times the normal rate to convince foreigners to come because the political price for doing so is growing.
Cultural isolation for Israelis is far from complete but it’s undeniably on the rise. For example, the fact that Madonna recently felt the need to try and bring peace activists from both sides during her show - Israeli liberal Zionists came while anti-occupation activists refused - shows the campaign is starting to bite.
During the Q and A - many in the audience were Westerners working for Western NGOs in Palestine - there was a palpable frustration with the role of these organisations in perpetuating the conflict rather than solving it. “Are we helping manage the occupation for Israel?”, one Australian asks. Some Palestinians, while liking the idea of a one-state solution, wonder how it will be achieved with such a powerful Zionist state next door. Dana says that now is not the time to be talking about the composition of a future state but rather we should better understand today’s reality and act accordingly. I say that Western audiences are yet to be seriously exposed to the idea of a anything other than the two-state equation and a “peace process” so if not now, when? Similar discussions occur during book events in London, including at the Frontline Club and SOAS.
Palestine is a contradiction. Dana and I hang out at a public pool in Ramallah. It’s full of parents with their children swimming in the cool water. There’s a pool bar serving beer on tap. Palestinian women are sitting in skimpy bikinis. This is not the image of Palestine that we’re used to seeing. Ramallah is a relatively liberal and Christian-dominated city and it’s unlikely many other places in the West Bank, and certainly not Gaza, would allow such behaviour, but despite growing conservatism, liberal life goes on. It’s yet another example of the Ramallah bubble.

MARIKANA MASSACRE - A POST-APARTHEID "APARTHEID" TRAGEDY

This article was printed in Amandla, and Red Pepper in the UK reprinted it

Marikana massacre: A brutal tragedy

21 August 2012: Red Pepper’s South African sister paper reports on the slaughter of 34 Marikana mineworkers

No event since the end of Apartheid sums up the shallowness of the transformation in this country like the Marikana massacre. What occurred will be debated for years. It is already clear that the mineworkers will be blamed for being violent. The mineworkers will be painted as savages. Yet, the fact is that heavily armed police with live ammunition brutally shot and killed over 34 mineworkers. Many more were injured. Some will die of their wounds. Another 10 workers had been killed just prior to this massacre.

This was not the action of rogue cops, this massacre was a result of decisions taken at the top of the police structures. The police had promised to respond with force and came armed with live ammunition, and they behaved no better than the Apartheid police when facing the 1960 Sharpeville and 1976 Soweto uprisings and 1980s protests, where many of our people were killed. The aggressive and violent response to community service delivery protests by the police, have their echo and reverberation in this massacre.

This incident represents a blood-stain on the new South Africa. This represents a failure of leadership. It is a failure of leadership from government: its ministers of labour and mineral resources who have been absent during this entire episode; its minister of police who maintains this is not political but a mere labour dispute and defends the actions of the police; a failure of the president, who can only issue platitudes in the face of this crisis and not mobilise the government and its tremendous resources to immediately address the concerns of the mineworkers and now their bereaved family members.

It has been a failure and betrayal of the Lonmin mine management that refused to follow through on undertakings to union leaders to meet the workers and address their grievances. The management somersaults between agreeing to negotiate with workers and then reneges saying they have an existing two-year agreement with National Union of Mineworkers (NUM).

It is unfortunately also a failure of the union leadership: In the first instance the NUM, which regards any opposition to their leadership as criminal and asserts that such opposition must necessarily be a creation of the Chamber of Mines. This is obviously not true. It is also a failure of the leadership of Association of Mining and Construction Union (AMCU), which acts opportunistically in an effort to recruit disgruntled NUM members, mobilises workers on unrealistic demands and fails to condemn the violence of its members.

The level of violence on our mines demonstrates the deep divisions within and polarisation of South African society. Mineworkers are employed in extreme conditions of poverty, often living in squalor in squatter camps without basic services. The mineworkers are often employed through labour brokers and informalised without decent work conditions.

The wildcat strike (like other similar strikes on the mines) that set off the events leading to the slaughter is a response to the structural violence of South Africa’s system of mining. However, it is also a response to something else, which we dare not ignore.

Enriched mine-owners with the experience of Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) co-option see an opportunity of driving a wedge between ‘reasonable’ union leaders and the workers. They entice the unions into sweetheart relations, dividing them from the rank-and-file workers. The anger on the mines is a deep-seated anger at mine management that is progressively being directed at the compliance and failure of their union leadership to defend and represent worker interests.

The alienation between union members and the unions’ leadership is a factor behind what has happened at Lonmin and what is happening on other platinum mines.

Nevertheless, the slaughter of more than 34 mineworkers is as a result of the violence of the state, specifically the police. At the very least minister Mthethwa must take responsibility and resign.

This article was originally published in Red Pepper’s sister magazine, Amandla! South Africa’s new progressive magazine standing for social justice

ISRAEL AND SOUTH AFRICA - POT, KETTLE, BLACK!

If the situation for the Palestinians wasn't a major tragedy, this story would actually be very funny!

Under the circumstances it is no joke!

• From mail and guardian 24 August 2012

Israel angered by SA move on settlement goods

24 Aug 2012 - Allyn Fisher-Ilan

Israel has lambasted SA for requiring Israeli goods made by West Bank settlers to be labelled as originating from occupied Palestinian territory.

Israel accused South Africa on Thursday of behaving like an apartheid state by requiring Israeli goods made by West Bank settlers to be labelled as originating from occupied Palestinian territory.

The rhetoric is likely to strain Israel's relations with South Africa, whose ANC fought to end the apartheid regime.

The ANC had strongly backed the Palestinian cause while Israel was one of the few countries to have strong ties with South Africa's white-minority government, which relinquished power in 1994.

Israeli trade with South Africa is modest but the impact of Pretoria's decision on goods-labelling has raised Israeli concern that other states could follow suit and bolster calls by Palestinians to boycott Israeli products made in the West Bank.
The European Union grants a tariff exemption to imports from Israel but not to those coming from the West Bank and other territory Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East War.

'Apartheid state'

The Israeli foreign ministry said it would summon South Africa's ambassador to lodge a protest over the decision on labelling goods from Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

"Unfortunately it turns out the change that has begun in South Africa over the years has not brought about any basic change in the country, and it remains an apartheid state," Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said in response to Pretoria's move.

"At the moment South Africa's apartheid is aimed at Israel," added Ayalon, a nationalist hardliner in right-wing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's governing coalition.

Ayalon did not elaborate on what he meant by associating the labelling decision with apartheid.

There was no immediate response from South Africa.

The government said on Wednesday that Cabinet had approved a measure "requiring the labelling of goods or products emanating from IOT [Israeli-occupied territory] to prevent consumers being led to believe that such goods come from Israel".

Viable state

When Pretoria first proposed the measure in May, Israeli Industry and Trade Minister Shalom Simhon said it would be a problem if other countries did the same thing.

Israel criticised Britain in 2009 for advising supermarkets to label produce from Jewish settlements clearly, to distinguish them from goods produced by Palestinians.
The World Court has ruled that Jewish settlements in the West Bank are illegal under international law and Palestinians say they will deny them the viable state they seek in the territory and in the Gaza Strip.

Israel says the future of settlements should be decided through peace talks, which have been frozen since 2010, largely over the settlement issue.

Israel withdrew settlers from Gaza in 2005. About 2.5-million Palestinians and 500 000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which Israel also took in the 1967 war. – Reuters

BRADLEY MANNING LATEST TRIAL UPDATES - 22 AUGUST 2012

The ongoing UK-Julian Assange row taking place at the Ecuador Embassy in London is bringing media attention back to the plight of Pfc. Bradley Manning. Assange's call for Manning's release made international news broadcasts, putting a spotlight on this important case, just ahead of Manning's next hearing.1

With Manning on the public's mind, Kevin Gosztola's coverage from Ft. Meade on August 27th is even more important - and as always, we depend on your support to bring critical details from the court proceedings to readers the world-over.

If you haven't already, consider chipping in $25+ today to support Kevin's coverage and help him make the trip to Ft. Meade for Bradley Manning's next hearing.

For more information, check out my email from last week below.

In solidarity,

Brian Sonenstein
Campaign Director,
Firedoglake.com

SOURCES:

1. Julian Assange Delivers Speech Thanking Supporters, Calling for End to US War on Whistleblowers, Kevin Gosztola, FDL Dissenter, 8/19/2012.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Brian Sonenstein, Firedoglake.com
Subject: Manning Back in Court

Help Kevin Gosztola Cover Bradley Manning's Next Hearing: Aug 27-31


Kevin Gosztola will be heading to Bradley Manning's next pretrial motion hearing on August 27 at Ft. Meade.

Following their most recent court appearance, defense attorney David Coombs publicly released a motion detailing the horrific abuses Bradley Manning endured during his isolation at Quantico, demanding the dismissal of all charges.1 Bradley's mistreatment is largely what brought attention to his case in the first place, as he was made to strip naked each night and had essentially zero privacy, access to exercise or outside stimulation.

Firedoglake's dedicated coverage and activism surrounding his abuse forced the government to remove him from punitive isolation, and revisiting the facts of his detention could yield another positive outcome for the defense. With your help, we can send Kevin Gosztola back to Ft. Meade to keep us apprised of the latest court proceedings.

Can you please donate $25 or more to support Kevin Gosztola's coverage of Bradley Manning's pretrial motion hearing, August 27-31?

Click here to donate: https://secure.firedoglake.com/page/contribute/manning-general

Firedoglake activists were instrumental in ending Bradley Manning's pretrial isolation at Quantico. Tens of thousands of activists spoke out against his mistreatment, inspiring some to even confront the President at a fundraiser-- and Firedoglake founder and publisher Jane Hamsher was even detained at Quantico bringing approved guest David House to visit Bradley.2

Together, our activism and Kevin's reporting brought Bradley's abuse to the public, spurring a series of events that fundamentally changed the conditions of his pretrial confinement: State Department spokesperson PJ Crowley was forced to resign after calling Manning's treatment "ridiculous," "counterproductive" and "stupid" at a press event. 3 Quantico brig commander James Averhart was replaced and Manning was subsequently moved to Ft. Leavenworth, KS where his conditions improved.4

Sending Kevin each month to cover the pretrial hearings is an important public service that we are honored to provide, and with your help we'll continue to do so. Help us keep this story alive by making a contribution to Kevin Gosztola's coverage of Bradley Manning's pretrial motion hearings.

Please donate $25 or more to support Kevin Gosztola's coverage of Bradley Manning's pretrial motion hearing, August 27-31.

Thank you for your continued support. Your donations allow Kevin to continue reporting on this story and make sure the government cannot convict Bradley in secrecy.

In Solidarity,

Brian Sonenstein
Campaign Director,
Firedoglake.com

SOURCES:

1. Defense Motion Details Horrific Conditions Bradley Manning Was Subjected to at Quantico, Kevin Gosztola, The Dissenter, 8/10/2012.
2. BREAKING: Military Harassing David House, Jane Hamsher for Visiting Bradley Manning, Michael Whitney, FDL Action, 1/23/2011.
3. State Department’s Crowley Condemns Treatment of Bradley Manning: “Counterproductive and Stupid”, Marcy Wheeler, EmptyWheel, 3/11/11.
4. Marines Boot Commander Ordering Abuse of Bradley Manning, Michael Whitney, FDL Action, 1/26/2011.

See also:

http://www.couragetoresist.org

EUTHANASIA - TOO MUCH FOR MOST GOVERNMENTS TO DEAL WITH!!

Yet again we have the spectacle of a government and its "justice" system too scared to hand down a judgement far a few desperate people - what a disastrous outcome!

The following article was in The Age newspaper on Saturday 18 August 2012:

Court ruling shatters death wish of two paralysed men

August 18, 2012
Alexandra Topping

Tony Nicklinson is comforted by his wife Jane. Photo: Getty Images

TWO severely disabled victims of locked-in syndrome have protested angrily that British judges are leaving them to undignified and increasingly distressing lives after they lost a landmark High Court battle to be allowed to die with medical help.
Tony Nicklinson, 58, who had sought to end his ''dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable'' life after he was left paralysed below the neck by a stroke seven years ago, wept uncontrollably after the judgment and said it meant his anguish would continue.

As he and his wife announced they would appeal, Mr Nicklinson, via a computer, said: ''I believe the legal team are prepared to go all the way, but it means yet another period of physical discomfort and mental anguish for me.''

In upsetting scenes following the judgment Mr Nicklinson's wife, Jane, stood by her husband at their home in Melksham as he shook with sobs. She described the judgment as one-sided and disappointing.

''All the points that we put forward have just really been ignored, it seems. You can see from Tony's reaction he's absolutely heartbroken. We always knew it was a big ask but we hoped the judges would see sense, but clearly they haven't.''

Another locked-in syndrome sufferer, who can only be named as Martin, had sought permission for volunteers to help him get to the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland. ''I wish to be able to exercise the freedom which everyone else would have - to decide how to end this constant tortuous situation,'' Martin said in a statement issued by his lawyers.

In a serious blow to pro-euthanasia campaigners in Britain, judges said that while the cases were deeply moving and deserved the most careful and sympathetic consideration, the questions they raised were too significant to be decided in a court, and could only be answered by Parliament.

Lord Justice Toulson said that allowing the two men to be helped to end their lives would have implications far beyond their cases, and a ruling, in Mr Nicklinson's case in particular, would have amounted to a major change in murder laws, which exceeded the powers of the courts.

''It is not for the court to decide whether the law about assisted dying should be changed and, if so, what safeguards should be put in place,'' he said.
Mr Nicklinson had sought assurance that it would not be unlawful for a doctor to assist him to die.

The Guardian