York University has issued a warning: if the institution’s student unions do not recant or sufficiently defend their collective statement on the Israel-Hamas conflict, they will risk losing their relationship with the university.
The university’s statement, released to the public on Friday, addressed the “serious and ongoing harms caused by [the groups’] statement,” which declares “solidarity with the Palestinian people” against “the settler-colonial apartheid state of so-called Israel.”
“Since 1948, Palestinian people have been systemically displaced from their land and homes as a result of state-sanctioned violence, siege, and genocide,” reads the Oct. 12 statement in part. “Our Unions remain unwavering in our support of the Palestinian people’s fight for self-determination and liberation.”
Furthermore, the student-funded groups lashed out at Israel for its air strikes on Gaza, saying they came in response to “Palestinian resistance.”
In its statement, York University said the unions must retract the statement, issue an apology, acknowledge the impact of the statement on campus, and remove all union executives by 5 p.m. on Oct. 25.
At first, I would take issue with what do they mean by “colonial”? The majority of Israel’s population is of Mizrahi descent, Jews from the Middle East. Jews didn’t leave Lebanon and Libya as part of some colonial project. Without further clarification about how they are using the term, my assumption is that they are attempting to imply that the Jews in Israel are somehow “white settlers” there at the behest of European and American powers, which seems to the a popular narrative, although not accurate.
There’s more, but I’ll start with that. A further point would be what do they consider the consequences of “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”? Hamas and Fatah have a pretty clear picture of how that would work, clearly presented in their Arabic media. With the availability of automated translation, are they endorsing that stance? What about the the non-Jewish citizens of Israel? From the SU’s statement, I would assume that they endorse the consequences of Hamas getting their wish.
But whatever, sure. “It’s not antisemetic, it’s antizionist” (while ignoring any obvious and inevitable consequences).
I also don’t understand how one can frame Israel as a colonial project. To add to your statement about the Mizrahi jews:
Yes, Israel doesn’t exist within the borders of 1967 that are often seen as a basis for a two state solution. There are definitely occupied areas. This does not however change the fact that the existence of Israel in the middle east is enshrined in international law and what exactly it’s future borders will be has been subject to debates for a long time. But what’s not debatable is the legality of Israel. Israel is not a foreign body in the region but it has an undeniable right to exist.
I feel like many statements about “colonialism” in this context do not consider international law at all. People not respecting the principles of the rule of law makes me very suspicious with regard to their intentions.
I think it’s kind of a Rorshach Colonialism or Schrödinger’s Colonialism. My impression is that people parroting the “Israel is a colonial country” statement aren’t specifically referring to settlements in the West Bank, but to Israel as a whole. The rationale being one of the following:
Rationale 1
Jews are white¹
Palestinians are dark²
Colonialism is something that whites do to darks
Rationale 2
Israel is more powerful, Palestine is the underdog
In colonial vs. indigenous conflicts, the indigenous people are the underdogs
Therefore the Israelis are the colonialist team and the Palestinians are the indigenous team
It should also be noted that Hamas (and Fatah as well IIRC) explicitly use the colonial framing with themselves as the oppressed indigenous group, so I’m fairly certain that those repeating it uncritically are somewhere along the Hamas propaganda pipeline.
<s> Perhaps in these troubling times, we should remember the words of Nobel Peace Prize winner Yassar Arafat:
We will not bend or fail until the blood of every last Jew from the youngest child to the oldest elder is spilt to redeem our land!
In his speech “The Impending Total Collapse of Israel” at the Grand Hotel in Stockholm, Sweden, January 30, 1996
</s>
¹ Even though most Israelis are approximately as dark (q.v. Mizrahi Jews) or darker (Beta Israel).³
² Palestinians have a lot of Arabic heritage, whereas Mizrahi Jews are more Levantine (even if from Morocco or Iran orginally). This is probably due to historic isolation of minority communities within the Arabic world.³
³ This is all a stupid basis for determining the worth of someone. I’m pretty much a pure “mudblood”, my ancestors were very open minded apparently. Genetic descent studies are kind of interesting for mapping the migrations of people around the planet, but at the end of the day, we are all just people. Also, talk about perpetuating racism, and looking at it through a modern US lens. Way past my level of expertise. Just my impression.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
At first, I would take issue with what do they mean by “colonial”? The majority of Israel’s population is of Mizrahi descent, Jews from the Middle East. Jews didn’t leave Lebanon and Libya as part of some colonial project. Without further clarification about how they are using the term, my assumption is that they are attempting to imply that the Jews in Israel are somehow “white settlers” there at the behest of European and American powers, which seems to the a popular narrative, although not accurate.
There’s more, but I’ll start with that. A further point would be what do they consider the consequences of “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”? Hamas and Fatah have a pretty clear picture of how that would work, clearly presented in their Arabic media. With the availability of automated translation, are they endorsing that stance? What about the the non-Jewish citizens of Israel? From the SU’s statement, I would assume that they endorse the consequences of Hamas getting their wish.
But whatever, sure. “It’s not antisemetic, it’s antizionist” (while ignoring any obvious and inevitable consequences).
I also don’t understand how one can frame Israel as a colonial project. To add to your statement about the Mizrahi jews:
Yes, Israel doesn’t exist within the borders of 1967 that are often seen as a basis for a two state solution. There are definitely occupied areas. This does not however change the fact that the existence of Israel in the middle east is enshrined in international law and what exactly it’s future borders will be has been subject to debates for a long time. But what’s not debatable is the legality of Israel. Israel is not a foreign body in the region but it has an undeniable right to exist.
I feel like many statements about “colonialism” in this context do not consider international law at all. People not respecting the principles of the rule of law makes me very suspicious with regard to their intentions.
I think it’s kind of a Rorshach Colonialism or Schrödinger’s Colonialism. My impression is that people parroting the “Israel is a colonial country” statement aren’t specifically referring to settlements in the West Bank, but to Israel as a whole. The rationale being one of the following:
Rationale 1
Rationale 2
It should also be noted that Hamas (and Fatah as well IIRC) explicitly use the colonial framing with themselves as the oppressed indigenous group, so I’m fairly certain that those repeating it uncritically are somewhere along the Hamas propaganda pipeline.
<s> Perhaps in these troubling times, we should remember the words of Nobel Peace Prize winner Yassar Arafat:
In his speech “The Impending Total Collapse of Israel” at the Grand Hotel in Stockholm, Sweden, January 30, 1996
</s>
¹ Even though most Israelis are approximately as dark (q.v. Mizrahi Jews) or darker (Beta Israel).³
² Palestinians have a lot of Arabic heritage, whereas Mizrahi Jews are more Levantine (even if from Morocco or Iran orginally). This is probably due to historic isolation of minority communities within the Arabic world.³
³ This is all a stupid basis for determining the worth of someone. I’m pretty much a pure “mudblood”, my ancestors were very open minded apparently. Genetic descent studies are kind of interesting for mapping the migrations of people around the planet, but at the end of the day, we are all just people. Also, talk about perpetuating racism, and looking at it through a modern US lens. Way past my level of expertise. Just my impression.