The Deceptive Art of Playing the Victim: How Aggressors Manipulate Perception and Intimidate Their Victims

By Admin, 8/11/2024

A sign featuring a quotation by Malcolm X is pictured during a sit-down protest by pro-Palestinian activists inside Charing Cross railway station to call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza on 4th November 2023 in London, United Kingdom. Mass Palestinian solidarity rallies have been held throughout the UK for a fourth consecutive weekend to call for an end to the Israeli bombardment of Gaza. (photo by Mark Kerrison/In Pictures via Getty Images)

In conflicts and occupations throughout history, a recurring strategy employed by aggressors is to portray themselves as victims while wielding power over those they subjugate. This tactic not only misleads the public but also creates an environment where oppressors can justify their harmful actions. By presenting themselves as vulnerable or under threat, they seek to gain sympathy and deflect scrutiny from their own injustices.

The Power of False Victimhood

The strategy of playing the victim taps into the innate human capacity for empathy. When perpetrators of violence or oppression position themselves as victims, they manipulate public sentiment, redirecting attention away from their own acts of aggression. This carefully constructed image serves to confuse the narrative and obscure the reality of who holds power and responsibility in a conflict.

In some cases, occupying forces claim self-defense as a justification for enacting policies that perpetuate suffering, dispossession, and human rights violations. This narrative creates a paradox: those with overwhelming power present themselves as besieged and under threat, even as they implement measures that suppress and harm vulnerable populations. By adopting this posture, they attempt to delegitimize the grievances of the true victims and stifle international and domestic critique.

Methods of Intimidation and Control

Maintaining the illusion of victimhood often involves a multifaceted approach that includes direct and indirect forms of intimidation against genuine victims. These methods aim to silence, discredit, and weaken the oppressed, ensuring that their stories remain unheard. Key tactics include:

1. Harassment and Threats: Those who attempt to speak out against the aggressors often face targeted harassment, surveillance, or explicit threats. This climate of fear discourages activism and isolates individuals, preventing them from sharing their experiences or building solidarity.

2. Propaganda and Disinformation: Control of media and information channels allows oppressors to flood public discourse with misleading narratives. By amplifying false claims, omitting key details, and emphasizing isolated incidents that support their narrative, they manipulate public perception. This tactic shifts blame and casts doubt on the legitimacy of the victims’ plight.

3. Weaponizing Legal Systems: Using laws as tools of oppression, aggressors may initiate baseless legal actions, impose arbitrary restrictions, or enforce punitive regulations. These measures serve to criminalize dissent, sap resources, and intimidate those who resist, further entrenching the imbalance of power.

4. Economic and Social Marginalization: By restricting access to vital resources and opportunities, aggressors create conditions that make it difficult for affected populations to challenge the status quo. Economic deprivation and social exclusion erode community resilience, making it harder for victims to organize or seek justice.

The Consequences of Deception

The portrayal of aggressors as victims has far-reaching implications. It allows them to rationalize ongoing violence, erodes trust in genuine human rights advocacy, and polarizes public opinion. This cycle of manipulation not only deepens the suffering of oppressed communities but also destabilizes efforts toward peace and justice.

Moreover, by undermining the credibility of victims and displacing accountability, these deceptive practices contribute to a culture where violence is normalized and impunity prevails. The narrative of false victimhood diminishes the visibility of those who endure daily hardships and silences calls for meaningful change.

The Path Forward: Promoting Awareness and Accountability

Breaking this cycle of deception requires a concerted effort by the international community, media, and civil society to critically analyze claims of victimhood and hold oppressors accountable. Independent investigations, robust journalism, and platforms that amplify the voices of those affected are essential tools for countering manipulative narratives.

Promoting awareness means educating audiences about the tactics used to deceive public opinion and teaching them to discern between genuine claims and orchestrated portrayals. Building an informed and empathetic global community helps expose these deceptive practices and supports movements for justice and peace.

Ultimately, dismantling the facade of false victimhood is crucial to ensuring that the stories of those who suffer under oppression are heard, acknowledged, and addressed. Only by recognizing these strategies for what they are can we challenge the structures that perpetuate harm and work toward a future rooted in truth and accountability.

Also see

Posted in Palestinian art & culture | Tagged | Comments Off on The Deceptive Art of Playing the Victim: How Aggressors Manipulate Perception and Intimidate Their Victims

Hamadeh’s art gallery

Posted in Hamadeh | Tagged | Comments Off on Hamadeh’s art gallery

The Mask of Sir Kid Starver

By Admin, 15/11/2024



Sir Kid Starver stands with words sharp and sly,
A human rights lawyer, a mask, a lie.
In Gaza, two million, starved and confined,
Children and mothers left shattered, maligned.

He denies the siege, turns away from the cries,
Beneath falling rubble and bomb-stricken skies.
“We defend the just,” he proclaims with pride,
Yet supplies the arms that fuel genocide.

Israeli occupation’s steel in his hand,
Feeds the flames that consume a lost land.
But truth rises fierce, though silenced and blurred;
No lie can hold back the reckoning stirred.
Posted in Gaza, Massacres & genocides, Palestinian art & culture, Poems, UK | Tagged , | Comments Off on The Mask of Sir Kid Starver

Stop Arming Israeli Apartheid!

By Phalapoem editor, 4/12/2024

Posted in Admin, Gaza, Massacres & genocides, Media, Palestinian art & culture | Tagged , | Comments Off on Stop Arming Israeli Apartheid!

Starmer’s Lies  and Racism 

By Admin, 10/11/2024

Sir Keir Starmer, leader of the Labour Party and former Director of Public Prosecutions, has cultivated an image of integrity, moderation, and unity within British politics. Yet, for many observers, his leadership is marked by contradictions that challenge the trust he once inspired among voters and party members alike. This article examines the tactics that Starmer has used to shape public perception and the ways in which these approaches have sparked accusations of deception.

Broken Promises and Policy Reversals

During the Labour leadership race in 2020, Starmer positioned himself as the heir to the progressive momentum built by his predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn. His pledges included upholding public ownership of key services, increasing taxes on the wealthy, supporting a Green New Deal, endorsing ceasefire in Gaza and recognising the state of Palestine. These commitments resonated with the party’s left-wing base and were seen as a promise to continue advocating for transformative policies.

His shameless lie about unconditional support for Israel to siege and starve  2.5 million people in Gaza was perceived  as the most heinous crime a human right lawyer and a politician may commit during their political career. Starmer’s  crime of enabling starvation and genocide will be subject to the international court of justice for ensuring justice is served for Gaza victims. 

After assuming leadership, Starmer began to distance himself from these pledges. Notably, the Labour Party under his guidance has shown a more cautious approach to public spending, dropped its commitment to nationalization of certain industries, and reframed discussions around tax policy. He refused the public demand to  stop arms sales to Israel, did  not condemn Gaza genocide nor recognised the Palestinian state. However he was one of the first politicians  to condemn  the clash between pro Palestinian protestors  and racist Israeli hooligans  in Amsterdam and described the event as a pogrom despite the fact that nobody was killed or seriously injured comparing with his silence towards the death of  43500 Palestinians killed by Israel. These changes have led to accusations of duplicity, with critics arguing that Starmer’s rhetoric during his leadership campaign was designed to court progressive members only to pivot to a more centrist stance once in power.

Suppressing Internal Dissent

and The Cost of Shifting Sands

A significant part of Starmer’s strategy involves maintaining tight control over party messaging and internal dynamics. This approach has included disciplinary actions against members and MPs who dissent from the leadership’s line to date to support ceasefire in Gaza and stop arming Israeli occupation army.

Starmer’s leadership reflects political pragmatism, adapting to changing landscapes. While this has made Labour more electable, it has also sown mistrust among those who feel misled. The challenge for Starmer is proving that his evolving positions are driven by principles and not mere political calculation. Until then, the perception of deception will continue to shadow his leadership.

See also

Posted in Palestinian art & culture, UK | Tagged | Comments Off on Starmer’s Lies  and Racism 

In Handala’s Playground: Season 2, Episode 8: Justice on Paper

S.T. Salah, 15/11/25

Scene:

A cracked courtroom under a fading UN flag. The walls are covered in reports, resolutions, and silence. Handala stands with his back turned, facing the horizon of Gaza’s smoke. The Prosecutor enters, papers trembling in his hand — not from fear, but exhaustion.

Prosecutor:

You’ve been standing like that for fifty years, little one. Aren’t your legs tired?

Handala:

They don’t hurt as much as watching the world pretend to walk the talk of justice. Tell me, how’s your court doing these days — still allergic to certain passports?

Prosecutor (half-smiling):

Ah, you’ve heard. We tried to issue warrants — the kind that mean something, not the decorative kind. But apparently, some countries come with an “immunity subscription.” Paid annually, in weapons and vetoes.

Handala:

Oh yes, the “Platinum Member of the Untouchables Club.” Comes with free airstrikes and diplomatic cover. And if you complain — they accuse you of misconduct, right?

Prosecutor (bitter laugh):

Exactly. The law, they said, must be universal. But the moment I applied it universally, universality suddenly became “politically inconvenient.” Imagine that.

Handala:

I’ve been imagining for 75 years. You’re late. The world’s been watching children like me die — not metaphorically, not statistically — and calls it “complex.”

Prosecutor:

They tell me international law is “powerful.” They said it after Nuremberg. They said it in The Hague. But it turns out the law’s power stops at the gates of Washington.

Handala:

And London. And Brussels. You see, when a brown child is bombed, it’s called “self-defense.” When a white city is invaded, it’s called “a moral outrage.”

The sanctions? Swift. The condemnations? Poetic. The double standards? Biblical.

Prosecutor (sighs):

When Russia invaded Ukraine, we opened investigations overnight. But when Israel invades Gaza, we open… debates.

Handala (sarcastic):

Don’t be so harsh. They did open something — more arms shipments. Wouldn’t want the occupation to run out of bullets before breakfast.

Prosecutor:

We spoke of the rules-based order. But every time Israel breaks the rules, someone changes the order.

We spoke of humanitarian law. But Gaza has become a laboratory for testing its limits — or proving its irrelevance.

Handala:

And yet, you still wear that robe. Why?

Prosecutor:

Because if I take it off, they win entirely. Someone has to keep the idea of justice alive — even if it’s on life support.

Handala (turns his head slightly, for the first time):

You remind me of a stubborn olive tree. It keeps growing, even when the soil is poisoned.

Prosecutor:

And you remind me of conscience itself — small, silent, but impossible to kill.

Handala:

Conscience doesn’t die, it just migrates. Maybe the next generation will find it buried beneath the rubble of Gaza and replant it somewhere that still believes in humanity.

Prosecutor:

Do you think they’ll forgive us — the adults who built a world where law bowed to power?

Handala:

Forgive you? Maybe. Forget you? Never. They’ll read about this time and ask,

“How could you watch the slaughter of children and still call yourselves civilized?”

Prosecutor (softly):

And what will you tell them, Handala?

Handala (turns fully, eyes fierce):

I’ll tell them I never stopped turning my back on hypocrisy — because facing it would have broken me.

Curtain falls.

The courtroom echoes with silence. The laws remain on paper.

But Handala still stands — back turned, fists clenched —

waiting for the world to grow a conscience worthy of his gaze.

Posted in Gaza, In Handala’s Playground, Justice, Massacres & genocides, Palestinian art & culture, Phalapoem editor | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on In Handala’s Playground: Season 2, Episode 8: Justice on Paper

Social Silence During Genocide and Its Consequences for Future Generations

By Admin, 3/12/2024

The phenomenon of social silence during genocide represents one of the most troubling aspects of human behavior. This silence, often marked by the absence of resistance, acknowledgment, or intervention, plays a pivotal role in enabling atrocities and has lasting repercussions for survivors, their descendants, and society as a whole. This paper explores the factors contributing to social silence during genocide, its immediate and long-term impacts, and the ways in which breaking this silence can help future generations heal and prevent history from repeating itself.

The Nature of Social Silence During Genocide

Social silence during genocide stems from a complex interplay of fear, apathy, complicity, and systemic oppression. Perpetrators often manipulate social and political structures to normalize violence and dehumanize target groups, making resistance risky and solidarity rare. For bystanders, silence may be driven by fear of retribution, a sense of helplessness, or indifference. For external actors, such as other nations or international organizations, silence may be the result of political or economic self-interest, lack of information, or bureaucratic inertia. Regardless of its source, this silence enables perpetrators to operate with impunity and fosters an environment where atrocities can escalate unchecked.

Immediate Consequences of Silence

The immediate consequences of social silence during genocide are profound. First, it emboldens perpetrators, who interpret the lack of resistance or condemnation as tacit approval of their actions. This dynamic allows atrocities to expand in scale and severity. Second, victims of genocide are left isolated, abandoned by both their communities and the broader world. This abandonment exacerbates their suffering, undermines their sense of humanity, and diminishes hope for rescue or justice. Finally, social silence reinforces the systemic dehumanization of target groups, solidifying divisions that can persist for generations.

Long-Term Consequences for Future Generations

The effects of social silence during genocide do not end with the cessation of violence. They ripple across generations, shaping collective memory, identity, and intergroup relations. Key long-term consequences include:

1. Historical Erasure: When societies fail to confront or acknowledge genocides, the events risk being minimized, distorted, or forgotten. This erasure denies victims and their descendants the dignity of recognition and justice, leaving wounds unhealed.

2. Transgenerational Trauma: Descendants of genocide survivors often carry the psychological and emotional scars of their ancestors. These may manifest as anxiety, depression, or a pervasive sense of insecurity, complicating efforts to rebuild lives and communities.

3. Perpetuation of Injustice: Silence creates a precedent of impunity, signaling that such atrocities can occur without consequence. This emboldens future perpetrators and undermines efforts to establish a global culture of accountability.

4. Social Divisions: In societies where genocide is ignored or denied, divisions between groups often deepen. The lack of acknowledgment fosters resentment, mistrust, and cycles of violence, perpetuating instability and suffering.

Breaking the Silence: Pathways to Healing and Prevention

Breaking the silence surrounding genocide is essential for healing and preventing future atrocities. Key strategies include:

1. Education and Awareness: Teaching about genocides in schools, universities, and public forums ensures that the events are not forgotten and helps build a collective commitment to “never again.”

2. Documentation and Memorialization: Preserving evidence through archives, museums, and memorials honors victims and provides a resource for truth-telling and accountability.

3. Justice and Reconciliation: Holding perpetrators accountable through trials and truth commissions sends a powerful message that genocide will not be tolerated. Reconciliation efforts, such as dialogue programs and reparations, can help mend intergroup relations.

4. Advocacy and Intervention: Strengthening international mechanisms to identify and respond to early warning signs of genocide ensures that silence does not enable future atrocities.

Social silence during genocide is a profound moral and societal failure with devastating consequences for victims and future generations. Addressing this silence requires a multifaceted approach that includes education, justice, and proactive intervention. By breaking the silence and fostering a culture of remembrance and accountability, humanity can honor the memory of those lost to genocide and work toward a future where such atrocities are unthinkable.

Posted in Gaza, Massacres & genocides, Palestinian art & culture | Tagged | Comments Off on Social Silence During Genocide and Its Consequences for Future Generations

Can a Nation Defeat Its Occupier While Being Weaker and Poorer?

By Admin, 28/11/2024

Throughout history, numerous examples demonstrate that a nation’s ability to overcome its occupier does not solely depend on economic strength or military might. Instead, it often hinges on resilience, unity, strategy, and the determination to achieve freedom. While being weaker and poorer undoubtedly presents significant challenges, history proves that it is not an insurmountable obstacle.

The Role of Unity and Resilience

One of the most crucial factors in overcoming an occupier is national unity. When a population stands together with a shared vision of liberation, they can leverage their collective strength to resist even the most formidable opponents. Unity fosters resilience, a critical trait for enduring the prolonged struggles often associated with anti-occupation movements.

For example, Vietnam’s fight against French colonialism and later American intervention showcased the power of resilience and unity. Despite being vastly outmatched in terms of wealth and military technology, the Vietnamese employed guerilla tactics and maintained unyielding morale, ultimately driving out their occupiers.

Asymmetric Warfare: A Strategy for the Weak

Weaker nations have historically relied on asymmetric warfare to level the playing field against stronger occupiers. Guerrilla tactics, ambushes, and sabotage are methods that exploit the vulnerabilities of a larger and more conventional occupying force. Such strategies can prolong conflicts, drain the occupier’s resources, and erode their resolve.

The American Revolution is another notable example. The colonists, far less wealthy and militarily equipped than the British Empire, used unconventional tactics and leveraged their knowledge of local terrain to outmaneuver their occupiers. Support from external allies, such as France, also played a decisive role in tipping the balance of power.

The Importance of External Support

No struggle against occupation exists in isolation. Many weaker nations have succeeded in their quests for freedom by securing external support. This support can come in various forms, including financial aid, military assistance, or political pressure on the occupier.

For instance, the Afghan resistance against the Soviet Union in the 1980s benefited greatly from external support, particularly from the United States and other countries. This external aid provided the resources needed to sustain a prolonged conflict, eventually leading to the withdrawal of Soviet forces.

The Power of Morality and Public Opinion

In the modern era, the battle for global public opinion has become a powerful tool for weaker nations. Highlighting the moral injustices of occupation can galvanize international support and pressure occupiers to reconsider their actions. The Indian independence movement, led by Mahatma Gandhi, exemplifies this approach. Through nonviolent resistance and civil disobedience, India’s leaders exposed the moral bankruptcy of British colonial rule, eventually leading to independence.

Similarly, the Palestinian struggle has sought to leverage global public opinion to highlight the injustices of brutal, settler/colonial and genocidal israeli occupation. While the path to liberation remains fraught with challenges, international awareness continues to grow, creating new avenues for resistance against the Israeli apartheid.

Economic and Psychological Dimensions

While weaker nations may lack material wealth, they can still undermine occupiers economically and psychologically. Boycotts, strikes, and the disruption of supply chains can impose significant economic costs on occupiers. At the same time, sustained resistance can wear down the morale of occupying forces and their domestic support base.

The Algerian War of Independence against France demonstrates this dynamic. Despite limited resources, Algerians employed economic and psychological tactics alongside guerrilla warfare, ultimately forcing France to abandon its colonial ambitions.

Defeating an occupier while being weaker and poorer is a daunting challenge, but history shows it is far from impossible. Unity, resilience, strategic innovation, and the ability to garner external support are critical factors in leveling the playing field. Moreover, leveraging global public opinion and imposing economic and psychological costs can further erode the occupier’s power.

The road to liberation is never easy, and the sacrifices are immense. Yet, the enduring spirit of oppressed nations continues to demonstrate that freedom is a goal worth fighting for, regardless of the odds.

Posted in Palestinian art & culture, Palestinian history | Tagged | Comments Off on Can a Nation Defeat Its Occupier While Being Weaker and Poorer?

My remarks at the Oxford Union debate

By Susan Abullhawa , 30/11/2024

I will not take questions until I’m finished speaking; so please refrain from interrupting me.

Addressing the challenge of what to do about the indigenous inhabitants of the land Chaim Weizman, a Russian Jew, said to the World Zionist Congress in 1921 that Palestinians were akin to “the rocks of Judea, obstacles that had to be cleared on a difficult path.”

David Gruen, a Polish Jew, who changed his name to David Ben Gurion to sound relevant to the region, said. “We must expel Arabs and take their places”

There are thousands of such conversations among the early zionists who plotted and implemented the violent colonization of Palestine and the annihilation of her native people.

But they were only partially successful, murdering or ethnically cleansing 80% of Palestinians, which meant that 20% of us remained, an enduring obstacle to their colonial fantasies, which became the subject of their obsessions in the decades that followed, especially after conquering what remained of Palestine in 1967.

Zionists lamented our presence and they debated publicly in all circles—political, academic, social, cultural circles—regarding what do with us; what to do about the Palestinian birthrate, about our babies, which they dub a demographic threat.

Benny Morris, who was originally meant to be here, once expressed regret that Ben Gurion “did not finish the job” of getting rid of us all, which would have obviated what they refer to as the “Arab problem.”

Benjamin Netanyahu, a Polish Jew whose real name is Benjamin Mileikowsky, once bemoaned a missed opportunity during the 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising to expel large swaths of the Palestinian population “while world attention was focused on China.”

Some of their articulated solutions to the nuisance of our existence include a “break their bones” policy in the 80s and 90s, ordered by Yitzhak Rubitzov, Ukrainian Jew who changed his name to Yitzhak Rabin (for the same reasons).

That horrific policy that crippled generations of Palestinians did not succeed in making us leave. And frustrated by Palestinian resilience, a new discourse arose, especially after a massive natural gas field was discovered off the coast of Northern Gaza worth trillions of dollars.

This new discourse is echoed in the words of Colonel Efraim Eitan, who said in 2004, “we have to kill them all.”

Aaron Sofer, an Israeli so-called intellectual and political advisor, insisted in 2018 that “we have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day.”

When I was in Gaza, I saw a little boy no more than 9 years whose hands and part of his face, had been blown off from a booby trapped can of food that soldiers had left behind for Gaza’s starving children. I later learned that they had also left poisoned food for people in Shujaiyya, and in the 1980s and 90s, Israeli soldiers had left booby trapped toys in southern Lebanon that exploded when excited children picked them up.

The harm they do is diabolical, and yet, they expect you to believe they are the victims. Invoking Europe’s holocaust and screaming antisemitism, they expect you to suspend fundamental human reason to believe that the daily sniping of children with so called “kill shots” and the bombing of entire neighborhoods that bury families alive and wipe out whole bloodlines is self-defense.

They want you to believe that a man who had not eaten a thing in over 72 hours, who kept fighting even when all he had was one functioning arm, that this man was motivated by some innate savagery and irrational hatred or jealousy of Jews, rather than the indominable yearning to see his people free in their own homeland.

It’s clear to me that we’re not here to debate whether Israel is an apartheid or genocidal state. This debate is ultimately about the worth of Palestinian lives; about the worth of our schools, research centers, books, art, and dreams; about the worth of the homes we worked all our lives to build and which contain the memories of generations; about the worth of our humanity and our agency; the worth of bodies and ambitions.

Because if the roles were reversed—if Palestinians had spent the last eight decade stealing Jewish homes, expelling, oppressing, imprisoning, poisoning, torturing, raping and killing them; if Palestinians had killed an estimated 300,000 Jews in one year, targeted their journalists, their thinkers, their healthcare workers, their athletes, their artists, bombed every Israeli hospital, university, library, museum, cultural center, synagogue, and simultaneously set up an observation platform where people came watch their slaughter as if a tourist attraction;

if Palestinians had corralled them by the hundreds of thousands into flimsy tents, bombed them in so called safe zones, burned them alive, cut off their food, water, and medicine;

if Palestinians made Jewish children wander barefoot with empty pots; made them gather the flesh of their parents into plastic bags; made them bury their siblings, cousins and friends; made them sneak out from their tents in the middle of the night to sleep on their parents’ graves; made them pray for death just to join their families and not be alone in this terrible world anymore, and terrorized them so utterly that their children lose their hair, lose their memory, lose their minds, and made those as young as 4 and 5 year old were die of heart attacks;

if we mercilessly forced their NICU babies to die, alone in hospital beds, crying until they could cry no more, died and decomposed in the same spot;

if Palestinians used wheat flour aid trucks to lure starving jews, then opened fire on them when they gathered to collect a day’s bread; if Palestinians finally allowed a food delivery into a shelter with hungry Jews, then set fire to the entire shelter and aid truck before anyone could taste the food;

if a Palestinian sniper bragged about blowing out 42 Jewish kneecaps in one day as one Israeli soldier did in 2019; if a Palestinian admitted to CNN that he ran over hundreds of Jews with his tank, their squished flesh lingering in the tank treads;

if Palestinians were systematically raping Jewish doctors, patients, and other captives with hot metal rods, jagged and electrified sticks, and fire extinguishers, sometimes raping to death, as happened with Dr Adnan alBursh and others;

if Jewish women were forced to give birth in filth, get C-sections or leg amputations without anesthesia; if we destroyed their children then decorated our tanks with their toys; if we killed or displaced their women then posed with their lingerie…

if the world were watching the livestreamed systematic annihilation of Jews in real time, there would be no debating whether that constituted terrorism or genocide.

And yet two Palestinians—myself and Mohammad el-Kurd— showed up here to do just that, enduring the indignity of debating those who think our only life choices should be to leave our homeland, submit to their supremacy, or die politely and quietly.

But you would be wrong to think that I came to convince you of anything. Thehouse resolution, though well-meaning and appreciated, is of little consequence in the midst of this holocaust of our time.

I came in the spirit of Malcolm X and Jimmy Baldwin, both of whom stood here and in Cambridge before I was born, facing finely dressed well-spoken monsters who harbored the same supremacist ideologies as Zionism—these notions of entitlement and privilege, of being divinely favored, blessed, or chosen.

I’m here for the sake of history. To speak to generations not yet born and for the chronicles of this extraordinary time where the carpet bombing of defenseless indigenous societies is legitimized.

I’m here for my grandmothers, both of whom died as penniless refugees while foreign Jews lived in their stolen homes.

And I also came to speak directly to zionists here and everywhere.

We let you into our homes when your own countries tried to murder you and everyone else turned you away. We fed, clothed, gave you shelter, and we shared the bounty of our land with you, and when the time was ripe, you kicked us out of our own homes and homeland, then you killed and robbed and burned and looted our lives.

You carved out our hearts because it is clear you do not know how to live in the world without dominating others.

You have crossed all lines and nurtured the most vile of human impulses, but the world is finally glimpsing the terror we have endured at your hands for so long, and they are seeing the reality of who you are, who you’ve always been. They watch in utter astonishment the sadism, the glee, the joy, and pleasure with which you conduct, watch, and cheer the daily details of breaking our bodies, our minds, our future, our past.

But no matter what happens from here, no matter what fairytales you tell yourself and tell the world, you will never truly belong to that land. You will never understand the sacredness of the olives trees, which you’ve been cutting down and burning for decades just to spite us and to break our hearts a little more. No one native to that land would dare do such a thing to the olives. No one who belongs to that region would ever bomb or destroy such ancient heritage as Baalbak or Bittir, or destroy ancient cemeteries as you destroy ours, like the Anglican cemetery in Jerusalem or the resting place of ancient Muslim scholars and warriors in Maamanillah. Those who come from that land do not desecrate the dead; that’s why my family for centuries were the caretakers of the Jewish cemetery in the mount of olives, as labors of faith and care for what we know is part of our ancestry and story.

Your ancestors will always be buried in your actual homelands of Poland, Ukraine, and elsewhere around the world from whence you came. The mythos and folklore of the land will always be alien to you.

You will never be literate in the sartorial language of the thobes we wear, that sprang from the land through our foremothers over centuries—every motif, design, and pattern speaking to the secrets of local lore, flora, birds, rivers, and wildlife.

What your realestate agents call in their high-priced listings “old Arab home” will always hold in their stones the stories and memories of our ancestors who built them. The ancient photos and paintings of the land will never contain you.

You will never know how it feels to be loved and supported by those who have nothing to gain from you, and in fact, everything to lose. You will never know the feeling of masses all over the world pouring into the streets and stadiums to chant and sing for your freedom; and it is not because you are Jewish, as you try to make the world believe, but because you are depraved violent colonizers who think your Jewishness entitles you to the home my grandfather and his brothers built with their own hands on lands that had been in our family for centuries. It is because Zionism is a blight onto Judaism and indeed onto humanity.

You can change your names to sound more relevant to the region and you can pretend falafel and hummus and zaatar are your ancient cuisines, but in the recesses of your being, you will always feel the sting of this epic forgery and theft, that’s why even the drawings of our children pasted hung on walls at the UN or in a hospital ward send your leaders and lawyers into hysteric meltdowns.

You will not erase us, no matter how many of us you kill and kill and kill, all day every day. We are not the rocks Chaim Weizmann thought you could clear from the land. We are its very soil. We are her rivers and her trees and her stories, because all of that was nurtured by our bodies and our lives over millennia of continuous, uninterrupted habitation of that patch of earth between the Jordan and Mediterranean waters, from our Canaanite, our Hebrew, our Philistine, and our Phoenician ancestors, to every conqueror or pilgrim who came and went, who married or raped, loved, enslaved, converted between religions, settled or prayed in our land, leaving pieces of themselves in our bodies and our heritage. The fabled, tumultuous stories of that land are quite literally in our DNA. You cannot kill or propagandize that away, no matter what death technology you use or what Hollywood and corporate media arsenals you deploy.

Someday, your impunity and arrogance will end. Palestine will be free; she will be restored to her multi-religious, multi-ethnic pluralistic glory; we will restore and expand the trains that run from Cairo to Gaza to Jerusalem, Haifa, Tripoli, Beirut, Damascus, Amman, Kuwait, Sanaa, and so on; we will put an end to the zionist American war machine of domination, expansion, extraction, pollution, and looting.

..and you will either leave, or you will finally learn to live with others as equals.

Posted in Palestinian diaspora, Susan Abullhawa, UK | Tagged , | Comments Off on My remarks at the Oxford Union debate

Situation in the State of Palestine: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I rejects the State of Israel’s challenges to jurisdiction and issues warrants of arrest for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant

Source, 21/11/2024

Today, on 21 November 2024, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), in its composition for the Situation in the State of Palestine, unanimously issued two decisions rejecting challenges by the State of Israel (‘Israel’) brought under articles 18 and 19 of the Rome Statute (the ‘Statute’). It also issued warrants of arrest for Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant.

Decisions on requests by the State of Israel

The Chamber ruled on two requests submitted by the Israel on 26 September 2024. In the first request, Israel challenged the Court’s jurisdiction over the Situation in the State of Palestine in general, and over Israeli nationals more specifically, on the basis of article 19(2) of the Statute. In the second request, Israel requested that the Chamber order the Prosecution to provide a new notification of the initiation of an investigation to its authorities under article 18(1) of the Statute. Israel also requested the Chamber to halt any proceedings before the Court in the relevant situation, including the consideration of the applications for warrants of arrest for Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant, submitted by the Prosecution on 20 May 2024.

As to the first challenge, the Chamber noted that the acceptance by Israel of the Court’s jurisdiction is not required, as the Court can exercise its jurisdiction on the basis of territorial jurisdiction of Palestine, as determined by Pre-Trial Chamber I in a previous composition. Furthermore, the Chamber considered that pursuant to article 19(1) of the Statute, States are not entitled to challenge the Court’s jurisdiction under article 19(2) prior to the issuance of a warrant of arrest. Thus Israel’s challenge is premature. This is without prejudice to any future possible challenges to the Court’s jurisdiction and/or admissibility of any particular case.

Decision on Israel’s challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to article 19(2) of the Rome Statute

The Chamber also rejected Israel’s request under article 18(1) of the Statute. The Chamber recalled that the Prosecution notified Israel of the initiation of an investigation in 2021. At that time, despite a clarification request by the Prosecution, Israel elected not to pursue any request for deferral of the investigation. Further, the Chamber considered that the parameters of the investigation in the situation have remained the same and, as a consequence, no new notification to the State of Israel was required. In light of this, the judges found that there was no reason to halt the consideration of the applications for warrants of arrest.

Decision on Israel’s request for an order to the Prosecution to give an Article 18(1) notice

Warrants of arrest

The Chamber issued warrants of arrest for two individuals, Mr Benjamin Netanyahu and Mr Yoav Gallant, for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least 8 October 2023 until at least 20 May 2024, the day the Prosecution filed the applications for warrants of arrest.

The arrest warrants are classified as ‘secret’, in order to protect witnesses and to safeguard the conduct of the investigations. However, the Chamber decided to release the information below since conduct similar to that addressed in the warrant of arrest appears to be ongoing. Moreover, the Chamber considers it to be in the interest of victims and their families that they are made aware of the warrants’ existence.

At the outset, the Chamber considered that the alleged conduct of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant falls within the jurisdiction of the Court. The Chamber recalled that, in a previous composition, it already decided that the Court’s jurisdiction in the situation extended to Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Furthermore, the Chamber declined to use its discretionary proprio motu powers to determine the admissibility of the two cases at this stage. This is without prejudice to any determination as to the jurisdiction and admissibility of the cases at a later stage.

With regard to the crimes, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu, born on 21 October 1949, Prime Minister of Israel at the time of the relevant conduct, and Mr Gallant, born on 8 November 1958, Minister of Defence of Israel at the time of the alleged conduct, each bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others: the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.

The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant each bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population.

Alleged crimes

The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that during the relevant time, international humanitarian law related to international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine applied. This is because they are two High Contracting Parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and because Israel occupies at least parts of Palestine. The Chamber also found that the law related to non-international armed conflict applied to the fighting between Israel and Hamas. The Chamber found that the alleged conduct of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant concerned the activities of Israeli government bodies and the armed forces against the civilian population in Palestine, more specifically civilians in Gaza. It therefore concerned the relationship between two parties to an international armed conflict, as well as the relationship between an occupying power and the population in occupied territory. For these reasons, with regards to war crimes, the Chamber found it appropriate to issue the arrest warrants pursuant to the law of international armed conflict. The Chamber also found that the alleged crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza.

The Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024. This finding is based on the role of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant in impeding humanitarian aid in violation of international humanitarian law and their failure to facilitate relief by all means at its disposal. The Chamber found that their conduct led to the disruption of the ability of humanitarian organisations to provide food and other essential goods to the population in need in Gaza. The aforementioned restrictions together with cutting off electricity and reducing fuel supply also had a severe impact on the availability of water in Gaza and the ability of hospitals to provide medical care.

The Chamber also noted that decisions allowing or increasing humanitarian assistance into Gaza were often conditional. They were not made to fulfil Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law or to ensure that the civilian population in Gaza would be adequately supplied with goods in need. In fact, they were a response to the pressure of the international community or requests by the United States of America. In any event, the increases in humanitarian assistance were not sufficient to improve the population’s access to essential goods.

Furthermore, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that no clear military need or other justification under international humanitarian law could be identified for the restrictions placed on access for humanitarian relief operations. Despite warnings and appeals made by, inter alia, the UN Security Council, UN Secretary General, States, and governmental and civil society organisations about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, only minimal humanitarian assistance was authorised. In this regard, the Chamber considered the prolonged period of deprivation and Mr Netanyahu’s statement connecting the halt in the essential goods and humanitarian aid with the goals of war.

The Chamber therefore found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.

The Chamber found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and specific medical supplies, created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, which resulted in the death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration. On the basis of material presented by the Prosecution covering the period until 20 May 2024, the Chamber could not determine that all elements of the crime against humanity of extermination were met. However, the Chamber did find that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crime against humanity of murder was committed in relation to these victims.

In addition, by intentionally limiting or preventing medical supplies and medicine from getting into Gaza, in particular anaesthetics and anaesthesia machines, the two individuals are also responsible for inflicting great suffering by means of inhumane acts on persons in need of treatment. Doctors were forced to operate on wounded persons and carry out amputations, including on children, without anaesthetics, and/or were forced to use inadequate and unsafe means to sedate patients, causing these persons extreme pain and suffering. This amounts to the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts.

The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that the abovementioned conduct deprived a significant portion of the civilian population in Gaza of their fundamental rights, including the rights to life and health, and that the population was targeted based on political and/or national grounds. It therefore found that the crime against humanity of persecution was committed.

Finally, the Chamber assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza. In this regard, the Chamber found that the material provided by the Prosecution only allowed it to make findings on two incidents that qualified as attacks that were intentionally directed against civilians. Reasonable grounds to believe exist that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant, despite having measures available to them to prevent or repress the commission of crimes or ensure the submittal of the matter to the competent authorities, failed to do so.

Background

On 1 January 2015, The State of Palestine lodged a declaration under article 12(3) of the Rome Statute accepting jurisdiction of the Court since 13 June 2014.

On 2 January 2015, The State of Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute by depositing its instrument of accession with the UN Secretary-General. The Rome Statute entered into force for The State of Palestine on 1 April 2015.

On 22 May 2018, pursuant to articles 13(a) and 14 of the Rome Statute, The State of Palestine referred to the Prosecutor the Situation since 13 June 2014, with no end date. 

On 3 March 2021, the Prosecutor announced the opening of the investigation into the Situation in the State of Palestine. This followed Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision on 5 February 2021 that the Court could exercise its criminal jurisdiction in the Situation and, by majority, that the territorial scope of this jurisdiction extends to Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. 

On 17 November 2023, the Office of the Prosecutor received a further referral of the Situation in the State of Palestine, from South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, and Djibouti, and on 18 January 2024, the Republic of Chile and the United Mexican State additionally submitted a referral to the Prosecutor with respect to the situation in The State of Palestine.

Posted in Gaza, Justice, Massacres & genocides | Tagged , | Comments Off on Situation in the State of Palestine: ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I rejects the State of Israel’s challenges to jurisdiction and issues warrants of arrest for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant