Continued Struggle in Sabastiya

View from the highest point of Sabastiya

Long-term readers of this blog will know that I have a long-standing love affair with the Palestinian town of Sabastiya and its connected archeological site.  I first visited Sabastiya as an EA in the spring of 2013, when the residents were holding protests over settlers dumping raw sewage on their farmland (“Sabastiya, Settlers and Sewage,” March 26, 2013).  When the protests resulted in the cessation of the sewage dumping, I rejoiced with the townspeople (“Sabastiya, A Happy Ending,” April 7, 2013).

Sadly, our joy was short-lived when, shortly after my return to the US, the “new” EAPPI team was called to Sabastiya because of a fire that had destroyed many of the village’s olive trees (“A(nother) Sad Story from Sabastiya,” June 30, 2013.)

Ahmed Kayed shows visitors the ruins

On subsequent visits to Palestine, I have always make a point of introducing Sabastiya to the people with whom I am traveling.    Because of this connection, I was made an “honorary” member of the Hanwell (UK) Friends of Sabastiya, and had the pleasure of meeting some of their members on a recent trip to London.  It was on the Hanwell Facebook page that I first learned that Sabastiya is now facing further challenges – these related to the archeological site that has played such an important part in the village’s history – and could plan an important part in their future if it weren’t for the over-reaching greed of the settlers in the area and, ultimately, the Israeli government.

Ahmed Kayed, a village leader who has become a friend over the course of my frequent visits is always willing to give “walking tours” of the archeological site to the travelers I bring with me.  On my last visit, this past February, he briefly alluded to “activity” on the part of Israeli archeologists and soldiers, who have fenced off a part of the site and appeared to be moving dirt in another area.  He also told our group that the Israelis had forbidden the locals to pick up trash on the site – a warning I found incomprehensible.

Recently, Kayed posted an article from an Israeli archeological publication titled “The Political struggle over the future of Tel Sabastia” (http://alt-arch.org/en/the-political-struggle-over-the-future-of-tel-Sebastia/).  In the first paragraph of this article, the author opined, “The struggle for Sebastia is central to strengthening the Israeli presence in the West Bank and to the realization of the aim to return to the Homesh settlement, evacuated by Israel in 2005.” 

Never mind that this is a site of great archeological importance (Kayed told our February group that, in 1965, Sabastiya was the most-visited tourist destination in the Middle East!) that deserves care and attention.  And never mind that the Israeli government has done its best to keep this treasure off the world’s “radar screen” ever since it seized control of the West Bank in 1967.  Now that the settlers have begun to visit, let’s take it over and “Judaize” it!

Of course, the site deserves attention.  But that attention should come from international archeologists, who will give equal weight to all of their findings, rather than to Israeli archeologists with the set agenda of finding ways to tie it to early Judaism and the “Kingdom of Israel.”  And let's not forget - the land is in Palestine – the Occupied West Bank – NOT Israel!   

ALL Lives Matter!

Terrorists struck in Paris...

I get most of my news from the Internet these days and, as I was busy most of yesterday getting ready for a dinner party that I was giving last night, I did not hear about the “Paris attacks” until one of my dinner guests mentioned it.  Others chimed in and a lively conversation about “terrorists” ensued.

It wasn’t until this morning, when I had a chance to look at the news myself, that I learned that not only had “terrorists” attacked Paris, there had also been attacks in Beirut and Baghdad. Of course, the stories of these attacks were not given the same prominence as those in Paris, which one news source described as “Europe’s  worst attack in a decade.” 

...and in Baghdad

Later, I was perplexed to note that many of my Facebook “friends” had included a French flag (tricolor) ‘veil” over their profile photos - presumably to “show solidarity with the French people.” 

“What about the Arab people?” I wondered.  They too have suffered – first from similar attacks, believed generated from the same terrorist organization (ISIS) – and then from being ignored.  The fact that terrorists killed “brown people” in two Arab” cities goes virtually unnoticed, while terrorists killing “white people” in a major European city dominates world headlines.

While the numbers may be smaller (the sources I saw said that 41 were killed in Beirut, 19 in Baghdad, and 119 in Paris), a life is a life – and all lives matter (or should!).  Why are so many otherwise well-intentioned people perpetrating “white supremacy” by loudly proclaiming concern for terrorist activity in one part of the world, while utterly disregarding terrorist activity in another part of the world?

...and Beirut!

And how many of those who are painting French flags on their faces and decrying “terrorism” have the slightest inkling that the sad history of white, European privilege, is largely responsible for the birth of organizations like ISIS and Al Qaeda?  My friend Jonathan Cook, a British journalist currently based in Nazareth (Israel) expresses this far better than I ever could, so I would invite you to read his thoughts on this subject (http://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2015-11-14/outrage-at-paris-attacks-masks-our-racism/#sthash.fktvBu0Q&st_refDomain=www.facebook.com&st_refQuery=) – and then maybe take that French flag off your face and take a good look at the rest of the world! 

Democracy in Action

Last night, I was one of an audience of several hundred people who attended the monthly meeting of the Portland Human Rights Commission (HRC).  Last month, the HRC had taken the courageous and controversial step of endorsing a letter asking that the city’s Socially Responsible Investment Commission place four American companies complicit with the Israeli Occupation of Palestine on the city’s “do not buy” list and/or to divest from any of those companies currently in the city’s portfolio (http://occupationfreepdx.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Coalition-letter-to-Socially-Responsible-Final-Oct-8-2015.pdf). In the face of tremendous “public” outcry (mostly generated by Portland’s Jewish Federation), the HRC agreed to provide agenda time to opponents to this action.

Described in a newspaper article the previous week as “obscure,” the HRC is more used to meeting in a small conference room than in the auditorium that last night’s meeting had been moved to.  Commission chair Chabre Vickers performed the Herculean task of keeping the crowd respectful of other viewpoints and of the HRC itself, while extending the agenda to provide time for the invited speakers as well as the 45 members of the public who had signed up to speak.

To provide a bit of background:  Over the summer, religious, social justice and human rights groups working for justice for Palestine formed “Occupation Free Portland” (full disclaimer – I am a member of this group) to encourage city officials to align municipal investments with values of human rights.   In September, this coalition composed a letter to the Socially Responsible Investment Committee (SRIC), asking that they recommend that the city divest from and/or place on the “do not buy” list four companies (Hewlett Packard, Motorola, Caterpillar and G4S) who play major roles in the ongoing Occupation. 

This letter was initially presented to the city’s HRC for their endorsement during the “public comments” period at the Commission’s September meeting.  The HRC asked for more time to review the letter and the backup materials that the coalition presented, and promised a vote at its October meeting.

 

At that October meeting, the HRC voted unanimously to endorse the letter, which will then be presented to the SRIC for further consideration and possible action.  The backlash was swift.

Once the action (taken in a public meeting!) was known, the Jewish Federation and its allies swung into high gear – accusing Occupation Free Portland and, by association the HRC, of everything from anti-Semitism to wanting to destroy the State of Israel.  A local, “alternative” newspaper, Willamette Week, wrote a one-sided story about the meeting   http://www.wweek.com/2015/10/28/portlands-obscure-human-rights-commission-sparks-anger-with-israel-palestine-vote/; politicians were contacted and favors called in to get support for the Jewish Federation position.  Reportedly, several members of the HRC even received “death threats.”

All came to a head in last night’s emotional 3 ½ hour meeting.  Vickers began by reading a heartfelt statement as to exactly what the HRC had voted on, stating that, as a courtesy, opponents to that position had been offered the opportunity to speak to the issue addressed in the “controversial” letter – namely, did the four American companies, in fact, violate human rights?  She asked all who spoke to be respectful of each other and of the process – and, when outbursts subsequently interrupted one of the first speakers, introduced a security officer who promised to evict anyone responsible for future outbursts.

The audience was then treated to about 30 minutes from various Jewish Federation speakers who used that time not to discuss the four companies or their human rights violations, but to give wide-ranging speeches on topics ranging from the Balfour Declaration to present-day anti-Semitism in Europe. 

When it was time for the Commissioners to comment on the issue, two, Sam Sachs and Marcia Suttenberg “confessed” that they had not done their homework before the October vote, stated that they were “horrified” by what they had subsequently learned, and wished to rescind their support.

Vickers then called on the 45 members of the public who had registered to speak to the issue – allotting two minutes to each speaker (and using a timekeeper to strictly enforce this limit).  The voices ranged from clergy (rabbis, priests and ministers), to ordinary people – Palestinian-Americans, Jews, students, housewives, professionals, all of whom had an opinion on the issue – although very few addressed the issue that the HRC had actually voted on – namely were the four American companies complicit in human rights violations?

The meeting concluded with a lengthy discussion by the commissioners; Sachs and Suttenberg reiterated their dismay about what the HRC had done and wanted to “undo” it; other commissioners stated that they had done their “homework” before voting, and had heard nothing that changed their mind about the specific action that the HRC had taken.

In the end, the HRC voted NOT to take a re-vote on the issue, but to make a note in the record that Sachs and Suttenberg had recanted their original “yes” votes.  And, with that, the die-hards still left in the audience went home – content that the democratic process had once again worked the way it was supposed to!!