Free Marwan Barghouti
Free, Free, Free, Marwan Barghouti
Free Marwan Barghouti
Twenty-one years in captivity
His shoes too small to fit his feet
His body abused but his mind is still free
Are you so blind that you cannot see

I say Free Marwan Barghouti
I'm begging you
Free Marwan Barghouti

He pleaded the causes of the PLO
Only one man in a large army
Are you so blind that you cannot see
Are you so deaf that you cannot hear his plea

Free Marwan Barghouti
I'm begging you Free Marwan Barghouti

Twenty-one years in captivity
Are you so blind that you cannot see
Are you so deaf that you cannot hear
Are you so dumb that you cannot speak

I say Free Marwan Barghouti
I'm begging you
Oh free Marwan Barghouti, free
Marwan Barghouti I'm begging you
begging you Please free Marwan Barghouti
free Marwan Barghouti
I'm telling you, you've got to free Marwan Barghouti

March, 2003
The Gaza strip, weather fine
It was business as usual
In Hai as-Salam
Oh Corrie, Corrie, because Corrie
Oh Corrie, Corrie, because Corrie
Come Spirit, Come Spirit
-The girl is dead

When I try to sleep at night
I can only dream in red
The outside world is black and white
With only one colour dead
Oh Corrie, Corrie, because Corrie
Oh Corrie, Corrie, because Corrie
Come Spirit, Come Spirit
-The girl is dead

You can blow out a candle
But you can't blow out a fire
Once the flames begin to catch
The wind will blow it higher
Oh Corrie, Corrie, because Corrie
Come Spirit, Come Spirit
-The girl is dead

And the eyes of the world are
watching now
watching now

I saw a toddler in a shopping trolley once, in 'Presto' if anyone remembers that store. He must have been about three. I must have been about 10. And he tickled himself under his own arms. And then he burst out laughing and he said to his father 'I tickled myself dad'. Now we all know you can't tickle yourself, but it was so charming that the kid would want to please his dad that way that even though he had lied, it was so inventive as to make me chuckle.

I started this thread to make a serious analogy about apartheid states, in a funny way - deliberately to tickle myself. The Spitting Image pastiche, I'm sure that was funny to anyone alive during the 80's with a TV. But the next two pastiches, well I've just untickled myself, to coin a new word. It's just not funny is it ? "I hurt myself dad" I am not crying yet. I am unhurt and far from brave but just foolish to take it one song too far. All bets are off - I lost, I made myself sad. I don't mind talking to myself, but I hate the hurtful things I sometimes come out with. Especially when they are true.

Apartheid is alive and well and living in Tel Aviv, and you are as racist as any stereotypical 80's white South African if you do not oppose it.

On February 6th and 7th, the Guardian newspaper published a two-part series by its Israel correspondent, Chris McGreal. The series sought to draw parallels between Israel and apartheid South Africa.

McGreal's attempt to liken Israel to apartheid South Africa contains two elements: the first is an effort to claim a resemblance between practical elements of life in Israel and the Palestinian territories, and those that existed in apartheid South Africa. The second is the claim that Israel maintained a unique alliance with the old South Africa (a 'pact with apartheid' he calls it) based on the alleged similarity between the two countries' systems and outlooks. McGreal's piece constitutes one of the gravest examples of journalistic bias and misrepresentation yet seen in the Middle East arena.

‘The ‘mask of equality’’

McGreal concedes that since Arab citizens of Israel have the right to vote, their situation is clearly not identical to that of blacks under apartheid. However, he focuses on educational inequalities, land laws and laws governing entry into Israel as justifying the comparison with apartheid. Let's look at McGreal's treatment of the issue of education to gain a sense of his working methods:

McGreal makes the comparison with apartheid in the following terms: "Separate and unequal education systems were a central part of the apartheid regime's strategy to limit black children to a life in the mines, factories and fields."

If one examines educational achievement among Israel's Christian Arab population, one sees that there is indeed a discrepancy between this community and Israeli Jews, and the discrepancy is in favour of the Christians. In the realm of higher education, for example, Christian Arabs are over-achievers in Israel. Over 320 out of each 1,000 Christian Arabs born between in Israel 1963-69 attended some form of higher education. The national average is 131 out of every 1000 people. Muslim and Druze students, at 108 per 1,000 are lagging behind, though not substantially so. Israel's universities are fully integrated institutions, with many Arabs as students and in teaching positions.

The educational success rate of minority communities in Israel is striking when compared with the situation in Britain. Whereas in Israel, the ratio of Muslim to Jewish Israelis passing the high school matriculation exams is 4:5, in Britain, only five to seven percent of students of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin go on to successfully complete A-levels.

These facts are not under dispute, and are readily available to any foreign correspondent in Israel. Similar figures could be quoted related to health care available to all Israeli citizens, and to resultant levels of longevity. The fact that Arab citizens of Israel enjoy full democratic rights and are participants in Israel's democracy is also no minor detail. Arab Israelis and their representatives are active players in the shaping of Israeli public life, and in legislation. Israel's first Arab Supreme Court judge was appointed this year. Israel's liberal Basic Laws, the values of freedom of expression and equality which are part of the national consensus, and the organisational and legal power of Arabs to act on behalf of their own communal interests are all vital aspects of Israeli life. In fact, the Economist Intelligence Unit ranked Israel at the very top of its Index of Political Freedom in the Middle East.

All this in a country governed, according to McGreal, in a manner 'eerily reminiscent of apartheid's philosophy.' Does such a claim when placed against the facts meet the criteria of objectivity?

‘Beyond the Green Line’

McGreal, in comparing the situation in the PA territories with apartheid, focuses on security measures introduced by Israel in the last five years - specifically, the security fence and access roads to Jewish communities in the West Bank. He refers to the fence as an 'intended future border that would carve up the territory.' The road system, meanwhile, is described as bearing 'clear similarities to the racist apartheid regime that existed in South Africa.'

Neither of these measures bears any relation to anything that existed under apartheid. Both of them, in Israel, came about in direct response to a murderous campaign of terror launched in 2000. McGreal conveniently overlooks the repeated Israeli attempts - including the recent disengagement from Gaza and 300 square miles of the northern West Bank - to achieve peace with the Palestinians in its determination to prevent and end a situation in which security fences and roads are needed. Hence, the analogies he has made are plainly false.

‘Brothers in arms’, ‘common aims’?

McGreal maintains the existence of a 'pact' between Israel and apartheid South Africa. This pact, according to McGreal, was based on a common aim, namely 'justifying the domination of other peoples.'

The main factual basis for the 'pact', claims McGreal, is the relationship between the countries' defence industries that existed for a decade from the mid 1970s to the mid 1980s. In 1986, at the height of apartheid, Israel's total trade with South Africa was worth $0.2 billion USD. This compares with the following volumes of trade with South Africa's other partners: United States - $3.4 billion, Japan - $2.9 billion, Germany- $2.8 billion, United Kingdom - $2.6 billion. The main suppliers of arms to the apartheid state were France, Britain, Canada, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Taiwan and the US.

So, again, why the ringing declaration of 'common aims' which, upon examination, is based on such flimsy and contradictory evidence? Why is Israel being singled out? What is going on?

‘Colonial disposession, states of fear’

In the final sections of McGreal's second article, the reason for the departures from professional and reasonable journalistic standards contained in these articles begins to become apparent. The clearest examples of distortion and plain error are also to be found here.

Thus, we are introduced to 'influential Likud MP' Uzi Cohen, who is quoted as supporting the expulsion of Palestinians from the PA areas.

There is no Likud member of Knesset, influential or otherwise, called Uzi Cohen. There is an Uzi Cohen who is the deputy mayor of a small municipality north of Tel Aviv called Ra'anana. It is probable that McGreal found it hard to find a Likud MK endorsing policy ideas such as the expulsion of Palestinians. Unilaterally turning party activists into 'influential MPs' is not an appropriate journalistic practice.

Israel as an example of Nazism

In his concluding section, McGreal asserts that if Israelis continue to attempt to maintain their apartheid-like system, this may eventually produce "parallels even more shocking than that with apartheid." This, clearly, is a reference to the Nazis and the Holocaust.

McGreal then goes on to illustrate the claim that Israel may be metamorphosing into a Nazi-like creature by quoting from an interview he conducted with the Haifa University geographer, Professor Arnon Soffer. In the interview, Soffer, an early advocate of unilateral disengagement, tries to explain the logic behind this policy. He does so by bluntly making clear that he does not believe that the policy will lead to peace, but that it will rather lead to the emergence of two entities - one Israeli, one Palestinian - in continued conflict with one another. That these are indeed Professor Soffer's views is easily verifiable. McGreal casts him in the role of the harbinger of Israeli Nazism by quoting a passage which starkly depicts a vision of continued conflict: "The pressure at the border will be awful. It's going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill." It's not a pleasant vision. But it is a vision of continued conflict between Israel and a Palestinian state. This view, McGreal considers, suggests 'parallels even more shocking than apartheid.'

Conclusion

The question that arises when presented with McGreal's methods is 'why?' Why the tortuously stretched analogy with apartheid? Why the misrepresenting of Israeli education policy? Why the ignoring of attempts to rectify inequalities? Why the singling out of Israel from all the countries that did business for a period with apartheid South Africa? Why the showcasing of the views of marginal figures? Why the likening of Israel to apartheid South Africa, when countries that really do formalise bigotry and discrimination – such as Saudi Arabia and the Sudan – are largely ignored by the media? Why is it, that when Iran has emerged as a global threat – steadily increasing its aggressive tones and working toward a nuclear capability, and an organisation committed to terrorism and the destruction of Israel has been elected as the new PA government, that the Guardian has chosen this moment to write an inflammatory piece condemning Israel? There is a basic matter of journalistic integrity and competence here. If we cannot trust foreign correspondents to reflect an un-biased, non-ideological view of events, then something has gone badly wrong.

The comparison between Israel and South Africa under apartheid is completely unfounded. Israel’s commitment to democracy, to the equality of all its citizens in all areas of life – including in politics, education and life opportunities, and the freedom of speech and freedom of the press which exist in Israel just a few of the fundamental differences that demonstrate how utterly ridiculous it is to compare Israel to apartheid South Africa. It is hoped that readers of McGreal’s piece will see through the thinly-veiled attempt to discredit Israel to a degree that sheds doubt on its legitimacy and right to exist, and instead realise the remarkable achievements of a country that is still young in years.