Wouldn’t your point two have to declare support for a two state solution? Saying Israel has a right to secure and recognized borders, and being silent on the rights of others in the region, does not sound balanced. I have a hard time seeing how any specifically nationalistic stance aligns with our principles. People have universal rights; states do not.
2 Likes
Our coalition does not list a position on the ultimate political solution. The Palestinian Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority official platform is for two states. Some believe in forming a confederation. Some might be surprised to know that Hamas is calling for a two state solution and stating that if this happens they will cease having a military wing. All the other Palestinian political parties support a two state solution. Many Palestinians and some Israeli Jews support transitioning to one democratic state. Some support a confederation. And the ultimate solution needs to be based on self-determination and developed by people in Palestine and Israel.
Right now, Palestinian lives are immediately at stake, and the first step, taking the lead from impacted Palestinians and Israeli Jews in the solidarity movement, is to support a ceasefire, release the captives, bring massive aid, and let Palestinians return to their homes/remains of homes for a process of rebuilding. And we must realize the lives of Israeli Jews are also endangered by the ongoing conflict and the possibility of regional war. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza are starving.
10 Likes
Though I agree with the bulk of this proposed AIS, I am disheartened by the lack of pluralism. I believe we UUs can and should hold both traumatized populations in our hearts.
1 Like
I appreciate your concerns. Yes, both peoples have experienced much trauma. I support the AIW because it states its opposition to antisemitism and its support for Jewish and Palestinian kin to thrive. The fact is, the Israeli state is carrying out extermination according to a recent UN report, and that seems urgent to try and stop however we can. Allowing this cycle of violence to continue is clearly not delivering safety to anyone in Palestine and Israel!
7 Likes
Thank you, I agree, stopping the genocide is urgent. I WANT to support this AIW. Just a few inclusive language changes would make a big difference for me.
4 Likes
There is not a way to change the language at this point. At first the AIW followed guidelines to keep it to 750 words max. This made it a challenge to put in every sentiment and fact. Later it was explained that it can be longer. By then time was tight for the final deadline. There is a References link at the end of the AIW above and FAQ and Resource page at https://uupalestineaction.org
That’s what I thought, thanking you for clarifying.
2 Likes
This conflict has gone on for thousands of years, and feeds on religious division, and claims that reach back to the casting of the first stone. It is unrealistic to place blame on either side alone, as the horrors of war are universal. I will support this AIW because, although it doesn’t, won’t, and can’t address all the evils even of the current activities in and around Gaza, it does speak to the only hope for a future in this radicalized state of affairs. Peace can only begin in the heart.
4 Likes
UUs for a Just Economic Community has endorsed this proposed AIW. Here are our endorsements.
Because there’s a difference between Palestinians and Hamas, we would ask that replacing Palestinians with Hamas (where accurate) be done. Hamas is merely a small group of Palestinians within the community.
5 Likes
Wow, is that an AI automatic overreaction; as I read your comment, it is the elimination of a political party, not the people who make it up. Regarding the first sentence, you could have been clearer about the fact that it is their interpretation of Islam, rather than Islam as a whole, but a human reading would likely understand that.
Right. When Israel uses the term “eliminate” they don’t mean “kill them all”. They mean eliminate their power. One would hope they would surrender before the last man falls. I don’t think AI did this. It was flagged by actual humans. And right, I thought it was clear I was talking only about one extreme brand of Islam. The extremism is however, pervasive in Gaza. (ref. Malcolm Nance)
2 Likes
Well, I am not so sure about Israel; I gave you more credit as a fellow UU. Although this is more in line with your perspective: https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2023-10-27/israeli-poll-finds-49-support-for-holding-off-on-gaza-invasion, from late October.
More recently, I have seen reports like this one: ‘Exterminate the beasts’: How Israeli settlers took revenge for a murder in the West Bank Yes, the trigger was the murder of a teen—but the disproportionate revenge mentality, including this comment in a What’sApp group of Israeli settlers, quoted in that article, “ ‘Make them afraid, those beasts. Exterminate them,’ " shows an attitude not often acknowledged in mainstream U.S. media.
1 Like
I agree that it is not for us in the United States to determine what the future should look like in Israel/Palestine. We might [think we] know what we would support if we lived there, but we do not (well, except for those with dual citizenship who travel back and forth [as Israeli Jews can do much easier than Palestinians or even U.S. members of groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace]). We can say that the war crimes and violence must stop. We can stop sending military equipment and funds to both sides, and do what we can to ensure that humanitarian aid is available to all who need it (almost exclusively Palestinians; my understanding is that Israeli hospitals, etc., are operating well, whereas the medical facilities in Gaza are virtually nonexistent.)
2 Likes
At the few protests that I have attended, and at those about which I have heard, all the extremism has come from the Zionist side, not the proPalestine side. Yes, chanting, loud car caravans, but no physical interaction or response to provocation such as thrown items from the Zionist counter-protestors. I am willing to hear reports of other first-hand experiences that may vary.
2 Likes
Decades of misinformation and outright propaganda has people thinking a lot of myths about Palestine and Israel are true.
It is not an ancient conflict. It dates to about 1917.
And it isn’t a religious one.
Reference Dr Rashid Khalidi’s The Hundred Years War on Palestine. He is speaking on Friday - see the Whova Agenda.
Read about that and other myths here:
9 Likes
I am grateful for the opportunity to support this AIW. I have been organizing with other faith groups in solidarity with Palestinian people, including the group Christians for a Free Palestine (https://christiansforafreepalestine.com/). One of the folks I met doing this work locally grew up a Jewish UU, but stopped attending because of our perceived silence on this issue. Remaining on the fence during a genocide has an impact. Choosing to stay in our heads and hold our tongues while people watch their children die of famine is a stance. All of us in the US are currently complicit in the harm, as our government has provided the weapons that the Israeli government has used to cause harm, and our weight in the United Nations has stopped aid from getting to those in Gaza who will die without it. This is why we must be vocal in our solidarity. This video from the Othering and Belonging Institute called me to move into my body and honor how we can show up to accompany those who grieve in solidarity-- to me, this AIW is part of this accompaniment https://www.youtube.com/live/sLIeoUmFE5I?si=jVGKT6Qp0yKnWJA7
11 Likes
The AIW already calls for the right to self-determination of Palestinians, which would include a right to statehood.
However, I would certainly support amending the AIW to add a statement that specifically called for a peaceful solutions that recognized the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians to each have their own state in this historical land, with secure and recognized borders.
1 Like
There has been widespread coverage in mainstream media sources that in many cases, student protests have selectively violated the rights of students they see as “Zionists” from accessing parts of campus.
For example, see the following article at LA Times about UCLA protests:
Beyond that, it is not clear to me that it is right to classify a protest as “peaceful” in the full sense of that word if it forcibly presents members of a community from accessing public spaces. A group occupying a building, or occupying a space in a manner that prevents or severely limits access to public spaces and buildings, is clearly using “force” to prevent others from using public spaces. This is not exactly “free speech”, particularly when the institution provides options for groups to exercise their free speech rights in a way that does not damage the rights of others.
Free speech law in the United States has consistently said: Yes, you have a right to free speech. However, the government and public organizations can regulate the time and place of such free speech rights to prevent the free speech activity from denying rights to others. You don’t have the right to deny others access to a public building, or, for example, to demonstrate with bullhorns or loudspeakers every night from midnight to 7 am outside a dorm. Private organizations of course do not have to allow for free speech on their property, but even if they decide that as a university they will act as if they are a public organization they can then quite consistently regulate the time and space of such free speech.
1 Like
It does not help the Palestinians if this Action of Immediate Witness tears the denomination apart.
It saps our strength if we do not come to a consensus that we can live with. We will be less for it, even if this AIW is passed, if the result is that there will be enough hurt feelings that drive us apart.
To be clear:
I am in solidarity with the Palestinians.
But:
I will vote this AIW down.
This is not a contradiction. This does not mean a lack of support for the Palestinians. I do want us as Unitarian Universalists to come together and support the Palestinians in witness to all of the suffering and death that is going on right now.
A no vote does not mean that I do not support or have solidarity with the Palestinians.
A no vote does not mean I do not know or care about all of the death and destruction.
I agree wholeheartedly with the ends: solidarity with the Palestinians. What the Israelis are doing is morally wrong and is killing innocent people. It is affecting the lives of members of our denomination who have friends and family who have suffered and died.
But the means to this end are fatally flawed and should be voted down.
Most fellowships in our denomination say something similar to this affirmation in our Sunday service:
Love is the spirit of this church
And service is its law.
This is our great covenant:
To dwell together in peace,
To seek the truth in love,
And to help one another.
Speaking for myself personally, this AIW doesn’t have inclusive love. And it does not reflect the truth as I see it.
A radical love is inclusive. The dichotomy of oppressor versus oppressed does not yield a radical love. To be radical is to go to the roots. Phrasing this AIW in the moral stance of oppressor versus oppressed cuts out the diseased parts without looking at the root cause of the disease.
A witness in a court of law swears to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. This AIW does not tell the whole truth. I understand and accept that: “We further acknowledge that we cannot possibly contextualize all that led to this point”. But I note that both sides have legitimate grievances. And that both sides have committed evil. I also note that Hamas is not the Palestinian people, just like the Settler Movement is not all of the Israeli people.
But to state that “Israel’s occupation and repression in Gaza has been decades long” without in the same breath mentioning that the attempt of the enemies of Israel to destroy the Jews has also been decades long is not the whole truth.
You say that Palestinians are dying right now and something must be done. I agree.
But we do not help the Palestinians by thinking in the moment and passing this. It does not help. It will not help.
Solzhenitsyn is right: in fighting the evils of the present, we will perpetuate evil if our means are not good enough.
I know that perfection is the enemy of the good. I am not requiring perfection. But this is just not good enough.
By choosing a flawed means to reach our end, we are making the same mistake as the Israelis, but on a moral level. Their actions in Gaza are mass murder and a crime against humanity. Their short-term actions make the problem worse. The suffering and killing of Palestinians makes sworn enemies amongst the Palestinians and makes enemies for the Israeli people throughout the world.
Passing this AIW does not serve to help address this atrocity. It gives the illusion that we are making a difference. But this is a Pyrrhic victory if it tears the denomination apart. Then, in the future, not only can we not help the Palestinians, we can’t help anyone.
Despite your best intentions this would be a bad result of passing this AIW.
To truly help the Palestinians, we need to work and think for the long term and the bigger picture.
In the short term, we should vote this AIW down as written and vote for a better worded AIW.
In the long term, we should resolve to do better.
It is unfortunate that, as you say, this AIW cannot be changed at this point. So I suggest that we withdraw it and resubmit something that works. This means that the sentiments and facts be balanced so as to reflect the whole truth, not just one side.
Personally, when I read the FAQs, it only made things worse. They are even more imbalanced than the AIW, as I have expressed in an earlier post.
It has been asked: how we can take collective action at this GA given the urgency of the situation without this AIW?
I recommend the following:
Vote this AIW down or withdraw it.
Submit an inclusive and fair AIW in its place.
If there is a word limit, contract the wording of the AIW as regards to the transgressions of the Israelis. Add something to the effect that Hamas has done terrible things not only to the people of Israel but also to the people of Gaza. In the history section, make clear the motivations on each side and the effect on each side. The Vox article on the 11 biggest myths is a good start.
And after this General Assembly is all said and done:
Resolve to do better.
We need some serious soul searching on why this happened. I suspect that, even though there are hundreds of people and dozens of groups, they formed an echo chamber of like-minded people. They just did not realize the level of objections that this AIW would have. They did not realize that this AIW would be so divisive. I feel that they did not listen to people with objections because those people were not included.
One worry I have is this. It can be tempting to present this AIW in such a way as to stonewall and overpower any objections. To push things to a precipice where it is either this AIW or nothing - take it or leave it.
We all sometimes have that tendency: to be so sure of our righteousness that we erroneously believe everyone will agree with our analysis of the problem or our solution. But this is a form of arrogance. Instead, we require the humility to admit we made a mistake and did not take into account other points of view.
The requirements for an AIW state:
3. Present an opportunity for member congregations to build partnerships and/or act in solidarity with marginalized groups beyond and within the Association.
5. Be crafted in anti-oppressive and inclusive language that is conducive to justice.
The requirements should also state:
3A. Present an opportunity for member congregations to consider and reflect on the AIW and its implications so that we learn from one another in our free and responsible search for truth and meaning
5A. Be crafted in loving and inclusive language that is conducive to justice in such a way that it embraces our differences and commonalities with Love, curiosity, and respect.
If we do better next time, we will grow spiritually and ethically as long as we do it in a spirit of generosity to all involved.
But for me personally I will vote against this AIW. Even though it is well-intended, as a matter of personal conscience, I do not believe it will help the Palestinians. I also believe it will hurt the denomination.
1 Like
Our UU tradition can hold this discussion, and people can vote their conscience without fear of the dissolution of our UU Association or congregations. I consider the work of the authors of this Action of Immediate Witness to be part of the work that frees us all.
12 Likes