{"id":22518,"date":"2013-12-09T11:12:27","date_gmt":"2013-12-09T19:12:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=22518"},"modified":"2013-12-09T11:12:27","modified_gmt":"2013-12-09T19:12:27","slug":"discussing-israeli-apartheid","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2013\/12\/09\/discussing-israeli-apartheid\/","title":{"rendered":"Discussing Israeli ‘Apartheid’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last week I drew a comparison<\/a>\u00a0between the South African apartheid system that is now the focus of Nelson Mandela’s legacy and current Israeli policies toward Palestinians. Obviously, that strikes many in the U.S. as offensive and inaccurate. But, as Israeli activist and military veteran\u00a0Mikhael Manekin said in January 2012, the “apartheid” criticism is an accepted part of the debate lexicon in Israel.<\/p>\n

Today, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz\u00a0<\/em>demonstrated how true that is with a discussion of it led by correspondent Amira Hass:<\/p>\n

What do those who say \u201cIsraeli Apartheid\u201d mean?<\/em><\/p>\n

They definitely don\u2019t mean the official and popular biological racism that ruled South Africa. True, there is no lack of racist and arrogant attitudes here, with their attendant religious-biological undertones, but if one visits our hospitals one can find Arabs and Jews among doctors and patients. In that regard, our hospitals are the healthiest sector of society.<\/p>\n

Those who say \u201cIsraeli Apartheid\u201d refer to the philosophy of \u201cseparate development\u201d that was prevalent in the old South Africa. This was the euphemism used for the principle of inequality, the deliberate segregation of populations, a prohibition on \u201cmixing\u201d and the displacement of non-whites from lands and resources for their exploitation by the masters of the land. Even though here things are shrouded by \u201csecurity concerns,\u201d with references to Auschwitz and heaven-decreed real estate, our reality is governed by the same philosophy, backed by laws and force of arms.<\/p>\n

What, for instance?<\/em><\/p>\n

There are two legal systems in place on the West Bank, a civilian one for Jews and a military one for Palestinians. There are two separate infrastructures there as well, including roads, electricity and water. The superior and expanding one is for Jews while the inferior and shrinking one is for the Palestinians. There are local pockets, similar to the Bantustans in South Africa, in which the Palestinians have limited self-rule. There is a system of travel restrictions and permits in place since 1991, just when such a system was abolished in South Africa.<\/p>\n

Does that mean that apartheid exists only on the West Bank?<\/em><\/p>\n

Not at all, it exists across the entire country, from the sea to the Jordan River. It prevails in this one territory in which two peoples live, ruled by one government which is elected by one people, but which determines the future and fate of both. Palestinian towns and villages suffocate because of deliberately restrictive planning in Israel, just as they do in the West Bank.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Read the rest here<\/a>. See some of my discussion of this subject here<\/a>, here<\/a>, and here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Last week I drew a comparison\u00a0between the South African apartheid system that is now the focus of Nelson Mandela’s legacy and current Israeli policies toward Palestinians. Obviously, that strikes many in the U.S. as offensive and inaccurate. But, as Israeli activist and military veteran\u00a0Mikhael Manekin said in January 2012, the “apartheid” criticism is an accepted […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":86,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-22518","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22518","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/86"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22518"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22518\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22519,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22518\/revisions\/22519"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22518"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22518"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22518"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=22518"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}