Brussels: Journalist Attempts citizen's Arrest of Avigdor Lieberman

Israeli comparisons to apartheid South Africa must begin with Israel’s self definition as a Jewish state and what that means in practice for its non-Jewish citizens.

Cronin's attempted arrest of Lieberman.

(BRUSSELS) - The Irish journalist and author David Cronin attempted a citizen’s arrest of Israeli Foreign minister Avidgor Lieberman in Brussels this afternoon.

Journalist David Cronin

Cronin is a prolific journalist who has recently published a book exploring Europe’s role in the Israeli Occupation of the West Bank called Europe’s Alliance with Israel: Aiding the Occupation.

The apartheid debate has been in Israeli mainstream press this week.

Writing in the Jerusalem Post, Zionism scholar and dual Israeli-South African citizen Gideon Shimoni addressed the apartheid ‘analogy’ regarding Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

The article denounces the labeling of Israel as an apartheid state in all but one area of comparison:

The most notable measure of this “reformed apartheid” praxis was the ruthless enforcement of the homelands (“Bantustans”) policy.  Only in their own homelands were voting rights to be granted to the blacks, including those domiciled in white areas. This ensured continued white supremacy. Another measure was the 1983 tri-parliamentary constitutional reform aimed at co-opting those racially classified as Coloured and Asian (Indian).  They were to have their own separate legislative assemblies, calculatedly subordinate to the purely white parliament. Eventually, when the bleak realization dawned that, apart from moral considerations, even this modified strategy was not viable, the path of negotiation was adopted, culminating in the dismantling of the entire edifice of white supremacy.

Here in alone lies the relevance of comparison with Israel, for it must be acknowledged that there is a large political and civic sector of Israel which, for reasons of fundamentalist religious faith or zero-sum survivalist strategy, is obdurately intent on perpetuating and buttressing this occupation regime as a permanent de facto annexation. This sector is assertively represented by several ultra-nationalist and national-orthodox religious parties in the present government. Theirs is manifestly a policy and vision that replicates the theory and praxis of the reformed phase of South Africa’s apartheid policy, which was adopted as a survivalist strategy but ultimately abandoned out of enlightened realism, if not moral compunction. Characteristically, they too cast about for spurious arrangements calculated to ensure Jewish control and privilege – for example non-sovereign cantonized autonomy, devoid of Israeli political rights, or relegation of citizenship and electoral rights to the adjacent Kingdom of Jordan.

It is in this respect alone that use of the South African analogy to critique Israel is justified, and importantly so. Never as grist to the mill of those who labor to delegitimize and demonize Israel by falsely labeling it an apartheid state and subjecting it to sanctions and boycotts, but certainly as a warning cry lest perpetuation of the occupation regime cause Israel to replicate South African reform-phase apartheid; a strategy which proved to be not only morally reprehensible but also realistically untenable.

In order to gauge apartheid in Israel, one does not need to look at the Occupation but rather the experience of Palestinian citizens of Israel. From 1948 until 1967, these citizens were kept under military law and subject to harassment not unlike the treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank. Since 1967, they have been subject to discrimination that is so much more severe than the situation of blacks in the Jim Crow South that the comparison is almost cruel.

When former Knesset member Azima Bishara and others began rallying around the notion that Israel should be a ‘state for all of its citizens”, Israeli commentators and officials from all sides of the political spectrum labeled the idea as an attack on Israel as a Jewish state. Matti Golan, a former editor of the liberal Haaretz newspaper went as far as saying that “the declared dream of Israel’s Arabs is a Palestinian state -a ‘state of all its citizens’ with the majority, of course, being Palestinian. Which would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state.”

Israeli comparisons to apartheid South Africa must begin with Israel’s self definition as a Jewish state and what that means in practice for its non-Jewish citizens. Indeed, as long as Israel demands to be a Jewish state with Zionism as its driving principle then an apartheid like situation for the non-Jewish minority is unavoidable. “Jewish and Democratic” in practice has meant separate and unequal for Israel’s non-Jewish minority. In order to understand apartheid, one does not need to start with the treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank. Instead one should simply look at the experience of Palestinian citizens of Israel which Shimoni does not.

Also, visit: Irish reporter tries to place Tony Blair under citizen's arrest for 'war crimes'

Originally published by: +972 Independent reporting and commentary from Israel & the Palestinian territories