Israeli Apartheid Week returns to Ottawa campuses
Ontario MPPs and Israeli community condemn annual event
GROUPS AT THE University of Ottawa and Carleton University are pressing forward with a controversial decision to host the Sixth Annual Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW), following Ontario MPPs’ unanimous condemnation of the initiative on Feb. 25. IAW, which begins on March 1, will feature guest lecturers and film screenings depicting Israel as an apartheid state.
“Our goal is to raise awareness of Israel’s violations of international law. We seem to get a very one-sided perspective on the issue, so we are challenging that,” said Sean Barron, spokesperson for Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights uOttawa (SPHR).
Israeli Apartheid Week will be held in 48 cities worldwide, including Toronto, Montreal, Edmonton, and Hamilton. This year’s events are focusing on the global Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions campaign, launched in 2005 in an effort to apply international pressure to Israel. SPHR spokesperson Sabrien Amrov noted that the campaign is particularly relevant for students because they may be paying their tuition to universities that support Israeli actions.
“The universities teach us to be good citizens but end up investing in companies that are, directly or indirectly, supporting the [Israeli] occupation,” she said.
Amrov accused Carleton University of investing in companies that provide funds for the construction of Israel’s wall in the West Bank. She suspects that the U of O may also be indirectly financing the occupation efforts.
The groups’ decisions to host Israeli Apartheid Week drew criticism from the Ontario government and Israeli student groups. Conservative MPP Peter Shurman’s motion to condemn the initiative received unanimous support in the Ontario legislature while the Israeli community criticized the IAW for creating a confrontational atmosphere.
“IAW serves to further polarize campuses and undermine the nature of institutions of higher learning, namely the importance of academic and creative dialogue between groups of differing opinions,” explained Laura Grosman, president of Ottawa’s Israel Awareness Committee.
As in past years, some of the posters advertising the week’s events have been torn down. In 2009, the U of O and Carleton were the only universities in the world to ban the posters on their campuses, arguing that they incited violence. The posters, which were used worldwide, showed an Israeli helicopter firing at a small boy with the words “Gaza” written behind him.
SPHR insists that IAW is not meant to target any Israeli people, but rather current Israeli politics.
“We’re not targeting people. It’s all a critique of state actions,” said Amrov. “We shouldn’t feel censored to critique other states. We should not be afraid to express our opinions.”
One of the main arguments made against the IAW is the characterization of Israel’s relationship with Palestine as apartheid. The word is commonly associated with the segregation of black people in South Africa and signifies the domination of one racial group by another. In an interview with the Toronto Star, Shurman likened the use of the word to hate speech.
“Israeli Apartheid Week is not dialogue; it’s a monologue, and it is an imposition of a view by the name itself—the name is hateful, it is odious,” he said.
Grosman expressed concern that the use of a loaded term may undermine dialogue between the different political groups.
“The use of certain verbiage shuts down dialogue as it expresses a lack of openness to new ideas,” she said.
Barren defended the use of the term.
“The word accurately describes what is going on,” he said. “It describes one racial group repressing another. Israel falls into this definition.”
This is the third time that IAW will be held in Ottawa. Attendance for IAW events in the past two years averaged 200 people each day. Event organizers credit past years with raising student awareness of the Middle East conflict but admit that more work needs to be done.
“The vast majority of people have heard of the conflict but don’t want to be involved because it is so emotionally charged,” said Barron. “There’s still a lot of ignorance and lack of wanting to get involved.”
Amrov encouraged all students to participate in the events, regardless of their background.
“I hope those who feel targeted actually give it a chance,” she said. “The content lets everyone get more involved.”
Just to contrast what Phil is saying. He attempts to minimize one problem (Israel apartheid) by talking about other problems in other countries. It is a common argument. The fact is this week is about Israel. IAW targets state policies and in no way targets individuals. If talking about one issues without talking about them all isn't valid, then we should stop talking.
In international law, Israel is an Apartheid state. According to UN definition of the crime of apartheid, Israel is an Apartheid state. There are several conditions that can qualify for apartheid. Israel more than meets these conditions.
Israeli apartheid week (IAW) is about raising awareness and explaining the situation of apartheid that is present in Israel/palestine.
I think it is incorrect to say that Israel is being singled out by students. At Ottawa U campus alone there are tons of groups working on tons of different issues. would we say that Students Taking Action Now - Darfur (STAND)is wrong in criticizing that genocide because they are singling out Darfur? is it wrong when First Nations group pressure the Canadian government because they are singling out Canada? was it wrong when students protested the Beijing Olympics because of human rights violations because they were singling out China? No! of course not. that would be ridiculous. if a country is committing atrocious acts against a population it is always right (and important) to criticize them and to pressure them to stop.
It is important too to note that, contrary to what Phil was saying, IAW does not target or demonize Jews. to say that murdering thousands of civilians is a jewish value is wrong. to say that racial discrimination is a jewish value is wrong. to say that military occupation is a jewish value is wrong. rather IAW is about the actions committed by the Israeli government, not jews. what we are criticizing in Israel we would be criticizing in other countries, just as we have in the past.
I hope everyone will actually take the time to go to some of the IAW events and see what the week is actually about. tonight (thursday) is a panel about the anti-apartheid struggle in an anti-racist context, and tomorrow's keynote speaker is Jamal Zahalka, a member of the Israeli Knesset.
Phil,
Will you admit publicly that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have stated these actions by Israel are war crimes and possible crimes against Humanity? Which in comparison to those of the palestinians are actually quite small?
Horrendous. Arab Israelis have all the rights of Jews, with only a few exceptions (ie serving in the military, for obvious reasons.) This is no more a case of Apartheid than Canada's treatment of natives. I pray that our military would use Israel DEFENCE Force restraint and precision should Ottawa U be subject to 10,000 missiles from Gatineau. The cleptocracy of Palestine will continue to use its population as shields and provoke Israel as long as their is profit in it for them. Build the wall higher!
I'm not Jewish, nor do I have any background from Israel. IAW makes me feel glad that I'm not either, for if I were, I think I would be so sick with the demonetization that IAW espouses towards Jews and Israelis that I would want to skip this week of school.
Were this a debate about "global human rights" or "global anti-racism," I would support it fully. But is that the organizers of IAW turn a blind eye to political and human atrocities committed in Sudan, Belarus, China, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, etc? Why is Israel painted as the epicenter of evil?
Mr. Amrov says he is in favour of IAW because it "accurately describes what's going on."
Well Mr. Amrov, I have two questions for you and your compatriot Mr. Barron:
Will you admit publicly that as of January 2009 Palestine has launched 8500 rocket attacks into Israel, which, according to Amnesty International "It is purely by chance that in most cases such strikes have not caused death or injury, and the lethal potential of such projectiles should not be underestimated. Above all, the constant threat of impending rocket attacks has caused fear and disrupted the lives of the growing number of Israelis who live within range of such attacks, reaching up to a million" ?
Will you admit publicly that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have stated these actions by Palestinians are war crimes?