Photo by Brooklyn Middleton
By: Brooklyn Middleton/Columnist
Israel, unlike south Africa, never intentionally meant to create an apartheid reality; yet, Leila Farsakh, middle eastern scholar at University of Massachusetts Boston, asserts that that is precisely what has happened.
At an event coordinated by Students for Justice in Palestine on April 4, Farsakh gave a lecture titled, “Is Israel an Apartheid State? Implications for the Two State Solution.”
Using an explanation of apartheid- a system of laws and policy initiatives implemented by the National Party beginning in 1948 in South Africa-Farsakh argued that the system that institutionalized total segregation based on race is analogous to the Israel-Palestine conflict.
Like modern day Palestine, apartheid policies in South Africa resulted in a deeply fragmented region racially, politically and economically. Farsakh clarified that despite the fact that South Africa’s apartheid policies were indeed conscious and intentional, Israel’s were not. And yet, she stated, Israel is indeed an apartheid reality created “de facto.”
Walking into the conference room, several students handed out literature that was antithetical to the lecture, “Apartheid?” the flyer asked. “You decide.” Students rejecting the lecture’s central points were in minority; when they walked out after expressing that they fundamentally disagreed with the lecturer, there were only four or so empty chairs. The lengthy list of signatures on a circulating Amnesty International pro Palestine petition was evidence that the majority of attendees supported Palestine.
Farsakh immediately addressed the notion that it was offensive to compare Israel’s current reality with that of apartheid South Africa. She argued that it is useful to compare the Israel-Palestine conflict to apartheid South African because it provides an analogous framework for both beginning to understand the conflict and also for imagining solutions. Rejecting that it was offensive to South African History, Farsakh stated, “Desmond Tutu came to the West Bank and said it was worse than apartheid South Africa.”
Describing the created apartheid reality based upon three pillars- economic, political and geographic, Farsakh described present day Palestine as being deeply fragmented, divided and nearly impossible to navigate for Palestinians. Saying it is easier for Palestinians to travel to the United States then it is for them to travel a distance of around 15 miles to Jerusalem, she referred to the “bantustanization” of Palestinian Territory. Bantustans were specific territories set aside solely for Black Africans as a central component of apartheid policy and Farsakh drew parallels of this to Palestine’s current fragmentation. Because of a pass system requiring all Palestinians to constantly show identification and checkpoints scattered all throughout the West Bank and Gaza that are mandatory for Palestinians to go through, an often lengthy process, Farsakh argued Palestine has ultimately been bantustanized.
Injustice, she ultimately argued, is as unsustainable as the current everyday Palestinian’s predicament.
“Reality of apartheid is something that Palestinians live daily but that Israelis are sheltered from,” said Farsakh. With her hands up in the air, she asked the crowd, “does force give you justice? Is it sustainable?”
Farsakh’s closing remarks centered on the possibility of restoring civility between Israel and Palestine. The focus, she argued, must be resistance to the Israeli occupation but also to “the humanity of your enemy.”
About Post Author
