Why it’s the Shministim not
‘Zionists without qualification’ (Starmer) who Labour should be supporting
Last week 60 Israeli
high school students issued a letter declaring that they would not serve in the
Israeli army which they declared was not there to defend Israel but to ‘exercise
control over a civilian population’.
Unlike previous
declarations they did not confine their objections to serving in the West Bank
but declared that the Palestinians had ‘lived under violent occupation for 72
years’. This is a major political advance over all previous declarations
because it recognises that the occupation of Palestine did not begin in 1967 as
‘liberal’ Zionists declare but in 1948 with the Nakba and the ethnic cleansing
of Palestine.
It takes apart the loyal Zionist opposition in Israel, represented by
Meretz (and formerly Mapam) that in order to criticise the occupation you have
to loyally serve in the army. They ask ‘How does it make sense that in order to
protest against systemic violence and racism, we have to first be part of the
very system of oppression we are criticizing?’
The army is the institution in Israel which has the highest rate of
approval. These youngers relate how they ‘grew up in the shadow of the symbolic
ideal of the heroic soldier’ and describe the military not merely as serving
the occupation but being the occupation. In sharp
break with the normative adulation of the military they describe it as ‘a violent, corrupt, and corrupting
institution to the core’.
Quite remarkably
they describe how they are ordered to put on the
‘blood stained military uniform and preserve the
legacy of the Nakba and of occupation. Israeli society has been built upon
these rotten roots, and it is apparent in all facets of life: in the racism,
the hateful political discourse, the police brutality, and more.’
This is a
narrative which breaks from the narrative of the ‘war against terrorism’ and
describes how the siege of Gaza has resulted in ‘no drinkable water nor
electricity in Gaza for most hours of the day’.
The military is
presented as a ‘melting pot’ in Israel, the place where divisions of race and
class are erased. The Shministim argue
that on the contrary the military reinforces these divisions as ‘soldiers from
upper-middle class are channelled into positions with economic and civilian
prospects, while soldiers from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are channelled
into positions which have high mental and physical risk’.
The Israeli army
is presented as a bastion of (Israeli Jewish) womens equality and freedom. How,
they ask ‘does it make sense that the struggle against gender inequality is
achieved through the oppression of Palestinian women?’ It is a question that Zionist
feminists in the West would do well to
ponder as they try to subvert the
struggle of women’s liberation into justifying imperialism and racism.
The letter ends
with a call for the right of return of the Palestinian refugees thus
challenging the Jewish nature of the Israeli state. This is indeed a remarkable letter and it is
one that all socialists and supporters of freedom should support.
By way of contrast
we should note how the miserable automaton who leads the Labour Party, Keir
Starmer, by describing himself as a ‘Zionist without qualification’ has placed
himself on the side of the racists and the ethnic cleansers, the military
rather than their opponents.
These young
people are incredibly brave as it isolates them within Israel’s settler
colonial society. They include Hallel Rabin who served 56 days in prison, Brand-Feigenbaum
who will have serve 27 days in prison and Roman Levin who has spent over 70
days in military prison.
Below are a number
of articles including a letter from the parents of Yair Tal, who is also refusing to serve in the Israeli
army.
Tony Greenstein
The Full Letter
We are a group
of Israeli 18-year-olds at a crossroads. The Israeli state is demanding our
conscription into the military. Allegedly, a defense force which is supposed to
safeguard the existence of the State of Israel. In reality, the goal of the
Israeli military is not to defend itself from hostile militaries, but to
exercise control over a civilian population. In other words, our conscription
to the Israeli military has political context and implications. It has
implications, first and foremost on the lives of the Palestinian people who
have lived under violent occupation for 72 years. Indeed, the Zionist policy of
brutal violence towards and expulsion of Palestinians from their homes and
lands began in 1948 and has not stopped since. The occupation is also poisoning
Israeli society–it is violent, militaristic, oppressive, and chauvinistic. It
is our duty to oppose this destructive reality by uniting our struggles and
refusing to serve these violent systems–chief among them the military. Our
refusal to enlist to the military is not an act of turning our backs on Israeli
society. On the contrary, our refusal is an act of taking responsibility over
our actions and their repercussions.
The military
is not only serving the occupation, the military is the occupation. Pilots,
intelligence units, bureaucratic clerks, combat soldiers, all are executing the
occupation. One does it with a keyboard and the other with a machine gun at a
checkpoint. Despite all of this, we grew up in the shadow of the symbolic ideal
of the heroic soldier. We prepared food baskets for him in the high holidays,
we visited the tank he fought in, we pretended we were him in the pre-military
programs in high school, and we revered his death on memorial day. The fact
that we are all accustomed to this reality does not make it apolitical. Enlistment,
no less than refusal, is a political act.
We are used to
hearing that it is legitimate to criticize the occupation only if we took an
active part in enforcing it. How does it make sense that in order to protest
against systemic violence and racism, we have to first be part of the very
system of oppression we are criticizing?
The track upon
which we embark at infancy, of an education teaching violence and claims over
land, reaches its peak at age 18, with the enlistment in the military. We are
ordered to put on the bloodstained military uniform and preserve the legacy of
the Nakba and of occupation. Israeli society has been built upon these rotten
roots, and it is apparent in all facets of life: in the racism, the hateful
political discourse, the police brutality, and more.
This military
oppression goes hand in hand with economic oppression. While the citizens of
the Occupied Palestinian Territories are impoverished, wealthy elites become
richer at their expense. Palestinian workers are systematically exploited, and
the weapons industry uses the Occupied Palestinian Territories as a testing
ground and as a showcase to bolster its sales. When the government chooses to
uphold the occupation, it is acting against our interest as citizens– large
portions of taxpayer money is funding the “security” industry and the
development of settlements instead of welfare, education, and health.
The military
is a violent, corrupt, and corrupting institution to the core. But its worst
crime is enforcing the destructive policy of the occupation of Palestine. Young
people our age are required to take part in enforcing closures as a means of
“collective punishment,” arresting and jailing minors, blackmailing to recruit
“collaborators” and more– all of these are war crimes which are executed and
covered up every day. Violent military rule in the Occupied Palestinian
Territories is enforced through policies of apartheid entailing two different
legal systems: one for Palestinians and the other for Jews. The Palestinians
are constantly faced with undemocratic and violent measures, while Jewish
settlers who commit violent crimes– first and foremost against Palestinians but
also against soldiers- are “rewarded” by the Israeli military turning a blind
eye and covering up these transgressions. The military has been enforcing a
siege on Gaza for over ten years. This siege has created a massive humanitarian
crisis in the Gaza Strip and is one of the main factors which perpetuates the
cycle of violence of Israel and Hamas. Because of the siege, there is no
drinkable water nor electricity in Gaza for most hours of the day. Unemployment
and poverty are pervasive and the healthcare system lacks the most basic means.
This reality serves as the foundation on top of which the disaster of COVID-19
has only made things worse in Gaza.
It is
important to emphasize that these injustices are not a one-time slippage or
straying away from the path. These injustices are not a mistake or a symptom,
they are the policy and the disease. The actions of the Israeli military in
2020 are nothing but a continuation and upholding of the legacy of massacre,
expulsion of families, and land theft, the legacy which “enabled” the
establishment of the State of Israel, as a proper democratic state, for Jews
only.
Historically,
the military has been seen as a tool which serves the “melting pot” policy, as
an institution which crosscuts social class and gender divides in Israeli
society. In reality, this could not be further from the truth. The military is
enacting a clear program of ‘channeling’; soldiers from upper-middle class are
channelled into positions with economic and civilian prospects, while soldiers
from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are channelled into positions which have
high mental and physical risk and which do not provide the same head start in
civil society. Simultaneously, women’s representation in violent positions such
as pilots, tank commanders, combat soldiers, and intelligence officers, is
being marketed as feminist achievement. How does it make sense that the
struggle against gender inequality is achieved through the oppression of
Palestinian women? These “achievements” sidestep solidarity with the struggle
of Palestinian women. The military is cementing these power relations and the
oppression of marginalized communities through a cynical co-opting of their
struggles.
We are calling
for high school seniors (shministiyot) our age to ask themselves: What and who
are we serving when we enlist in the military? Why do we enlist? What reality
do we create by serving in the military of the occupation? We want peace, and
real peace requires justice. Justice requires acknowledgment of the historical
and present injustices, and of the continuing Nakba. Justice requires reform in
the form of the end of the occupation, the end of the siege on Gaza, and
recognition of the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Justice demands
solidarity, joint struggle, and refusal.
Solidarity
The letter is addressed to Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu, army Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi, Minister of Defense Benny
Gantz and Education Minister Yoav Galant.
Please sign
the letter of solidarity.
‘We’re taking
responsibility’: Sixty teens announce refusal to serve in Israeli army
Dozens of Israeli teens sign public letter objecting to military service over Israel's policies of apartheid, neoliberalism, and denial of the Nakba.
By Oren
Ziv January 6, 2021
 |
Conscientious objectors Shahar Peretz (left) and Daniel Peldi at an anti-annexation protest in the city of Rosh Ha'ayin June 2020. (Oren Ziv) |
Sixty Israeli teenagers published an open letter addressed to top Israeli officials on Tuesday morning, in which they declared their refusal to serve in the army in protest of its policies of occupation and apartheid.
The so-called “Shministim Letter” (an initiative with
the Hebrew nickname given to high school seniors) decries Israel’s military
control of Palestinians in the occupied territories, referring to the regime in
the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem as an “apartheid” system
entailing “two different systems of law; one for for Palestinians and another
for Jews.”
“It is our
duty to oppose this destructive reality by uniting our struggles and refusing
to serve these violent systems–chief among them the military,”
reads the letter, which was addressed to Defense Minister Benny Gantz, Education
Minister Yoav Galant, and IDF Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi.
“Our
refusal to enlist to the military is not an act of turning our backs on Israeli
society,” the letter continues. “On the contrary, our refusal is an act of taking responsibility over
our actions and their repercussions. Enlistment, no less than refusal, is a
political act. How does it make sense that in order to protest against systemic
violence and racism, we have to first be part of the very system of oppression
we are criticizing?”
The public refusenik letter is the first of its kind
to go beyond the occupation and refer to the expulsion of Palestinians during
the 1948 war: “We are ordered to put on the bloodstained military uniform and preserve
the legacy of the Nakba and of occupation. Israeli society has been built upon
these rotten roots, and it is apparent in all facets of life: in the racism,
the hateful political discourse, the police brutality, and more.”
The letter further emphasizes the connection between
Israel’s neoliberal and military policies:
“While
the citizens of the Occupied Palestinian Territories are impoverished, wealthy
elites become richer at their expense. Palestinian workers are systematically
exploited, and the weapons industry uses the Occupied Palestinian Territories
as a testing ground and as a showcase to bolster its sales. When the government
chooses to uphold the occupation, it is acting against our interest as
citizens– large portions of taxpayer money is funding the “security” industry
and the development of settlements instead of welfare, education, and health.”
 |
| Israeli conscientious objector Hallel Rabin, Kibbutz Harduf, Israel. (Oren Ziv) |
Some of the signatories are expected to appear before the IDF conscientious objectors’ committee and be sent to military prison, while others have found ways to avoid army service. Among the signatories is Hallel Rabin, who was released from prison in November 2020 after serving 56 days behind bars. A number of the signatories also signed an open letter last June demanding that Israel stop the annexation of the West Bank.
‘Who are we
actually protecting?’
Israelis have published a number of refusal letters
ever since Israel took control of the occupied territories in 1967. While for
decades the letters predominantly referred to opposing service in the occupied
territories specifically, the last two Shministim Letters, published in 2001
and 2005, respectively, included signatories who refused to serve in the army altogether.
“The
reality is that the army commits war crimes on a daily basis — this is a
reality I cannot stand behind, and I feel I must shout as loud as I can that
the occupation is never justified,”
says Neve Shabtai Levin, 16, from Hod Hasharon. Levin,
now in 11th grade, plans to refuse army service after graduation, even if it
means going to prison.
“The
desire not to enlist in the IDF is something I have been thinking about since I
was eight,” Levin continues. “I did not know there was an option to refuse
until around last year, when I spoke to people about not wanting to enlist, and
they asked me if I was planning to refuse. I began to do some research, and
that’s how I got to the letter.”
Levin adds that he signed the letter
“because
I believe it can do good and hopefully reach out to teenagers who, like me, do
not want to enlist but do not know about the option, or will raise questions
for them.”
Shahar Peretz, 18, from Kfar Yona, is planning on
refusing this summer. “For me, the letter
is addressed to teenagers, to those who are going to enlist in another year or
those who have already enlisted,” she says.
“The
point is to reach out to those who are now wearing uniforms and are actually on
the ground occupying a civilian population, and to provide them with a mirror
that will make them ask questions such as ‘who am I serving? What is the result
of the decision to enlist? What interests am I serving? Who are we actually
protecting when we wear uniforms, hold weapons, and detain Palestinians at
checkpoints, invade houses, or arrest children?’”
 |
Conscientious objector Shahar Peretz at an anti-annexation protest in the city of Rosh Ha’ayin June 2020. (Oren Ziv) |
Peretz recalls her own experiences that changed her thinking around enlistment:
“[My]
encounter with Palestinians in summer camps was the first time I was personally
and humanly exposed to the occupation. After meeting them, I realized that the
army is a big part of this equation, in its influence over the lives of
Palestinians under Israeli rule. This led me to understand that I am not
prepared to take a direct or indirect part in the occupation of millions of
people.”
Yael Amber, 19, from Hod Hasharon, is mindful of the
difficulties her peers may encounter with such a decision.
“The
letter is not a personal criticism of 18-year-old boys and girls who enlist.
Refusing to enlist is very complicated, and in many ways it is a privilege. The
letter is a call to action for young people prior to enlistment, but it is
mainly a demand for [young people] to take a critical look at a system that
requires us to take part in immoral acts toward another people.”
Amber, who was discharged from the army on medical
grounds, now lives in Jerusalem and volunteers in the civil service.
“I
have quite a few friends who oppose the occupation, define themselves as
left-wing, and still serve in the army. This is not a criticism of people, but
of a system that puts 18-year-olds in such a position, which does not leave
[them] too many choices.”
While conscientious objection has historically been
understood as a decision to go to prison, the signatories emphasize that there
are various methods that one can refuse, and that finding ways to eschew
military service can itself be considered a form of refusal. “We understand that going to jail is a price
that not everyone has the privilege of paying, both on a material level, time,
and criticism from one’s surroundings,” Amber says.
‘Part of the legacy of the Nakba’
The signatories note that they hope the political
atmosphere created in recent months by the nationwide anti-Netanyahu protests —
known as the “Balfour protests” for the street address of the Prime Minister’s
Residence in Jerusalem — will allow them to talk about the occupation.
“It’s the
best momentum,” says Amber. “We
have the infrastructure of Balfour, the beginning of change, and this
generation is proving its political potential. We thought about it a lot in the
letter — there is a group that is very interested in politics, but how do you
get them to think about the occupation?”
Levin also believes that it is possible to appeal to
young Israelis, particularly those who go to the anti-Bibi protests.
“With
all the talk about corruption and the social structure of the country, we must
not forget that the foundations here are rotten. Many say the military is an
important process [Israelis] go through, that it will make you feel like you
are part of and contributing to the country. But it is not really any of these
things. The army forces 18-year-olds to commit war crimes. The army makes
people see Palestinians as enemies, as a target that should be harmed.”
As the students emphasize in the letter, the act of
refusal is intended to assert their responsibility to their fellow Israelis
rather than disengage from them. “It is
much more convenient not to think about the occupation and the Palestinians,” says
Amber.
“[But]
Writing the letter and making this kind of discourse accessible is a service to
my society. If I wanted to be different or did not care, I would not choose to
put myself in a public position that receives a lot of criticism. We all pay a
certain price because we care.”
“This is activism
that comes from a place of solidarity,” echoes
Daniel Paldi, 18, who plans to appear before the conscientious objectors’
committee. “Although the letter is first
and foremost an act of protest against occupation, racism, and militarism, it
is accessible. We want to make the refusal less taboo.” Paldi notes that if
the committee rejects his request, he is willing to sit in jail.
 |
Palestinians hold a protest against a new settlement outpost near the village of Beit Dajan, West Bank, November 27, 2020. (Nasser Ishtayeh/Flash90) |
“We tried not to demonize either side, including the soldiers, who, in all of its absurdity, are our friends or people our age,” he notes. “We believe that the first step in any process is the recognition of the issues that are not discussed in Israeli society.”
The signatories of the latest Shministim Letter
differed from previous versions in that they touched on one of the most
sensitive subjects in Israeli history: the expulsion and flight of Palestinians
during the Nakba in 1948. “The message of
the letter is to take responsibility for the injustices we have committed, and
to talk about the Nakba and the end of the occupation,” says Shabtai Levy.
“It’s a discourse that has disappeared
from the public sphere and must come back.”
“It’s
impossible to talk about a peace agreement without understanding that all this
is a direct result of 1948,” Levy continued. “The occupation of 1967 is part of the legacy
of the Nakba. It’s all part of the same manifestations of occupation, these are
not different things.”
Adding to this point, Paldi concludes:
“As long as we are the occupying side, we
must not determine the narrative of what does or doesn’t constitute occupation
or whether it began in 1967. In Israel, language is political. The prohibition
against saying ‘Nakba’ does not refer to the word itself, but rather the
erasure of history, mourning, and pain.”
‘Refusing to serve in the army is my small act of making change’
Hallel
Rabin spent 56 days in military prison for refusing to serve in the IDF. Now she opens up about her time behind bars,
conversations with her fellow inmates, and talking to young Israelis about the
occupation.
By Oren Ziv November 27, 2020
As Hallel Rabin stood before the IDF conscientious objectors committee two weeks ago, the military body that decides whether or not she would be sent back to prison for refusing to serve in the army, she was asked the strangest of questions: “Would you agree to wear the army uniform if it were pink?”
“I don’t have an issue with the color,” she responded, “I have an issue with wearing an army uniform — regardless of the army.”
A conscientious objector, Rabin was still in military prison for refusing
to serve due to the army’s occupation policies. On November 20, Rabin’s fourth
stint in military prison came to an end; a day later the army officially gave
her the discharge she had wanted. She served a total of 56 days behind bars.
Rabin, 19, from Kibbutz Harduf in northern
Israel, was first imprisoned in August after appearing before the committee to
appeal for an exemption. She was tried and sentenced to two different periods
of incarceration, including during Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. Upon her
release last week, Rabin thought she would be going home for a brief stint
before another sentencing. But when she turned on her phone, she received a
message from her attorney, Adv. Asaf Weitzen, who informed her that the
committee had accepted her request and that she was being released.
As she told Orly Noy in October,
Rabin was raised by a mother who taught civics, and began asking herself
questions about the reality in Israel from a young age. By the age of 15 she
knew she wouldn’t be able to enlist in the army, since doing so goes “against my most basic ideals, and that I
cannot support such violent policies.”
Less than a week after her release, Rabin has
yet to get used to life outside prison. She wakes up every day at six, as is
required on the inside, and answers the hundreds of messages she regularly
receives from across the world. I met her this week in Harduf for a
conversation about refusing to serve in the army, her time behind bars, and the
possibility of talking to young Israelis about refusal.
How
did you end up in prison? What did your refusal look like?
“On the day of my enlistment, I arrived at the
conscription base knowing that I was going to jail. That was my goal, but I
didn’t really understand how to go about it. I started the conscription process
but did not know whom to turn to [to refuse]. I sat down on a chair and loudly
proclaimed: “I need you to bring someone who will know to tell me what to do. I
am a conscientious objector and I need to go to prison and I will not become a
soldier.
“Finally, a nice woman took me to an office
where I signed a paper saying I was refusing to serve. I found it amusing that
my goal was to go to jail, and that once I was there I would be in the right
place.”
Rabin was initially sentenced to seven days and
was sent to the women’s ward of Prison Six, a military prison in northern
Israel. “It was the longest, most
exhausting day of my life,” she recounts. “It took me three days to understand what was going on, how to respond
[to the prison authorities], how to get around. I learned fast.”
What
was your time in jail like?
“It was a crazy experience. I was in a cell with
a Border Police officer, a woman who served at a checkpoint, two women who
refused to serve as surveillance monitoring operators, one woman who had
attacked her commander, and a military police officer who went AWOL. We were
six in total.
“The first question they asked me was ‘why are
you here?’ I told them, hesitantly, ‘I am a conscientious objector.’ They
immediately began asking all the well-known questions: ‘Are you a leftist? Are
you pro-Palestinian?’ During my first sentence I learned how to live as a
conscientious objector. Every time there was a new group of girls or I went
back [to prison], the subject would stir controversy and a great deal of
discussion.”
Did
the soldiers and commanders in jail talk to you about your decision to refuse?
“There is not one soldier who didn’t hear my
story. Even the commanders were interested. There was one officer who told me
that she appreciates my decision and even praised me. That was one of the
important conversations I had — someone from inside the system understood why I
did what I did and had an appreciation for it.
“I didn’t fight with anyone in jail. It was
practice for my ego, for my ability to have a conversation, for my ability to
be socially flexible. To be in a position in which people disagree with me and
in which I feel uncomfortable — almost threatened — but to be okay with that.”
Rabin was released after five days and sent
home, where she spent the next 2.5 weeks. “It
takes longer to get used to home. In jail there is order in everything, then
all of a sudden you’re released. It’s confusing,” she says. “The hardest thing about going back home is
returning to jail.”
 |
| A view of Israeli military Prison 6. (Oren Ziv) |
When she returned to the conscription base in Tel Hashomer, she was sentenced to another two weeks in prison — one week for refusal to serve and another for absenteeism. Like other conscientious objectors, after each stint in prison she received another summons to the base and was repeatedly sentenced.
How did you pass the time?
“I read eight books, including ‘Feminism is for
Everybody’ [by bell hooks] and ‘Nonviolence Explained to My Children’ [by
Jacques Semelin]. My friends Hillel and Tamar, also conscientious objectors,
told me half-jokingly that my homework was to find similarities between
feminism and conscientious objection.”
Before her third stint in jail, Rabin decided to
go public about her refusal with the help of Mesarvot, a grassroots network
that brings together individuals and groups who refuse to enlist in the IDF in
protest of the occupation. “At first, I
hoped that there wouldn’t be any good reason for me to turn to the media. I had
hoped to be discharged by the conscientious objectors committee. I thought it
would all come to an end after my first sentence,” she explains.
Even before her enlistment date, Rabin tried to
approach the conscience objectors committee, which promptly rejected her
request for an exemption. During her first period of incarceration, she filed
an appeal and waited for the military to return with its reasons for jailing
her. When the arguments were late in coming, she decided to go to the media.
After her third time in prison, Mesarvot organized a demonstration in support
of Rabin outside the conscription base. She was sentenced to 25 days. Between the
third and fourth incarceration periods, Rabin was scheduled to have her second
hearing before the IDF conscientious objectors committee.
What
was the difference between the first and second committee?
“The second time around was longer, they went
deep into the details. The first committee asked me questions to try and prove
that my refusal was political and based on conscientious objection rather than
on pacifism [the IDF has historically made a distinction between conscripts who
can prove they are “non-political pacifists,” and those who refuse to serve
over what the army deems “political” reasons, such as specific opposition to
the Israeli occupation. Despite the difficulties of doing so, conscripts who
can prove they are the former have a higher chance of receiving exemptions].
“In the second committee hearing they asked me
why I wasn’t wearing my army uniform. I explained that I had come from my home
and that in any case I had refused to enlist as a conscientious objector, which
is why I never received a uniform in the first place. Even if they demanded I
wear it, I would never put on a uniform. They are trying to understand whether
your refusal is political or driven by pacifism, how you respond to situations
of violence, and what your lifestyle looks like.”
What did you say?
“I
was more prepared [the second time around]. Fifty days in prison, daily
conversations on the topic, and interviews with the media helped me explain
myself.
“I said that I was not willing to take part in
any way in a system whose very essence is based on fighting and violent
oppression. I believe that this needs to change, and this is my way to make
change. This is my small act. I added that I have been vegetarian my entire
life, buy second-hand clothing, and am against exploitation, capitalism, and
sexism.”
Did
you feel that the committee understood that a pacifist objector who opposes
violence will also be against the occupation?
“It upsets them. It’s hard for them. They are
four members of the army and a civics professor. All of them are 50 years old
or older and have dedicated their lives to reaching high positions [in the
IDF], and I’m a 19-year-old girl who tells them ‘this is not okay.’ I am sure
that it is personally hard for them. I would not enlist in the Swiss army, but
I live here and am supposed to serve in the army that commits these acts. I
oppose the occupation because it is violent, oppressive, and racist.”
During her second committee hearing, the members
showed Rabin a photo of herself taking part in the Mesarvot protest outside the
conscription base, which took place just before she was jailed for the third
time. The photo showed her holding a sign that read “Mesarvot” [Hebrew for the
feminine form of “refusers”] and “Refusing the occupation is democracy.”
“They asked me what the sign meant,” Rabin says.
“I said that it is legitimate to oppose issues that have turned into taboo
subjects — that opposing them is democratic.”
Activists in Mesarvot told +972 that over the
past half year, the conscientious objectors committee has made it much harder
to receive an exemption on conscientious grounds as well as to receive
explanations when requests for discharge are denied. The organization hopes
that Rabin’s discharge will bring about a change in this policy.
Do
you feel it is possible to talk to teenagers about the occupation?
“It’s not about age. I don’t need to wait until
half my life is behind me to fight for my principles… it is not a bad thing
that I say out loud that going to the conscientious objectors committee is a
legitimate option and that it is possible to think for oneself. Even prison
isn’t bad. It is exhausting but I did not leave with a feeling of anxiety or
wanting to die.”
What
kind of responses did you receive after your release?
“A lot of people reached out from Israel and
across the world. Some people cursed me. Others wrote that [my refusal] was
inspirational and brings hope that there are teenagers who stand up for what
they believe. Palestinians also wrote to me after [my story] was published in
Turkey. Someone from Tulkarem wrote that he appreciates my act and hopes that
one day we’ll drink coffee together and talk about life.”
Israeli
conscientious objector sentenced to 20 days in military prison
By +972 Magazine July 30, 2019
 |
Conscientious objector Maya Brand-Feigenbaum will serve another 20 days behind bars for her refusal to serve in the Israeli army due to its policies of occupation.
Israeli
conscientious objector Maya Brand-Feigenbaum. ‘I am aware that we need an army to protect us against real threats.
But at the same time, there is a need for people who fight for a reality free
of war.’ (Ido Ramon/Mesarvot)
An IDF
disciplinary body sentenced 18-year-old Israeli conscientious objector Maya
Brand-Feigenbaum to 20 days in military prison on Tuesday over her refusal
to serve in the military.
This is the
second time Brand-Feigenbaum, from the northern town of Tivon, has been
sentenced for refusing to serve since she her conscription date on July 14.
Upon completing her sentence, will have spent a total of 27 days
behind bars. Military conscription is mandatory for most Jewish Israelis.
“I refuse to serve in the army because I believe that this is
the best and most meaningful way for me to promote my anti-war principles and
help put an end to the occupation,”
Brand-Feigenbaum wrote in a statement published prior to her first stint in
military prison.
“The decades-long control over a nation compromises the
security of the State of Israel,” continues the statement.
“As a woman who loves this country, whose landscapes
and people are a part of me, I cannot take part in maintaining this
situation. I am aware that in our reality we need an army to protect us against
real threats, but at the same time, there is a need for
people who fight for a reality free of war. Anti-war
activities will benefit both the country and the world to bring
long-term security. Taking action to resolve the conflict and end the
occupation will benefit of all residents of the land, whether Jewish,
Muslim or Christian.”
Prior to
her first appearance before the IDF’s conscientious objectors committee,
Brand-Feigenbaum received a visit by Joint List Chairman Ayman Odeh at her home
in Tivon, who called Brand-Feigenbaum and her fellow conscientious
objectors a “ray of humanity that lights
the way toward ending the occupation and promoting peace.”
Meanwhile,
the army has yet to release 20-year-old
conscientious objector Roman Levin from military prison, despite a
recommendation by the conscientious objector’s committee to do so. Levin has
spent over 70 days in military prison. Both Levin and Brand-Feigenbaum are
supported by Mesarvot — Refusing to Serve the Occupation, a grassroots network
that brings together individuals and groups who refuse to enlist in the IDF in
protest at the occupation.
 |
Conscientious objector Roman Levin. ‘My refusal is an act of protest against an occupation that has lasted more than 50 years and of solidarity with the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza.’ (Ido Ramon/Mesarvot). |
Levin, from the city of Bat Yam just south of Tel Aviv, immigrated to Israel with a few members of his family from Ukraine when he was 3 years old. He initially believed his service would contribute to society and fulfill his duties as a citizen.
“I refuse to continue my military service,”
Levin said. “My refusal is an act of
protest against an occupation that has lasted more than 50 years and of
solidarity with the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza.”
This is the
fourth time Levin has been sentenced for refusing to serve in the army. He was
previously jailed twice after a year and a half of service in the IDF as a truck
driver.
60 High School Seniors
Refuse to Serve in the Israeli Army Because of the Occupation
The group's members say in a letter their stance comes
from 'taking responsibility for our actions and their implications,' and accuse
the education system of ignoring the Palestinian narrative
Sixty Israelis of eligible draft age have signed
a letter declaring their refusal to serve in the military because of Israel’s
occupation of the Palestinian territories.
Departing from previous letters of this kind,
the signatories call out the country’s education system for various issues,
such as encouraging enlistment in the Israel Defense Forces and emphasizing the
Jewish narrative in Bible and history classes.
They also draw attention to issues they say the
curriculum ignores, such as the expulsion of Arabs in 1948 and the current
violation of human rights in the occupied territories.
In a letter sent Tuesday to the defense and
education ministries and to the IDF chief of staff, the teens wrote:
“The state demands that we enlist into an army that is
ostensibly meant to ensure the existence of the state. But in practice, army
operations are not directed mainly at defending against enemy armies, but at
subjugating a civilian population. Thus, our mobilization has a context and
implications.” They say their refusal to enlist is not an act of disengagement
or turning away from Israeli society, but rather “the taking of responsibility
for our actions and their implications.”
They added: “We
grew up with the ideal of the heroic soldier, we sent them care packages, we
visited the tanks they fought in, we dressed up as soldiers in premilitary
training camps and we elevated their deaths on memorial days. The fact that
this is the reality we’re all used to does not make it a-political. Enlistment
is a political act, no less than refusal to do so.” The letter later refers
to “the policy of apartheid as expressed
in two separate legal systems, one for Palestinians and one for Jews” and “to the heritage of the Nakba [Arabic for “Catastrophe,” when more than 700,000
Arabs fled or were expelled from their homes during the 1947-49 Israeli War of
Independence] and the occupation, as expressed in “societal racism, an
inflammatory political discourse and police violence.”
One of the signatories, Daniel Paldi of Tel
Aviv, said: “From a very young age we are
raised to be soldiers. Civic classes don’t do much to change the one-directional
course of the school system, its pinnacle arriving with the preparations for
enlistment in high school.”
Paldi added:
“Why is refusal to enlist perceived as a political
action, but school activities meant to encourage enlistment seen as
self-evident? It starts with school trips to Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, in which no political contexts are discussed.
We’re only told about the battles. There’s an elephant in the room that no one
is talking about.”
Paldi notes that on a school trip to southern
Israel, the guides warned that “If we
don’t work the land, someone else will take it.”
 |
Members of Israeli border police walk at the scene of an incident, at Qalandia checkpoint near Ramallah in the West Bank, December 7, 2020.Credit: Mohamad Torokman / Reuters |
The state school curriculum does mention the issue of Palestinian refugees, but many schools prefer not to teach the subject. Paldi says:
“Until we talk about the Nakba in class, how it
happened that most of the Palestinians who lived here fled or were expelled, or about
the theft of their possessions, we won’t understand how much the problem
remains part of our lives. This is sweeping history under the rug. When I began
to understand this, I immediately started thinking about what else we were
‘sold’ in school.”
After a struggle lasting months, including
spending 56 days in a military prison, one of the signatories of the letter, Hallel Rabin of Kibbutz Harduf,
was awarded an exemption from military service as a conscientious objector.
Rabin says the schools only teach the Jewish
narrative. In history and civics classes, they present a zero-sum game, in
which the right and justification for Jews to live freely automatically denies
the rights of the other population.” She adds: “Ultimately, even in schools that try to broaden the picture, in
matriculation tests pupils will write what they were told to.” The present
letter stems from an understanding of how much schools affect the shaping of
our consciousness, she says.
Sivan Tal is with Dori Tal
As parents of a boy destined for enlistment, we
decided to take responsibility and refuse to send our son to serve in the IDF.
The following letter was sent to the IDF authorities.
--------
We, the undersigned – Dori and Sivan Tal –
refuse to send our son Yair Tal to serve in the IDF. Our refusal is due to
reasons of conscience, as will be detailed below.
It’s commonly argued that the decision to refuse
to enlist to the IDF is a political decision. We agree with this statement.
Furthermore, the logical conclusion of it is that the decision to enlist to the
IDF is also a political decision. It is also commonly argued that 18 is too
young an age for a political decision of this importance. Here we intervene as
parents and claim responsibility for the political decisions of our young son,
and our decision is – NO!
Since the decision to enlist or to refuse
enlisting the IDF is a political decision, it is crucial to learn the
background, the historical facts, the political reality, and the different
views on the topic – in order to formulate a political position for making such
a decision. Unfortunately, the formal education that our son receives, like all
teenagers in the Israeli education system, does not meet any criteria of
responsible civic education. In fact, our son was pushed and encouraged to
willingly enlist to the IDF in every step of the way. In schools, the history
of the country is not truthfully told, and instead only a distorted narrative
of it is built through the years to paint an imaginary reality of a peaceful
state persecuted by evil-doers seeking to destroy it. All while the country
itself is carrying out ethnic cleansing in order to control the land, and
anti-democratically and inhumanely persecutes the opponents to the occupation
and seeks to exclude and expel the native people of this country – the
Palestinian people.
Our son will not be a part of the conquests of the
extreme right government controlling the country. We will not allow him to die
for the occupation of land and for causing the suffering of others. It is a
despicable purpose to die for.
Yair is not religious, nor does he suffer from
mental issues or other things that would have granted him exempt. He is healthy
in his body and mind and we wish for him to stay that way. We have raised him
with love, protected him, supported and educated him for 18 years to the
universal values that we believe in. Serving in the IDF stands in stark
contrast to these values. Yair is not the property of the state, and the state
does not have a moral right to forcibly recruit him to an organization that
consistently violates international human rights conventions. We believe that
it is our moral duty to oppose his enlistment to the IDF. It is our
responsibility as parents.
Additionally, we do not recognise the
“conscience committee” of the IDF as the authority to judge in these questions
of conscience and morality regarding enlistment and refusal. Our conscience is
clear, and we are not asking for the validation and approval of the IDF.
We are certain in our stance that the IDF
operations in Gaza and the West Bank are war crimes and crimes against
humanity. They severely harm the local population and are a blatant violation
of human rights, and do not meet any moral standards. Moreover, they also harm
the chance for future coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians. Beyond the
severe harm to the Palestinian population, these operations also hurt the
soldiers – at least those whose hearts are not sealed to the suffering of other
human beings and are being forced to cause suffering and injustice.
Even the other operations of the IDF that do not
directly deal with the occupation and control of the Palestinians, mainly deal
with fighting the forces that resist the Israeli occupation. In the current
political climate where the prime minister is accused in court for crimes and
his actions are motivated solely by his personal considerations, there is a
grave concern that the IDF is called upon to enact unnecessary military
operations in order to escalate regional conflicts, taking human lives on both
sides. In these conditions, we refuse to have our son be used as a pawn by a
system designed to preserve conflict and dangers for political interests.
The IDF acknowledges the right of parents of a
single child to refuse the enlistment of him to combat units, or in the case of
bereaved families, but we claim our right to refuse the enlistment of all our
children. We don’t “give our first child for free”. For the reasons we have
detailed above, we claim our right and duty to protect all our children, from
the eldest to the youngest.
Just as we have a responsibility towards our son
in the context of criminal behaviour, we also have a responsibility towards his
actions in the military context. We would not rid ourselves of responsibility
if our son would commit a crime such as theft or physical violence in the civic
world. This responsibility does not diminish if the crimes are committed in
uniform. Political backing of the everyday crimes the IDF commits does not
justify or excuse them – just the opposite. Our responsibility as parents is to
say – no more. Enlistment to the IDF – not on our watch!
See also
Israeli high school students refuse to join the Israeli military citing the “continuing Nakba”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please submit your comments below