Yesterday was the first open-to-the-public organizational meeting for the March to Break the Siege of Gaza (hopefully?). Things went rather well: after a scatter-brained exodus from the stifling library of the Brecht Forum to a large concrete platform outside, we discussed who, how, when we're going to try to march, as well as the ideas behind the march. Norman Finkelstein and Medea Benjamin of CODEPINK co-emceed, clarifying that they had spoken to many groups in Gazan civil society as well as Hamas politicians, all of whom seemed to (largely) agree that something needs/needed to be done--that is to say, something of this sort--and that now is a good time to do it.
It remained unclear who is on the steering committee, beyond Medea and NF. A wealth of activists as well as, and more importantly, a good number of Palestinians were in attendance. NF largely stepped into the background and let Medea organize and moderate the event, which was a good choice; she was plainly good at it, and let people have the floor for as much time as they needed to make their points.
The most telling came from Palestinians in the audience: the need to choose concrete objectives, viz., breaking the siege at Rafah, which is where food and supplies come into Gaza, vs. breaking it at the Erez crossing. As one young woman, Lubna(?), from (I believe) Adalah-NY added, each carries with it pluses and minuses; Erez is highly symbolic, as the link, or potential link, to the West Bank. However, breaking the siege there would mean merely a return to the Paris Accords, when access was still somewhat tightly controlled.
Another Palestinian, who had spent years living in Gaza, added that breaking the siege would be hard, citing an attempt to use younger children to break the siege, under the assumption that Israel wouldn't open fire on 7 or 8 year old boys and girls. Take a guess. The suggestion was that Israel would open fire on nearly anyone, with the exception of extremely--perhaps hyper--visible authors and writers, as well as, crucially, American, European, and Palestinian-Israel politicians (I don't know the mores of the IDF well enough to know if it'd open fire on this last group). NF alluded to attempts to get high-profile academics to join the march, as well as Noam Chomsky, and perhaps John Dugard and Jimmy Carter. We will see. That same Palestinian spoke of Israeli tactics, consisting of turning the air-space in front of marchers into a swarming mass of bullets from Apache gunships, at which point discussion wisely turned to attempting to make sure Israel didn't launch such counter-measures from the outset, perhaps impeded (pressured was the word selected) by journalists and politicians at the Erez crossing, preventing its use as a staging ground for attacks. A friend just added that Israel recently deployed its new stink weapons against protesters; such weapons are "non-violent," meaning, I guess, that they don't outright kill people, but effective against actually non-violent protests, probably.
Another idea was launching incursions against the siege from all sides: I thought immediately of coordinating with the Free Gaza ships, not that they've had such great fortune against a shameless Israel of late.
Another Palestinian, a younger guy who is helping to organize the December convoy, pointed out that if the March is to work it must work fast; Gazan food and fuel rations are not stretched to the breaking point--they're broken and insufficient. Another 5,000 mouths to feed would be a burden that foreigners have no right to ask Gazans to bear. He was of course correct. In turn he brought up the crucial point: that the siege must be broken, that Israel must be made to feel that it may no longer close off Gaza, because otherwise, the Marchers would flit in and flit out and Gaza would be subsequently pummeled after an evanescent carnival of resistance; it's again not a revelation for me to note that violence is the means by which Israel reminds Palestinians that they should feel themselves to be a defeated people. The Palestinian man likewise lambasted a symbolic tossing of food parcels over the Erez crossing. I plan on going, and so don't feel so self-righteous in writing this, but I felt that there must be tactical and logistical plans for bringing Israel to a negotiating table where concessions won't be asked but demanded: that victory won't come freely, if it will come at all. Medea spoke of perhaps leaving some behind on a hunger strike; but I'm not sure a token hunger strike will compel Israeli concessions either. It seems that if the March is to have a more-than-symbolic effect--although symbols are important--it must be able to use the critical leverage of numbers and media exposure to force deep, lasting concessions right there.
I don't mean to be too critical. It was obviously a good start. A lot of thought and effort has gone into it thus far. I'm with it. But there's a lot of thinking left to do. Medea and NF spoke of deferring to Palestinian knowledge of logistics/tactics vis-a-vis the march; they're the ones with experience conducting resistance, not us ( a fact that got somewhat underplayed by Medea and NF, but others brought it up calmly and Medea and NF accepted the point graciously).
We will see.
(Also, if anyone wishes to either get involved, or get periodic updates, please leave an e-mail address in the comments, or contact NormanFinkelstein@gmail.com. I'm not one of the chief organizers but will be happy to add names to a mailing list when it gets set-up. Alternatively just check back here; hopefully I'll have an update in a week or so. The next organizing meeting is slated for 20 days from today).
Related posts:
- End the Siege! On Monday, I am going to an organizing meeting at...
- Gaza Freedom March, Update The organizational issues have been ironed out, not without some...
- Why Norman Finkelstein Resigned from the Gaza Freedom March A prefatory word. Norman Finkelstein had my highest regard. Unsparing...
- Gaza’s Suffering The following was delivered at a lobbying effort at the...
- May Day, not Mayday Hopefully. Because the beguiling Free Gaza solidarity movement chose...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Thank you for your report on the meeting. You bring up an excellent point that there must be tactical and logistical plans for bringing Israel to a negotiating table where concessions won’t be asked but demanded: that victory won’t come freely, if it will come at all. Deferring to Palestinian activists is a must. Norman is an academician with no organizing experience other than dabbling in a few protests during the Israel occupation in Lebanon 1982. Medea has much more organizing experience, but is fairly new to the I/P conflict. I hope experienced Palestinian American activists and abroad will be the ones heading up this effort so the March will be successful. Otherwise I hate to say it will be doomed
Diane–
What I forgot to add in the write-up was that whatever the “head committee” or whatever ends up doing, we delegated all the work out to smaller committees. My impression was that most of the people there were very experienced activists in IP-affairs; at least the 2 people I went with have been working on it for years, and while I didn’t take a survey, my impression was that everyone there had years and years of experience; most had been to Palestine, as well, I think. It may be doomed, but not for lack of experienced people.
Good to see you’ve joined the lefts focused eye on Israel.
a