EDITOR: Israel launches itself into outer space!
So, while all around the world silly people like Cathrine Ashton do not understand the great value of the new anti-BDS law, Netanyahu explains to the world that the law is a mark of Israeli democracy. A genius of a man, this PM, now in command of the Israeli spaceship, which is at last free of the earth gravity, and is speeding into outer space without a way back. Bye bye, Israel, one wishes to utter, but of course, some other people are involved here, ones who did not agree to go into outer space, of course. Some of the new regulations, like those governing schools and kindergartens, which have just been published, would not go amiss in Nazi Germany. I cannot bring them here today, as the Haaretz paper, in atypical act of self-censorship, has not translated them into English, and may well fail to do so. Another sign of the train heading for the rocks.
On the face of it, Israel was never stronger – financially (as a result mainly of being the 4th arms exporter in the world. Israel sells death!) it is in an excellent shape, politically, it is supported like never before (see the episode of Flotilla II and how governments fall over each other in their willingness to break their own laws to support Israel illegal activities) – it has just been given almost all the privileges of the EU membership – what could go wrong for them?
But looking at it like this leaves out the global growth of the BDS and anti-Zionist movement across the globe. While governments are prepared to support Israel’s crimes, their people are more prepared than ever to struggle against those crimes. The sheer proof that Israel itself realises this, is the spate of laws, regulations and attacks on civil rights within Israel, so as to stem the tide. But it is too late to stem the tide. Israel is understood, at last, to be what it always was: a racist, aggressive colonialist regime, ready to break any law and any international treaty to advance its militaristic, illegal occupation and its iniquities. No amount of anti-democratic legislation will ever remove this realisation from the public domain. Israel is losing the war, while claiming victory in the skirmishes it starts itself.
European Union expresses concern over Israel’s boycott law: Haaretz
EU says legislation may affect freedom of expression in Israel; mixed reaction among European Jewish organizations.
The European Union put out a carefully worded but clearly critical statement on the new Israeli boycott law on Wednesday, saying it intended to “discuss this matter and raise our concerns with the Israeli authorities.”
“The EU recognizes Israel’s sovereignty in the legislative process.
Furthermore, the EU does not advocate boycotts,” a spokesperson for foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said in a statement.
“However, as part of such fundamental values as free expression and speech that the EU cherishes and shares with Israel, we are concerned about the effect that this legislation may have on the freedom of Israeli citizens and organizations to express non-violent political opinions.”
Meanwhile, the umbrella organization of French Jewish organizations in France, known as the CRIF, welcomed the controversial new Israeli boycott law Wednesday. The CRIF’s director general Haim Musicant pointed out that a similar such law has long existed in France, much to the satisfaction of the French Jewish community.
“Commercial boycotts of Israel have been illegal in France for many years,” he explained to Haaretz. “And this has been good in fighting such negative action. I believe this is a good model. I know that many other European countries are looking into adopting the French models themselves.”
But, even as such official Jewish organs were applauding the Israeli measures, other community voices were speaking out against them. Yachad, a new British Jewish Israel advocacy organization inspired by the American J-Street, decried the law.
“Yachad will not join those who call for a boycott of Israeli produce because we believe in debate and we are opposed to a policy of isolation. However, we fiercely and unapologetically defend the right of Israelis and Jews to express their opinion as enshrined our tradition and as stated in Israel’s own Basic Law of Human Dignity and Liberty,” said Daniel Reisel, Yachad’s chair.
“The first and most obvious problem with the boycott law is that violates the freedom of individual free speech. To seek to punish someone for their political opinions limits their freedom, creates a climate of fear and suspicion, and compromises the ability of every person to speak their mind,” Yachad went on to said in a statement. “Second, the law violates basic freedom of expression and debate in a democratic society….(and) finally, the anti-boycott law is likely to prove counter-productive. People who have previously resisted the idea of boycotts as political leverage may now start to consider it simply due to the infringement of their freedom of speech which the current law entails.”
Earlier on Wednesday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defended the boycott law, which was passed in the Knesset Monday night. The law, which penalizes people or organizations who call for a boycott on Israel or the settlements, provoked sharp criticism from opposition MKs and leftist organizations in Israel.
Netanyahu said the law does not taint Israeli democracy. “What stains (Israel’s) image are those savage and irresponsible attacks on a democracy’s attempt to draw a line between what is acceptable and what is not,” he said.
According to the law, a person or an organization calling for the boycott of Israel, including the settlements, can be sued by the boycott’s targets without having to prove that they sustained damage. The court will then decide how much compensation is to be paid. The second part of the law says a person or a company that declare a boycott of Israel or the settlements will not be able to bid in government tenders.
On Tuesday, Israeli leftist organizations launched a legal and a public campaign against the law.
Netanyahu is turning Israel into Iran: Haaretz
Now violence is being privatized. In typical Netanyahu fashion, individuals on the radical right are given the push, the encouragement and the authority to take the “Operation Price Tag” route, with much more than winking approval.
By Sefi Rachlevsky
Benjamin Netanyahu was right when he spoke about the dangers of a messianic, nuclearized Iran, and the difficulty of creating a stable balance of terror with it. That is precisely why the prime minister’s actions are so shocking. In our terms, they constitute a serious dereliction of duty. In the terms of the circles he is so fond of inflame in a demonstration, they constitute treason.
In the face of a nuclearizing Iran, in addition to international sanctions and covert actions, Israel has three main options: a military assault, which is looking increasingly irresponsible; a switch from insufficiently deterrent nuclear ambiguity to a policy of open nuclear deterrence; and reliance on NATO’s umbrella of defense.
All three options share a single key: a close alliance with the West. Without it, the thought of a military operation, and especially a day-after scenario, are not even a hallucination. Without it, there can be no move to effective open deterrence. Without it, there is no huddling under NATO’s nuclear defense umbrella.
This was one of the main causes that led Yitzhak Rabin to choose to move toward a strategic, stabilizing peace before Iran acquired nuclear capabilities. It should have been one of the reasons that would bring Israel now to the unequivocal recognition – as a matter of principle – of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 lines. Not a miserly formula for purposeless negotiations, but rather genuine generosity, in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.
This is not a simple deal, Itamar in exchange for Bushehr. But were it not for the 1956 withdrawal from Sinai, there would be no Dimona; if not for the peace with Egypt, there would have been no attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor. An alliance with the West requires proof of intentions and of values. But Netanyahu consciously chooses to go in the opposite direction, thus revealing the depth of his unbridled extremism.
Under normal circumstances, the military establishment is to the right of the political establishment. That is its nature. Only in rare cases is the situation reversed, as in the waning days of the Second Temple Era, and in fascist regimes. In all these cases, the end is similar. Israel is now joining these anomalies. Not only is Netanyahu not building an alliance with the world’s democracies, he is creating a fascist, messianic Iran here. Churchill, whom he claims to admire, distanced himself from Britain’s racist Naziphiles. Here, things are approaching the threshold of non-distancing. Netanyahu’s coalition is vigorously legislating “red heifer laws,” that purify the impure and pollute the pure. Laws that invert the legal and the criminal.
It is no longer just the government of Rabbi Dov Lior. Now it is simply the “dov” regime – the Hebrew acronym for the suppression of traitors. Dov was the name of an extreme right-wing group that got its start among groups of university students in Jerusalem. Dov Shilansky often lectured them about the Altalena. These groups would later give rise to Avigdor Lieberman. The organization’s name is an acronym for its philosophy: dikui bogdanim [“suppression of traitors” in Hebrew].
Now violence is being privatized. In typical Netanyahu fashion, individuals on the radical right are given the push, the encouragement and the authority to take the “Operation Price Tag” route, with much more than winking approval. The days that preceded Rabin’s assassination as a “traitor” are returning. Rabbi Dov Lior, who by dint of receiving tens of thousands a shekels a month and controlling an Israel Defense Forces hesder yeshiva is a direct extension of the Israeli government, is not alone. The method of delegating revenge against traitors to private hands, after incitement by the leader, is growing stronger and more focused.
Menachem Livni, the head of the “Jewish underground” terror organization, who when he was convicted of multiple murders testified that he had acted on behalf of Lior, now has a vineyard and a winery. Now, anyone who does not want to directly fund Livni is a potential target for “price tag” actions from him, and without being subject to the restrictions of the criminal code and the attorney general. Now, in addition to the weapons entrusted to him by the IDF, Netanyahu is giving Livni and the Yitzhar thugs the weapons of civil prosecution, with no need for proof of damages.
Those who are against the occupation and who refuse to cooperate with the criminality of the settlements will now have to pay huge sums for their unwillingness to cooperate – in addition to paying their taxes, which fund the illegal settlement enterprise. Navot must pay for being put to death by Ahab.
Our own Captain Ahab is leading the boat and the whales to disaster. Removing him from power is becoming a top global priority.
Israel’s McCarthy coalition is on a dangerous power trip: Haartez
The slew of anti-democratic laws introduced by the current Knesset constitutes one of the darkest chapters in Israeli history.
By Carlo Strenger
The flood of anti-democratic laws that were proposed, and partially implemented, by the current Knesset, elected in February 2009, constitute one of the darkest chapters in Israeli history. The opening salvo was provided by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party with its Nakba law, that forbids the public commemoration of the expulsion of approximately 750,000 Palestinians during the 1948 war.
Since then, a growing number of attempts were made to curtail freedom of expression and to make life for human rights groups more difficult. The latest instance is the boycott law that is passed this Monday by the Knesset, even though its legal advisor believes it to be a problematic infringement on freedom of speech.
The law, as Knesset Member Nitzan Horowitz from the leftist Meretz Party said, is outrageous, shameful and an embarrassment to Israel’s democracy.
What stands behind this frenzy of attempts to shut down criticism? The answer, I believe, is fear, stupidity, confusion – and now also a power-trip.
The result of Netanyahu’s and Lieberman’s systematic fanning of Israelis’ existential fears is tangible: polls show that Israelis are deeply pessimistic about peace; they largely do not trust Palestinians, and in the younger generation belief in democratic values is being eroded.
But this pessimism and siege-mentality is not only to be found in ordinary Israeli voters, but also in the political class. After talking to a number of right-wing politicians, I am unfavorably impressed by their total lack of understanding of the international scene. They have profound misconceptions about the Free World’s attitude towards Israel, and very little real understanding of the paradigm shift towards human rights as the core language of international discourse. They buy into Netanyahu’s adage that Israel’s existence is being delegitimized, rather than realizing that Israel’s settlement policy is unacceptable politically and morally to the whole world.
Out of their utter confusion between international criticism of Israeli policies and existential danger for Israel, the right-wing coalition members look for a scapegoat to be blamed for Israel’s unprecedented isolation. The Israeli left and Human Rights organizations are an easy target. Instead of understanding that Israel’s settlement policy is a genuine catastrophe, they claim that NGOs provide the international community with ammunition for criticizing Israel, and are trying to silence them.
Confusion, ideology and a growing intoxication by the coalition’s unchecked power create the explosive mix that is drawing Knesset members into the maelstrom of ever more anti-democratic measures, of which the boycott law is the latest, but by no means last installment. The passing of the boycott law is giving the right-wing MKs a sense of unbridled supremacy: Yisrael Beitenu and Likud MK Danny Danon are already pushing for a committee to investigate what they call “leftist” organizations and NGOs.
They are working all their might to turn Israel into an illiberal democracy. They are turning into a classic case of what Alexandre de Tocqueville, one of the great observers of democracy, called “the tyranny of the majority”, using their clout without any restraint.
Drunk with power, they do not listen to the Knesset’s legal advisor; they will not listen to American Jewry, including the recently right-leaning ADL, as well as the US State Department who are warning them that they have crossed the line of what is democratically acceptable, and harmed freedom of expression grievously.
The next step is under way: The Supreme Court has been a thorn to Israel’s right for a long time, because it tries to uphold universal human rights. The coalition is now trying to break one of pillars of democracy, the separation of powers, and to undermine the Supreme Court’s ability to function as a democratic balance to the Knesset’s power.
A new Likud initiative proposes that the Knesset should be able to veto candidates for the Supreme Court. The new system would “allow the committee to introduce to the court a different state of mind and allow them to influence the legal system”. In simple words: they want both to intimidate the Supreme Court, and gain control over its judicial philosophy, to bring it in line with their chauvinistic ideology. Once this happens, Netanyahu’s proud statements that Israel is the only liberal democracy in the Middle East will no longer be true.
A final word on Netanyahu and Barak: Both of them are sufficiently ashamed of their coalition’s actions, in order not to show up for the vote on the boycott law. If they think that this absolves them from responsibility, they are dreadfully wrong. History will judge their cowardice harshly: their legacy will be to have presided over Israel’s descent into rabid McCarthyism.
EDITOR: Meanwhile, back at the farm, Israel continues to act criminally, attacking and killing with total immunity. Nothing has changed as far as Palestinians are concerned – it is the same occupation and the same brutality.
Israeli army kills man in Nablus, hits Gaza targets: BBC
Relatives mourned the death of Ibrahim Sarhan at the Rafidiya Hospital in Nablus
A Palestinian man has been killed in an Israeli military raid on a West Bank refugee camp.
The Israeli military said troops fired at a man who tried to evade arrest in the el-Fara camp north of Nablus.
But a witness said residents had thrown stones at the troops, who responded with live fire, killing 21-year-old university student Ibrahim Sarhan.
In Gaza, Israeli aircraft struck two suspected weapons factories overnight, injuring a Palestinian woman.
The air strikes also damaged the main water pipe in an eastern neighbourhood of Gaza City, cutting water to a large part of the city, said Gaza’s emergency services spokesman Adham Abu Selmiya.
Israel’s military said the air strikes came in retaliation for rockets fired from Gaza into Israel on Tuesday.
Another rocket hit southern Israel on Wednesday morning, Israel’s military said, but no-one was hurt in the attacks.
‘Bled to death’
Omar Sarhan said his son was shot after attending morning prayers in a local mosque, and bled to death because no ambulance was allowed to attend to him.
The 21-year-old had been shot twice, once in each thigh, and was dead by the time he reached hospital, Palestinian medics said.
Israel’s military said the dawn raid was part of “routine activity” at the refugee camp.
“One of the Palestinians tried to flee arrest, at which point the soldiers began an arrest procedure, eventually firing at his lower body,” a spokeswoman told the AFP news agency.
Seven Palestinians were arrested during the raid, the spokeswoman said, adding that an explosive device was hurled at Israeli troops during the operation. No soldiers were injured.
The Israeli army often carries out raids in Palestinian town and cities, some of which are coordinated with Palestinian police, says the BBC’s Jon Donnison from Ramallah.
The West Bank has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967.
Israelis, Palestinians must unite to end occupation: Haaretz
“The will of Israel” does not derive from civilian, minority-majority norms, nor is it based on a constitution that guarantees minority rights and defines when a minority has the option to rise up against the government. Instead, “the will of Israel” derives from an ultra-nationalist version of the Jewish religion.
By Yitzhak Laor
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the political right argues, has a solid parliamentary majority, so not accepting such a majority’s decisions is undemocratic. Right-wing advocates use this argument widely. But of course, this argument harms Israel because it treats its colonialism as if it were part of its political structure.
For the sake of argument, let’s put aside the conventional wisdom, which holds that democracy is an arena of constant struggle, also between elections, one that involves lobbying and persuasion, demonstrations and donations – even boycotts. Let’s put aside the way this government is shortening its rivals’ stride and curtailing its rights. And let’s ignore the way the mass-media outlets quickly turn into propaganda instruments the moment the government describes any circumstance as “a crisis.”
One can even accept the allegation that on the militant left’s margins, the fringe that confronts the police and intones the pathetic chant “p-o-l-i-c-e s-t-a-t-e,” as if any of them have ever lived in a police state, there is contempt for democratic institutions. One can even concede that the fascistic signs of Israel’s governing culture beget a new left marred by conspicuous signs of “red fascism.” That is, this leftist fringe has contempt for the democratic process. Let’s look beyond all that – none of this relates to the main point.
The key aspect of claims about democracy by right-wing spokesmen – be they supporters of a negotiation process and peace talks, or activists who unreservedly maneuver to foil the process – is that it rests on a dubious form of democracy, perhaps the lowest imaginable. That form imputes to residents of the occupied territories the results of “our” democratic decisions, decisions they are not privy to at all.
Not only is this “democracy” tainted with racism, not only does it bestow upon its subjects in schools, the army and other dens of learning a completely distorted understanding of the concept of democracy, it also is the cause and explanation of a long list of anti-democratic laws.
Israeli democracy, and all its stable and shaky foundations, is not based on the idea of “the will of the people.” Its basis is something else, something murky that, as the long years of the occupation progress, increasingly takes on a religious cast. It can even account for the brazen messianic chutzpah of the settlers and their cohorts. “The will of Israel” does not derive from civilian, minority-majority norms, nor is it based on a constitution that guarantees minority rights and defines when a minority has the option to rise up against the government. Instead, “the will of Israel” derives from an ultra-nationalist version of the Jewish religion. That religion long ago turned into the unofficial constitution that rules our lives. According to this vision, Israeli sovereignty derives from the sacred text.
Israel’s left was never able to say that, regarding the occupation, there was no possibility of forging a real opposition without Israeli-Palestinian cooperation. Because such cooperation is needed to bypass the obstacle of this racist, unwritten constitution. In fact, it was left-wing activists who were drawn to the dubious proposal of conducting a referendum on the “future of the territories.”
This mentality produced a paternalistic leftist-Zionist approach (which fortunately has eroded ): You, the Palestinians, have to do or say this or that. The Zionist left disappeared because it was unable to fashion forms of solidarity with the subjects of the occupation. The solidarity march in Jerusalem on Friday to support Palestinian independence can mark a historic turn of events. Whatever happens in the future, the struggle against the occupation must be binational and conducted by anyone who rejects its legitimacy.
Israel’s boycott law: The quiet sound of going fascist: Haaretz
This is the one. This is where the slope turns nowhere but down. When the Knesset passed the boycott law, it changed the history of the state of Israel.
By Bradley Burston
This is the one. Don’t let what we like to call the relative calm here, fool you. When the Knesset passed the boycott law Monday night, it changed the history of the state of Israel.
In real time, a tipping point of great magnitude can sound a lot like nothing at all. But if the Boycott Law makes it past challenges filed by human rights and pro-peace organizations in Israel’s High Court of Justice, then anything goes, beginning with democracy itself.
Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak and 10 other cabinet ministers already know this. That’s why they failed to show up for the vote.
They stayed away because they know that this is the stain that may prove indelible. The Boycott Law is the litmus test for Israeli democracy, the threshold test for Israeli fascism. It’s a test of moderates everywhere who care about the future of this place.
This is the one. This is where the slope turns nowhere but down.
Q. What is wrong with the law?
1. The measure curbs political freedom of expression in Israel in a number of ways, setting potentially significant – and dangerous – precedents. It allows any individual to, in effect, become a private law enforcement agency, empowered to bring lawsuits against anyone or any group the plaintiff accuses of having taken part in or even simply supported any action the plaintiff construes as a boycott against Israel, against the settlements, or even any individual Israeli, for any reason.
2. The measure erases the legal differentiation between settlements and Israel proper, regarding targeted boycotts against goods from the settlements as actions harmful to the state of Israel itself.
3. The Knesset’s apolitical Legal Advisor Eyal Yinon has ruled that the law’s broad definition of “boycotting the state of Israel”, coupled with its “civil wrongdoing” or anyone-can-sue clause, may compromise freedom of expression where it comes to public debate over the fate of the West Bank. Prior to the Monday vote, Yinon stated that the law could be brought to bear against targeted boycotts “whose goal is to influence the political debate in connection with the future of Judea and Samaria, a discussion which has been at the heart of political debate in Israel for more than 40 years now.”
4. The effect of the law could be crippling to the efforts of all organizations and many individuals working for Israeli-Palestinian peace and enhanced freedoms and human rights within Israel and the territories. The rabid anti-NGO campaigns of Im Tirtzu and other groups could escalate into a full-bore “lawfare” offensive, hauling them repeatedly into court and costing them prohibitive legal fees.
Q. Who benefits from all of this?
For the hard right, this is a clear win-win. First, there is the language of the law, through which Israel effectively and without fanfare annexes the settlements, and, in so doing, acknowledges that the settlements have annexed the state of Israel.
Secondly, the more untenable the law, the more anti-democratic its spirit and the more delusional its provisions, the more it delights those within the pro-settlement power base. Furthermore, this increases the likelihood that the High Court – reviled by the far-right and radical religious – will strike it down, only adding luster to those who incite against the Court.
Q. Who is fighting the law?
The Gush Shalom organization Tuesday filed the first High Court legal challenge to the new law.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel, the Coalition of Women for Peace, Physicians for Human Rights, the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, and Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, have also announced that they will challenge the law in the High Court. Peace Now and the Solidarity (Sheikh Jarrah) movement have begun collecting thousands of personal pledges advocating boycotts against settlement.
A number of U.S. Jewish organizations have condemned the bill, notably the Anti-Defamation League, which generally refrains from criticizing Israeli government policy and actions. ADL President Abraham Foxman said the bill was a disservice to Israeli democracy. J Street and Ameinu were among other U.S. groups to denounce the law.
Q. How dare you call this a step toward fascism in Israel?
I’m pretty much no different from everybody else here – just learning by doing. I’m learning about fascism one step at a time. “Now they tell me,” I’m thinking to myself. I’m learning that the success of the Boycott Bill is a textbook case of the quiet appeal, the brilliant disguise, the endlessly adaptable expertise in the workings of democracy , that help explain the progress of fascism in our time. So this is what I’ve found out so far:
At first, it doesn’t feel like fascism. That’s why it works.
At first, to people whose nerves are bleeding and torn and altogether shot from generations of bearing arms and bearing wars and bearing children who will face still more wars, and between them, chaos and trauma and fury and grief and going without, fascism can sound like quiet. It can sound like actual calm. It’s an understandable mistake. What have these people had to compare it to?
To people who feel vilified on reflex and demonized by rote, this new direction of ours can feel like freedom. That’s why it works in a place like this. While it’s getting up to speed, fascism’s just another word for nothing left to lose.
I have friends whose livelihood is bound up with preserving the sense that democracy in Israel is as sound as ever; that if it’s under attack, it’s only from enemies foreign and domestic. I feel for them now. They’ll have to dismiss or minimize or ignore the Boycott Bill. They’ll have to pretend. At first, they could hope that no one would notice or care. Not, as they say, bloody likely. Fascism, the human construction that it is, has its better days and worse, and Monday was the best ever.
And this was not only because the day began with Glenn Beck being hosted in the Knesset by Likud MK Danny Danon, the carefully coiffed Mad Hatter of Israeli Tea Party wannabes.
It was how the day ended that mattered.
Q. What’s next in line?
A list of new bills, beginning next week, each designed to choke debate, gag protest, punish criticism, and/or cement the rule of the right. First up: The return of a bill to create McCarthyesque committees to investigate organizations the panels deem leftist. The bill was originally withdrawn for lack of votes in Knesset, but, buoyed by the success of the Boycott Law, the McCarthy Bill’s sponsors now believe they can win passage.
Q. Do you see any cause for hope at all?
Paradoxically, the Boycott Law may yet prove to be a disaster for its primary sponsors, the settlement movement. First, there is the economic element. While the law appears to effectively annex the territories, erasing any legal difference between Israel proper, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, it may single-handedly spur an unprecedented world protest boycott on settler-produced goods. And thanks to the sweeping language of the boycott law, the poison written in smoke and fun-house mirrors, the boycott may extend to the Golan as well, in particular, to Yarden wines.
But what may more effectively stymie the march toward fascism in Israel are the budding doubts of the supporters of laws such as these. You could hear them on Tuesday, headed by Likud Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz, forced by the absence of Netanyahu and Barak to defend the law on his own.
The former Peace Now activist, sounding pained and put-upon, condemned boycotts as inherently undemocratic and illegitimate. In terms that were as worthy a description as any of the Boycott Law itself, Steinitz called boycotting “a belligerent attempt to impose one’s will on a public which thinks otherwise”.
‘Boycott law – huge step toward fascism’: YNet
Artists who signed letter against performing in Ariel join left-wing groups in slamming proposal adopted by Knesset. ‘If it’s approved by the High Court, I’ll be a proud criminal,’ says playwright Edna Mazia
The artists who last year signed a letter against performing in the city of Ariel, located beyond the Green Line, are facing a new reality after the Knesset adopted a bill proposing sanctions against anyone declaring a boycott on Israel.
According to the proposal, if these artists take part in a similar initiative in the future, they will be violating the law. On Tuesday they joined left-wing organizations in slamming the controversial move.
“This bill is a measure of intimidation which isn’t that frightening. It joins several other childish bills which I can hardly remember because they’re so delusional,” argues actor Rami Heuberger, who signed the original letter against Ariel.
“These types of bills contradict human nature, and I presume no one is interested in such things. I guess some people forgot to show up for the Knesset vote last night, and that’s why it passed. At least that’s what I’m trying to think.”
Would you sign the letter today, after the bill has been adopted?
“Yes. It’s a funny bill. Not everything should be taken seriously. I couldn’t understand it. It seemed childish to me. Perhaps I’m living in ‘la-la-land’, but I’m not worried.
“I personally boycott the entire occupied territories – I simply don’t go in there, don’t perform there, don’t eat there and don’t sleep there. Is there a law saying that if someone personally boycotts the territories, they’ll be forced to go in there or face prosecution? It sounds like a fantasy to me.”
‘Prepared to pay any fine’
“I have just taken another job to be able to pay any fines imposed on me, and we’re prepared to pay the fines. We’re desperate,” playwright and screenwriter Edna Mazia says cynically.
“It’s unbelievable. I’m sure the High Court won’t approve it, and if it does – I’ll be a proud criminal.”
“Not only is it illegal and undemocratic,” Mazia says angrily,” “it’s a huge step toward fascism. These people want to reach it slowly. Instead of waiting patiently for demography to win, they’re impatient.
“Clearly the State is heading toward a catastrophe. It’s a case of unbelievable arrogance on their part, and they will pay for it… Today we’re silent because we’re desperate. We’re headed toward dictatorship.
“I would be glad to see someone lead the change that must take place. I don’t have the energy. I’m waiting for a charismatic leader to take the matter into his own hands, lead a depressed nation. This is the kind of nation that wakes up only when its cottage cheese is taken away. I’m staying here for now, but perhaps I’ll try to become a Buddhist.”
‘Never thought this could happen’
Like Heuberger, author and playwright Savyon Liebrecht clarifies that she wouldn’t hesitate if asked to sign a similar letter after the bill has been adopted, expressing her hope that the threat would vanish once the High Court judges rule on it.
“They may be our last resort,” she says. “If this bill and other bills the Right is planning pass, I don’t know if we’ll be able to do anything about it. I assume the law won’t make me not sign a similar letter or not take any measures, but it’s sad that this is happening.
“I never thought something like this could happen, but reality here is stranger than fiction. Personally, I haven’t crossed the Green Line for years, but as a private person.
“When it comes to a play, I can’t prevent a play invited to Ariel from performing there. But I plan to donate the money coming from there. I wouldn’t touch it.”
Prof. Oz: Thought police introduced
According to Prof. Avraham Oz, who signed a second anti-Ariel letter, “This bill brings us closer to a delusional situation in Israeli politics. My friend Amnon Rubinstein wrote that ‘this is a day of disaster for Israeli democracy’.
“This is the kind of bill that doesn’t let you think. If you’re against something, no matter what, you’re facing legal proceedings. I’m unfamiliar with such a law in any other country, democratic or non-democratic.
“The Israeli Knesset is dominated by a group of people with a majority in the votes, but with no realization of what they’re doing. Any person who understands the meaning of democracy should rebel today, regardless of certain issues, because if one day they decide to rise up against the majority – they are facing collective punishment.
“Even (Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu and (Defense Minister Ehud) Barak didn’t show up for this vote. They’re afraid, as a thought police has been introduced.”
What about the boycott of Ariel? Will it continue?
“I can’t say what we’ll do. I’m responsible for myself, and naturally I’ll continue boycotting and calling on others to boycott anything I view as illegal and unacceptable, which has to be boycotted. They have increased our motivation to express the opposition’s opinion.
“If asked, I would sign a similar letter tomorrow, without any hesitations. I’m willing to be the first person to be sued under this law. It’s against any basic rules and values, so I believe I am not violating the law.”
Nonetheless, many of the artists who signed the anti-Ariel letter refused to comment on the new law adopted by the Knesset.
“It’s very easy to intimidate people,” Prof. Oz says in response. “I’m a law-abiding citizen, but this law is not a law as far as I’m concerned.”