Created on Wednesday, 15 February 2012 07:00
Written by Gilad Atzmon
A Few Comments on Recent Norman Finkelstein Interview with Frank Barat
by Gilad Atzmon
Norman Finkelstein has recently bought himself a few enemies within
the Palestinian solidarity movement for openly and enthusiastically
advocating the Two States Solution. In the last interview it seems as if
Finkelstein defends Israel’s right to exist.
From an academic point of view, Finkelstein has a point. He argues
that in order to win we have to operate within the parameters set by
international law. However, some points should be made here.
It is far from being clear who sets the parameters of international
law. Is it really the international community? Or is it just a few
powerful Western countries looking into their own particular
It is also far from being clear whether the international law is
either ethical or sensible.
- Is it ethical to let the Jewish State
celebrates its exceptional symptoms at the expense of the indigenous
people of the land i.e. the Palestinians? Is it sensible to maintain
an, aggressive, expansionist, racist, and exclusivist, nuclear Jewish
State in Middle East? Is it safe? Is it good for world peace?
- It is far from being transparently obvious to me why an American
Jewish academic or any other Western solidarity activist should have a
say about the way or manner in which Palestinian should live on their
land. I, for instance, have never come across a Palestinian academic
preaching Britain to divide its island by resurrecting the wall at the
Scottish border. The meaning of it is simple, there is something
fundamentally pretentious in the solidarity discourse and in resolution
discourse in particular. We, for some reason, like to tell others what
is right or wrong.
- Do we need to discuss resolution for the conflict? Israel is already
a one State, it has a single electric grid, one sewage system, one
international pre dial number. Yet Israel is dominated politically by an
oppressive and racially exclusive Jewish political philosophy. This
has to be changed and it will be changed by means of resistance with
our solidarity or without it.
- Yet, Finkelstein’s criticism of the solidarity movement is largely valid. The recent expulsion of Palestinians and academics
from the UK PSC, proves that we aren’t just dealing with a ‘cult’
discourse as Finkelstein suggests, far worse, we are actually dealing
with a rabbinical operation that exercises the most repulsive Judaic
- Finkelstein is correct when he suggests that the achievements of the
solidarity ‘cult’ operations are pretty limited. However, he may fail
to realise that solidarity with the Palestinian doesn’t end in the
West, in NYC, London or Paris. The recent political triumph of Muslim
parties in the region is fuelled by Hamas and Hezbollah victories. It is more than likely, that the Palestinians and the Aabs will liberate themselves.
- Unlike Finkelstein, I believe that the solidarity movement is
already a mass movement.
- More and more people out there grasp that the
continuum between Israel, AIPAC and the Conservative Friends of Israel
(CFI) is the biggest threat to world peace. More and more Brits are
astonished to find out that all the British political parties are
controlled by the Israel Lobby (Friends of Israel), CFI, LFI, & LDFI
. How many British politicians are as friendly with Hartlepool or
Penzance? More and more Brits and Americans grasp that their
politicians are for sale. They realise that on the Israeli shopping
list, a Western politician comes out much cheaper than a tank. More and
more Brits and Americans come to realise that in this crucial battle
for elementary freedom ‘We are all Palestinians.’