[Is democracy today only a matter of whites, of Westerners, and
has it been completely emptied of its meaning in terms of equality? ]
[[link removed]]

EYAL SIVAN: ‘IF ISRAEL IS A MODEL OF DEMOCRACY FOR THE WEST, THAT
SCARES ME’  
[[link removed]]


 

Cristina Piccino
November 9, 2023
Il Manifesto Global
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Is democracy today only a matter of whites, of Westerners, and has
it been completely emptied of its meaning in terms of equality? _

,

 

Director, producer, essayist and film lecturer Eyal Sivan has built up
with each of his films a narrative of Israel seen from the
“inside,” through a passionate interrogation of memory and a gaze
in constant dialogue with the present and the reality of the world.
From the Israel-Palestine conflict to the Holocaust (_A
Specialist_ retraced the Eichmann trial under the guidance of Hannah
Arendt), each scene manages to achieve a refounding of the imaginary
around the issues being focused on.

This might also be part of the reason why his works have often been
controversial or at the center of heated debates, such as _Route
181_ (2004), made with Palestinian filmmaker Michel Khleifi, a road
movie that takes place along the border line set out by the 1947 UN
resolution (never implemented) that established a possible binational
state.

Sivan, born in Haifa, an activist against the Occupation from a very
young age, a photographer before he was a filmmaker, refused military
service and moved to Paris in 1985. We interviewed him on the phone
from Marseille, where he lives today.

IN ONE OF YOUR EARLY FILMS, _IZKOR: SLAVES OF MEMORY_ (1991), YOU
ANALYZED THE WAY IN WHICH ISRAEL, IN ITS NARRATIVE, USES HISTORY TO
JUSTIFY CHOICES IN THE PRESENT. SINCE OCTOBER 7, THE DAY OF THE HAMAS
TERRORIST ATTACK, THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN CONSTANTLY USING THE
COMPARISON BETWEEN NAZISM AND HAMAS.

_Izkor_, which you mentioned, is a film from over 30 years ago. The
most terrible thing is that there’s nothing new in this process;
sometimes I feel like everything has been said already. The Israeli
ambassador’s gesture of showing up at the UN with the Star of David
on his chest confirms this conclusion.

The intention is to forget that what happened on October 7 did not
begin at that time, and using the dialectic of the Shoah to frame it
is a desecration of the memory of the Shoah itself, which is debased
by being reduced to terrorism. As a human being, as a Jew, I see this
as an insult towards my family history. Instrumentalizing the Shoah to
justify any action hearkens back to that victimhood ideology, strongly
established in our society, which says that when someone is a
“victim” they are in a position of “absolute innocence” –
something that does not exist as such. But it doesn’t matter: we,
because we are victims of the Shoah, are allowed to do anything, even
bombing a refugee camp, hospitals, schools – our “total
innocence” absolves us. Such a view is nothing other than a
desecration of memory and a form of revisionism.

If Hamas are Nazis, then does the Holocaust and Nazism become nothing
more than terrorism? What about the millions of people exterminated by
Hitler’s ideology? Europe accepts this rhetoric about Nazism because
it’s a good way to evade its own responsibility: viewing the
Holocaust as terrorism tells us that killing all European Jews
wasn’t that serious after all. In this way, the historical
uniqueness of the Shoah is lost.

And there’s another point here: it wouldn’t be possible to seek
any peace agreement with the Nazis, right? Or negotiate, or attempt a
prisoner exchange. Within the framework of this comparison, any
possibility of mediation is eliminated. But the Israelis are
“condemned” to live with the Palestinians, even if they continue
in this mass slaughter – with a shocking number of Palestinians
killed that is moving increasingly closer to the notion of genocide.
So, Israel, after denouncing crimes against humanity time and time
again, finds itself in the position of committing them. It is truly a
suicidal policy for all Israelis.

MANY EUROPEAN COUNTRIES, INCLUDING GERMANY AND FRANCE, HAVE BANNED
DEMONSTRATIONS IN SOLIDARITY WITH PALESTINE, WHILE CRITICISM OF
ISRAELI POLICY IS BRANDED AS ANTI-SEMITISM. AT THE SAME TIME, ACTS OF
ANTI-SEMITISM ARE MULTIPLYING.

Right-wing, liberal-conservative European governments are playing with
fire. There is a real danger of importing this conflict into Europe,
which is already characterized by repressive policies against
immigration, by Islamophobia; and the attitude expressed towards this
conflict seems to be intended to set aside the issues that are
internal to European countries.

Defining any criticism of Israeli policy as “anti-Semitic” again
hearkens back to that “state of exception” – a highly ambivalent
one – that Israel enjoys, in everything from the bombing of Gaza in
2007 to the attacks by settlers that have resulted in many deaths.

The whole world has let Israel do these things, against all
international law. Israel enjoys the power to act without limits,
precisely because of that “state of exception”: what applies to
others doesn’t apply to them. However, this policy by European
governments has been counterproductive for Israel: the fact that it
was able to go ahead with its crimes, committed well before October 7,
has put Jews, Israelis, in more and more danger.

IN OFFICIAL ISRAELI GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS RELEASED LAST WEEK, THERE IS
A PLAN TO EXPEL GAZANS INTO THE EGYPTIAN SINAI DESERT. DO YOU THINK
THIS IS POSSIBLE? IT READS THAT “THEY WILL BE HELPED BY THEIR ARAB
AND MUSLIM BROTHERS.” BUT WE KNOW THAT IN THE ARAB WORLD, THIS WHOLE
BUSINESS OF SOLIDARITY WITH THE PALESTINIANS IS QUITE HYPOCRITICAL.

That document turns out to have been drafted on October 3, and it
reflects Israeli policy since 1948, which can be summarized as the
greatest possible land area and the smallest possible Arab population.
The difference today is that, as the most radical far right has come
into government, they can finally – as they say – get the job done
that wasn’t finished in ’48. This is the great dream, or illusion,
of expelling the Palestinians from the collective consciousness –
something that, moreover, has already been going on since Gaza became
an open-air prison, since the walls were built that eliminated
millions of Palestinians from the common space, in the perception of
both Israel and Europe.

Regarding the Arab countries, no matter what they’re saying, their
dictatorial regimes are friends of the West: this applies to Egypt
with its 60,000 political prisoners as much as to the Gulf countries.
The Arab populations are under the heel of these dictatorships, but
the Western countries only care about safeguarding their profits.

I don’t expect anything from the Arab countries: Al-Sisi is
negotiating whatever suits him in terms of money, weapons, debt
cancellation, and if they reach a favorable agreement, he will take in
the Palestinians in the desert. There is no Arab policy of solidarity,
it’s all about individual states and economic interests. The same
goes for Turkey: it accepted Syrian refugees for money, promising the
Europeans to “hold them back,” so it would have a free hand in
repressing the Kurds. Instead of solidarity, I would call it a general
businesslike attitude.

That Israeli plan confirms that the current conflict is neither ethnic
nor blood-based, but political; that is how it should be seen and
treated.

IN ISRAEL, BEFORE THE START OF THE WAR, THERE SEEMED TO BE AN
OPPOSITION MOVEMENT AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT.

I would not use the word “war”: it might be one on the Israeli
side, but the Palestinians don’t have an army. In my view, war is a
clash of equal forces. This is a military operation and an assault on
the civilian population. Just as the Hamas attack of October 7 is not
an act of war, but terrorism. Before that day, it was like Israel was
enjoying a picnic on top of a volcano. With the widespread belief
among Israelis that they were fine, that they felt safe enough to
organize a festival on the border with Gaza without thinking about the
possible risks.

The internal protests were never against the occupation or the state
of war, never critical about the 200 dead in the West Bank this year
or the settler pogroms. They were protesting against corruption,
judicial reform – very important things, but not the heart of the
problem. People were saying they intended to refuse military service;
nevertheless, as soon as it all happened, there was an almost tribal
reaction, and 90% of Israelis asked to go and fight, showing that they
had their eyes and ears closed just like the government. That is, they
didn’t want to understand that a colonial state of occupation does
not allow one to live normally, that the constant repression of
suffering people yields no hope.

After all, those protests – which I never believed in – were more
aesthetic than structural: they were fighting for democracy, but for
Jews, not for everyone, so that they could continue to enjoy their
privileges and not find themselves subjected to conditions that are
already reality in the Territories.

ON THAT SUBJECT: ONE OF THE MOST COMMON OBJECTIONS TO CRITICISMS OF
ISRAELI POLICY IS THAT ISRAEL IS A DEMOCRACY.

There is a lot to discuss about what democracy means today. To that
argument one can reply that South Africa was also a democracy, but
only for whites. There is a very poignant issue of racism in all of
this. Proof of this is the worldwide mobilization for the Ukrainians
and the deafening silence towards the Syrians and so many other
massacres being carried out in our world. So: is democracy today only
a matter of whites, of Westerners, and has it been completely emptied
of its meaning in terms of equality?

The same goes for Israel: democracy is reserved for Jews, and half of
Israel’s population – the Arab-Israelis – don’t experience it,
don’t have voting rights, civil rights and are suffering constant
discrimination. If this is a model of democracy for the West, that
scares me very much. It would mean that the idea of a new European
democracy is built on racism, on inequality, on a state of exception
that allows one to keep people in prison without trial or to enter
their homes at night for any reason.

_Originally published in Italian on NOVEMBER 7,
2023https://ilmanifesto.it/eyal-sivan-se-israele-e-un-modello-la-democrazia-mi-fa-paura_

* Israel-Palestine
[[link removed]]
* Gaza
[[link removed]]
* democracy
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]