One thousand five hundred Palestinian prisoners have been on a hunger strike for almost a week now. They are refusing sustenance in an effort to improve the deplorable conditions faced by the nearly 6,500 Palestinians who are currently imprisoned in Israel.
On the day before the strike began, the action’s leader, Marwan Barghouti, published an op-ed in the International New York Times. It was an elegantly written piece in which Barghouti laid out the conditions in Israel’s prisons and the demands of the strikers.
These demands include more regular family visits, better healthcare, an end to solitary confinement and administrative detention (a practice in which Israel jails Palestinians for prolonged periods without charges or trial), and installing public telephones enabling prisoners to have monitored calls with their families.
As one of the co-founders of the Palestine Human Rights Campaign, I have long been acquainted with Israel’s “justice system”. Since most Palestinians have been convicted based on confessions obtained under duress, international human rights organisations have condemned Israel’s violations of international law and the lack of due process afforded to prisoners.
More than 80 per cent of all arrested Palestinians have been refused the right to legal counsel until after they have been subjected to prolonged and often abusive interrogation. In his article, Barghouti describes these abuses that he and other prisoners have been forced to endure, noting that the equivalent of 40pc of Palestine’s male population have been jailed by Israel.
The Israeli government’s response to the article and to the strike, itself, have been revealingly characteristic of their modus operandi.
Because the Times initially described Barghouti as a Palestinian MP and a leader, Israel launched a campaign forcing the editors to change their description to note that Barghouti had been convicted of murder and membership in a terrorist organisation.
What Israel did not mention was the fact that Barghouti’s arrest, trial and conviction were denounced by the Swiss-based Inter-Parliamentary Union as being “a violation of international law” and having “failed to meet fair trial standards”. The IPU concluded that “Barghouti’s guilt has not been established”.
But when Israel is on the warpath in an effort to discredit criticism, facts don’t matter. They called the op-ed “journalist terrorism”; accused the Times of “media terrorism”; called Barghouti’s piece “fake news” that was “full of lies”.
Former Israeli Ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, called for an investigation to see who at the Times was responsible for getting and publishing the article. One Knesset member went so far as to suggest that Israel might close the Times’ Israel bureau.
In the end, the Times relented and changed their description of Barghouti to meet Israel’s demands.
Reflecting on this Israeli bullying campaign, Haaretz’s insightful columnist, Chemi Salev termed the entire effort a ritual of diversion and denial. “First”, he wrote, “you manufacture righteous indignation over a minor fault; then you assault the newspaper; and cast doubt on its motives.
In this way the Israeli public is absolved of the need to actually contend with the gist of the article. As for the strikers, Israel promised a harsh response and no negotiations. Barghouti and other “ring leaders” have been placed under solitary confinement.
What Israel will not acknowledge and is attempting to obfuscate is that their treatment of Palestinians is deplorable. Their 50-year-long illegal occupation has driven a captive people to resist their systematic oppressive violence. In the process, Israel terms every Palestinian response “terrorism”. Whether throwing rocks at checkpoints, boycotting Israeli products or writing op-eds and going on a hunger strike – all become “terrorist” acts.
Doesn’t bombing civilian targets and killing scores of civilians or systematically starving Gaza into submission qualify as terror? And doesn’t confiscating land, demolishing homes, and centuries-old olive orchards also fit the definition of terrorism? At the root of all the violence is the persistence of an inhumane occupation and the evil that results from it.
What should be noted is that like the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, a mass prisoners’ strike is an inherently non-violent protest. This, Israel refuses to accept. Because it can admit no wrongdoing and because of its obsessive need to control all aspects of Palestinian life, any resistance becomes a threat and, therefore, an “act of terror” that must be punished and snuffed out.
It is this behaviour that breeds resistance. And this deadly and tragic cycle will continue until Israel recognises that its victims are real people who will not submit but will continue to assert their rights.