RSS
Does the Palestinian Leadership Represent all Palestinians?
JNS.org – Palestinians who live abroad are calling for a voice in Palestinian decision-making, arguing that neither the Palestinian Authority nor the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) have the right to speak for all Palestinians.
In 2017, a portion of the Palestinian population residing outside the West Bank and Gaza Strip announced the formation of a group called the “Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad.” The group, which claims to represent 6-7 million Palestinians dispersed throughout more than 50 countries, is fiercely opposed to the Oslo Accords, signed between Israel and the PLO in 1993, and supports the “resistance” against Israel.
The group’s leaders say that the primary impetus behind its formation is the “marginalization” of Palestinians abroad since the signing of the Oslo Accords.
Prior to the agreement, there was a semi-consensus among the Palestinians that the PLO is the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.” After the signing of the Oslo Accords, however, the PLO leadership moved from Tunis and other Arab countries to the West Bank and Gaza Strip. As the PLO began concentrating the majority of its efforts on the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the organization’s ties with the Palestinians abroad increasingly deteriorated.
In the past three decades, the PLO Executive Committee, a crucial decision-making body, and other institutions associated with the organization have met regularly in Ramallah. The PLO no longer has offices in most Arab countries.
PA/PLO leaders reject the outsiders
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who also chairs the PLO Executive Committee, and several PLO leaders are incensed over the formation of the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad. They see the PLO’s status as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people” as directly threatened by the group. They are also concerned about the extreme stances the group has adopted since its founding, particularly its opposition to recognizing Israel’s right to exist and commitment to the “armed struggle” against Israel.
The representatives of the Palestinian expatriates maintain that former PLO leader Yasser Arafat was not entitled to “give up 80% of the lands of Palestine” when he recognized Israel’s right to exist. Furthermore, they contend that Arafat had no right to abandon the “armed struggle” by purportedly amending the PLO’s Charter shortly after the signing of the Oslo Accords. They further state that the PLO leadership is not authorized to surrender Palestinian refugees’ and their descendants’ “right of return” to their former homes within Israel.
Accusing Abbas of “hijacking” and “weakening” the PLO, the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad has demanded extensive reforms in the PLO, but to no avail.
Two of the group’s declared objectives are “engaging the Zionist enterprise” and “supporting the resistance” inside the West Bank and Gaza Strip. A standard definition of “resistance” is the use of violence by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups against Israel. Abbas claims he favors only peaceful “popular resistance” against Israel and therefore views the group’s commitment to the “armed struggle” as a challenge to him personally.
Given that the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad was established in Istanbul, PA officials surmise that Turkey, together with Qatar, is its primary backer. Qatar and Turkey have supported and encouraged Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood Organization, for a considerable amount of time.
Currently, the offices of the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad are located at the Al-Zaytouna Centre for Studies and Consultation in the Lebanese capital of Beirut, where the Iran-backed Hezbollah terrorist militia exists as a state-within-a-state.
Since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad has voiced support for the Palestinian “resistance” in the Gaza Strip and called on the Palestinians to utilize the worldwide support for the Palestinians, especially on US college campuses, to intensify the diplomatic and legal campaign against Israel in the international arena.
For now, it does not seem that the representatives of the Palestinians abroad are interested in taking on any role in overseeing the affairs of the Gaza Strip after the war. Instead, they believe the Palestinians should invest their energies and resources in pursuing an international campaign to delegitimize and isolate Israel.
In addition, they demand a complete overhaul of the Palestinian political structure, which would involve the ouster of the 88-year-old Abbas and the majority of his associates.
On June 28, 2024, some 200 representatives of the Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad convened in Istanbul to engage in a symposium centered on the aftermath of Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack on Israel. Speakers at the parley agreed that the attack catalyzed “achievements” gained by the Palestinians, including anti-Israel student demonstrations in the United States, a rise in international attention to the Palestinian cause, a “schism” that has split Israeli society over the war, and the issue of the 120 Israeli hostages held in the Gaza Strip.
It is difficult to see how Abbas or any other Palestinian leader can ignore the voices of Palestinian expatriates. These Palestinians are sending a message to Abbas and other Palestinian leaders that they are not authorized to sign any peace agreement or make any concessions to Israel on behalf of millions of Palestinians abroad whose views seem to be more aggressive towards Israel.
Originally published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
The post Does the Palestinian Leadership Represent all Palestinians? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence
McGill University has canceled an on-campus event planned by Jewish students—and temporarily halted bookings for all extracurricular activities—following threats of violence along with a death threat, as outlined in a […]
The post McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel
US Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) on Tuesday introduced bipartisan legislation to cut off federal funding from universities that engage in boycotts of Israel.
The legislation, titled “The Protect Economic Freedom Act,” would render universities that participate in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel ineligible for federal funding under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, prohibiting them from receiving federal student aid. The bill would also mandate that colleges and universities submit evidence that they are not participating in commercial boycotts against the Jewish state.
“Enough is enough. Appeasing the antisemitic mobs on college campuses threatens the safety of Jewish students and faculty and it undermines the relationship between the US and one of our strongest allies. If an institution is going to capitulate to the BDS movement, there will be consequences — starting with the Protect Economic Freedom Act,” Foxx, chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said in a statement.
Gottheimer added that the legislation is necessary to thwart the surging tide of antisemitism on college campuses. Although the lawmaker noted that students are allowed to engage in free expression regarding the ongoing war in Gaza, he argued that blanket boycotts against Israel endanger the lives of Jewish students and community members.
“The goal of the antisemitic BDS movement is to annihilate the democratic State of Israel, America’s critical ally in the global fight against terror. While students and faculty are free to speak their minds and disagree on policy issues, we cannot allow antisemitism to run rampant and risk the safety and security of Jewish students, staff, faculty, and guests on college campuses,” Gottheimer said in a statement. “The new bipartisan Protect Economic Freedom Act will give the Department of Education a critical new tool to combat the antisemitic BDS movement on college campuses. Now more than ever, we must take the necessary steps to protect our Jewish community.”
The legislation instructs the US Department of Education to keep a record of universities that refuse to confirm their non-participation in anti-Israel boycotts. The list of universities in non-compliance with the legislation would be made publicly available.
In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre acrosssouthern Israel, universities across the country have found themselves embroiled in controversies regarding campus antisemitism. In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Israel, hordes of students and faculty orchestrated protests and demonstrations condemning the Jewish state. Student groups at elite universities such as Harvard and Columbia issued statements blaming Israel for the attacks and expressing support for Hamas.
Several high-profile universities have also shown a significant level of tolerance for anti-Jewish sentiment festering on their campuses. Northwestern University, for example, capitulated to demands of anti-Israel activists to remove Sabra Hummus from campus dining halls because of its connections to Israel. At Stanford University, Jewish students have reported being forced to condemn Israel before being allowed to enter campus parties. Students at the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University launched unsuccessful attempts to convince the university to divest endowment funds from companies tied to Israel.
The post US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident
Harvard University’s Office of the Chaplain and Religious and Spiritual Life is being criticized by a rising Jewish civil rights activist for omitting any mention of antisemitism from a statement addressing antisemitic behavior.
The sharp words followed the office’s response to a hateful demonstration on campus in which pro-Hamas students stood outside Harvard Hillel and called for it to banned from campus. Such a demand is not new, as it began earlier this semester at the direction of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) organization, which coordinates the lion’s share of anti-Zionist activity on college campuses.
As seen in footage of the demonstration, the students chanted “Zionists aren’t welcome here!” and held signs which accused the organization — the largest campus organization for Jewish students in the world — of embracing “war criminals” and genocide.
Addressing the behavior, Harvard Chaplains issued a statement, which is now being pointed to as a symbol of higher education’s indifference to the unique hatred of antisemitism, as well as its permutation as anti-Zionism.
“We have noticed a trend of expression in which entire groups of students are told they ‘are not welcome here’ because of their religious, cultural, ethnic, or political commitments and identities, or are targeted through acts of vandalism,” the office said, seemingly circumventing the matter at hand. “We find this trend disturbing and anathema to the dialogue and connection across lines of difference that must be a central value and practice of a pluralistic institution of higher learning.”
It continued, “Student groups who are singled out in this way experience such language and acts of vandalism as a painful attack that undermines the acceptance and flourishing of religious diversity here at Harvard. Let us all endeavor to care for one another in these divisive times.”
Recent Harvard graduate Shabbos Kestenbaum, who addressed the Republican National Convention in August to discuss the ways which progressive bias in higher education fosters anti-Zionism and anti-Western ideologies, described the statement as a moral failure in a post on X/Twitter on Tuesday.
“Disappointing,” he said. “After Harvard Jews were told by masked students ‘Zionists aren’t welcome here’ outside of the Hillel, the Chaplain Office finally released a statement that did not include the words Jew, Zionism, Israel, or antisemitism. A total abdication of religious responsibility.”
Kestenbaum noted in a later statement that Harvard’s chief diversity and inclusion officer, Sherri Ann Charleston, has so far declined to speak on the issue at all. He charged that when Charleston “isn’t plagiarizing, she and DEI normalize antisemitism,” referring to evidence, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, that Charleston is a serial plagiarist who climbed the hierarchy of the higher education establishment by pilfering other people’s scholarship.
Harvard University president Alan Garber — installed after former president Claudine Gay resigned following revelations that she is also a serial plagiarist — has, experts have said, been inconsistent in managing the campus’ unrest.
During summer, The Harvard Crimson reported that Harvard downgraded “disciplinary sanctions” it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it suspended for illegally occupying Harvard Yard for nearly five weeks, a reversal of policy which defied the university’s previous statements regarding the matter. Unrepentant, the students, members of the group Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP), celebrated the revocation of the punishments on social media and promised to disrupt the campus again.
Earlier this semester, however, Garber appeared to denounce a pro-Hamas student group which marked the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by praising the brutal invasion as an act of revolutionary justice that should be repeated until the Jewish state is destroyed, despite having earlier announced a new “institutional neutrality” policy which ostensibly prohibits the university from weighing in on contentious political issues. While Garber ultimately has said more than Gay when the same group praised the Oct. 7 massacre last academic year, his administration’s handling of campus antisemitism has been ambiguous, according to observers — and described even by students who benefited from its being so as “caving in.”
The university’s perceived failure to address antisemitism has had legal consequences.
Earlier this month, a lawsuit accusing it of ignoring antisemitism was cleared to proceed to discovery, a phase of the case which may unearth damaging revelations about how college officials discussed and crafted policy responses to anti-Jewish hatred before and after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.
The case, filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, centers on several incidents involving Harvard Kennedy School professor Marshall Ganz during the 2022-2023 academic year.
Ganz allegedly refused to accept a group project submitted by Israeli students for his course, titled “Organizing: People, Power, Change,” because they described Israel as a “liberal Jewish democracy.” He castigated the students over their premise, the Brandeis Center says, accusing them of “white supremacy” and denying them the chance to defend themselves. Later, Ganz allegedly forced the Israeli students to attend “a class exercise on Palestinian solidarity” and the taking of a class photograph in which their classmates and teaching fellows “wore ‘keffiyehs’ as a symbol of Palestinian support.”
During an investigation of the incidents, which Harvard delegated to a third party firm, Ganz admitted that he believed “that the students’ description of Israel as a Jewish democracy … was similar to ‘talking about a white supremacist state.’” The firm went on to determine that Ganz “denigrated” the Israeli students and fostered “a hostile learning environment,” conclusions which Harvard accepted but never acted on.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident first appeared on Algemeiner.com.