06.08.25
Editorial Note
IAM has reported numerous times on how pro-Palestinian activists have taken over academic associations in the West. Concurrently, IAM has also related how Qatar is funding anti-Israel activities on Western campuses. A recent example has come to light that pertains to Georgetown University in Qatar (GU-Q).
GU-Q has a significant connection to Palestine. For example, GU-Q and the organization Second Chance (which offers full scholarships to high-achieving, low-income students, primarily outside of their home country) are offering scholarships to Palestinian students to pursue their studies at the university. The GU-Q Library has a dedicated Palestinian Studies Guide, offering resources for students, scholars, and researchers. The GU-Q hosts various events focusing on Palestine, including speaker series, workshops, and the Hiwaraat conferences featuring discussions on historical and contemporary Palestine issues and the dynamics of Gaza.
Very glaring and detrimental is the absence of any ties to Israel, Israeli representatives, or even pro-Israeli speakers.
The Hiwaraat conference series hosts “Coalitions for Justice: Jewish and Palestinian Solidarity” as part of the “Reimagining Palestine” events. Panelists discuss “how Palestinians and their Jewish allies can effectively combat the rise of ethno-nationalism and advocate for a shared future [as well as] explore the potential for reconciling historical grievances, building partnerships that contribute to a just and inclusive future, and expanding these coalitions to include other marginalized communities.”
All the featured guests are anti-Israel activists, including the Jewish speakers such as Rebecca Vilkomerson (Moderator), who is the Co-Director of Funding Freedom. This group supports Palestinian liberation within philanthropy. She is the co-author of the 2024 book Solidarity is the Political Version of Love: Lessons from Jewish Anti-Zionist Organizing. From 2009-2019, she was the Executive Director of Jewish Voice for Peace. Arielle Angel is the editor-in-chief of Jewish Currents and an anti-Zionist activist. Tareq Baconi is a writer. He is the author of the 2018 book Hamas Contained: The Rise and Pacification of Palestinian Resistance. He is the former senior analyst for Israel/Palestine at the International Crisis Group based in Ramallah. He serves as the president of the board of Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network. Fadi Quran is the Senior Director at Avaaz, a global civic movement with 69 million members dedicated to driving change worldwide. He is also organizing efforts toward Palestinian liberation. Simone Zimmerman is an organizer and strategist based in Brooklyn, New York. She is the protagonist of the film Israelism, about the deepening generational divide in the American Jewish community over Israel and Palestine. She is a co-founder of the US-based Jewish anti-apartheid organization IfNotNow. She is currently the director of Media & Special Projects for the Diaspora Alliance, an international organization dedicated to “fighting antisemitism and its instrumentalization.”
Likewise, the Reimagining Palestine conference in September 2024 was co-organized with the legal group, Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which was founded in the US in 1966 to promote civil rights legislation and to pursue social justice causes. However, the group has been taken over by pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel activists. For example, on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched its deadly attack against Israel, the CCR published a press release, stating, “International Indifference to 16 years of a Suffocating Closure of the Gaza Strip and Decades of Israeli Impunity for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Against Palestinians Is Necessary Context.” For the group, the Hamas attack was a “Palestinian armed resistance from occupied Gaza, following months of intensive Israeli military attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank including East Jerusalem, and Gaza, and in the context of 75 years of Israeli military occupation of historic Palestine.” CCR then issued a statement: “The Center for Constitutional Rights stands in solidarity with the Palestinian people in their decades-long struggle for self-determination and freedom from Israel’s regime of apartheid and prolonged belligerent military occupation… Israel’s brutal 16-year closure of Gaza has suffocated the two million Palestinians imprisoned there.” They ended the statement with, “We echo demands for accountability and reaffirm our commitment to dismantling all forms of colonialism.”
CCR does not mention the fact that Israel withdrew from Gaza twenty years ago, nor has it acknowledged that Hamas is a terrorist organization. The fact that Georgetown University in Qatar is affiliated with terror sympathizers is appalling.
The GU-Q’s conference with the CCR aimed to “protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of ‘genocide’.”
Qatar’s Georgetown campus’s anti-Israel project has been acknowledged. A Jewish News article recently reported that “Qatar is buying influence at Georgetown University and reshaping the Jesuit school’s academic mission, hiring practices and campus culture.” The article discussed a new report that came out in June 2025 by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP). According to the report, Qatar invested “$1 billion of soft power” in one of the most important universities in the United States.
Dr. Charles Asher Small, the founding director and president of ISGAP, said in this article that “Muslim Brotherhood ideologues have had an influence in the academic world… Not just in Georgetown but throughout the United States.” Decades of substantial funding from Oman, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Jordan and Qatar have changed Georgetown in the past 50 years from “a prestigious academic institution rooted in Jesuit traditions into a pivotal nexus where radical ideologies, academic inquiry and geopolitical influence converge.” Those funders have steered GU-Q “toward a distinctive pro-Islamist and anti-Israel orientation.”
In particular worrying, the article discloses that the Muslim Brotherhood is a driving force behind the Qatari belief system, which, according to Small, is a “fusion of European genocidal antisemitism and even Nazism fused with a perversion of Islam,” that aims to “alienate and weaken Israel, to fragment and weaken the United States and Europe and to fragment the ‘great Satan’.”
The Georgetown University in Qatar reflects the common practice in Middle Eastern Studies of using a one‑sided narrative in discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This narrative strips events of their historical and regional context, portrays Palestinians as actors without agency or accountability for their decisions, and casts them primarily as perpetual victims of alleged Israeli colonialism, apartheid, or even genocide. This framing not only simplifies a highly complex conflict but also serves broader ideological objectives by assigning moral clarity to one side while absolving the other of responsibility.
Georgetown University, whose name legitimizes the degrees granted by its Qatar campus, should conduct a thorough audit of the programs and associated activities, addressing and rectifying the ideological biases embedded within its curriculum and outreach.
REFERENCES:
Using ‘$1b of soft power,’ Qatar has corrupted Georgetown University, new report says
“It’s all open-source information that we have seen,” the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy told JNS. “Just imagine what we couldn’t find.”
(June 17, 2025 / JNS)
Qatar is buying influence at Georgetown University and reshaping the Jesuit school’s academic mission, hiring practices and campus culture, according to a new report from the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy.
“The big takeaway is that we found $1 billion of soft power from the Qatari regime that goes into one of the most important universities in the United States, and if not the world,” Charles Asher Small, founding director and president of the nonprofit, told JNS.
“Muslim Brotherhood ideologues have had an influence in the academic world,” he said. “Not just in Georgetown but throughout the United States.”
According to the 135-page report, decades of “substantial” funding from Oman, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Jordan and Qatar have changed Georgetown in the past 50 years from “a prestigious academic institution rooted in Jesuit traditions into a pivotal nexus where radical ideologies, academic inquiry and geopolitical influence converge.”
Those funders have steered the Washington private school “toward a distinctive pro-Islamist and anti-Israel orientation,” according to the report. The foreign donors, of which Qatar is the principal, have also shaped a school that is “a training ground for U.S. foreign service professionals,” according to the report.
“It’s all open-source information that we have seen,” Small told JNS. “Just imagine what we couldn’t find.”
‘Blur the lines’
In 2005, the school opened a campus in Doha that is “an extension of the university that operates under a distinctly different set of political and academic constraints,” according to the report.
The Qatar campus, Georgetown’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies and its Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding—the latter two of which are parts of its School of Foreign Service in Washington—are “conduits through which external capital and ideological impulses converge to promote narratives that challenge the traditional American bipartisan consensus on international relations and cultural understanding,” according to the report.
“By fostering environments that often blur the lines between academic freedom and ideological advocacy, these centers have not only influenced scholarly discourse but have also played a significant role in the formation of activist networks and policy-oriented debates,” it states.
The Muslim Brotherhood is a driving force behind the Qatari belief system, which Small described as a “fusion of European genocidal antisemitism and even Nazism fused with a perversion of Islam.” It aims to “alienate and weaken Israel, to fragment and weaken the United States and Europe and to fragment the ‘great Satan,’” he said.
By infiltrating elite North American and European universities, the brotherhood and its allies are shaping the values and ideas of future leaders, with the effects now visible “from the classroom to the encampment to our streets,” Small said.
In Doha, Georgetown’s campus depends financially on the Qatar Foundation, which the royal family and the government control. Events organized on the campus and scholars invited to them have ties to extremism.
Small told JNS he had “particular shock” that Georgetown awarded its president’s medal to Sheikha Moza bint Nasser, chair of the Qatar Foundation and a public supporter of Hamas. (Jewish Insider noted that she posted, “O Allah, we entrust Palestine to you,” in Arabic on Oct. 8, 2023.)
“Here’s Georgetown giving a medal to a woman who supports Hamas, applauds Hamas’s activities when it comes to murdering Israelis and Jews,” he said. “This, to me, is astounding. It’s almost like it’s prime and plain sight.”
Since the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, there have been more antisemitic incidents, pro-Hamas demonstrations and harassment of Jewish students at Georgetown, according to the report.
“Universities have a sacred mission,” Small told JNS. “You’re educating young people on how to be citizens in a democracy. When liberal educational institutions are taking money from regimes that want to exterminate Jews, subjugate women, murder gay people, destroy democracy, this is really a threat to our stability and to our democracy and our democratic principles.”
He added that other research from the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy has found that Qatar funds U.S. institutions to the tune of $100 billion.
“It’s probably only the tip of an iceberg,” Small told JNS. “Now, we’re extending our research into Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and South Africa.”
“We’re very concerned that Qatar has excellent relations with Iran,” he said. The Qataris “understand our culture and our language and our political institutions, and we in the West remain ignorant and oblivious.”
=============================================================
Reimagining Palestine
Coalitions for Justice: Jewish and Palestinian Solidarity
Panelists will discuss how Palestinians and their Jewish allies can effectively combat the rise of ethno-nationalism and advocate for a shared future. The session will explore the potential for reconciling historical grievances, building partnerships that contribute to a just and inclusive future, and expanding these coalitions to include other marginalized communities.
Rebecca Vilkomerson (Moderator)
Rebecca Vilkomerson is the Co-Director of Funding Freedom, which organizes support for Palestinian liberation within philanthropy. She is the co-author, with Rabbi Alissa Wise, of the 2024 book Solidarity is the Political Version of Love: Lessons from Jewish Anti-Zionist Organizing, published by Haymarket Books. She authored the report Funding Freedom: Philanthropy and Palestinian Freedom Movement, published by Solidaire Network in 2022. From 2009-2019, she was the Executive Director of Jewish Voice for Peace. She serves on the boards of Showing Up For Racial Justice (SURJ) and her synagogue in Brooklyn, NY.
Arielle Angel
Arielle Angel is the editor-in-chief of Jewish Currents and a frequent host of the Jewish Currents podcast, On the Nose. In addition to Jewish Currents, her work has appeared in The Guardian, Guernica, and Off Assignment.
Tareq Baconi
Tareq Baconi is a writer. He is the author of Hamas Contained: The Rise and Pacification of Palestinian Resistance (Stanford University Press, 2018). His writing has appeared in the London Review of Books, the New York Review of Books, the New York Times, the Washington Post, among others. He is the former senior analyst for Israel/Palestine at the International Crisis Group based in Ramallah. He serves as the president of the board of Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network.
Fadi Quran
Fadi Quran is the Senior Director at Avaaz, a global civic movement with 69 million members dedicated to driving change worldwide. In his current role, he focuses on cultivating transformative leadership throughout the Southwest Asia and North Africa (SWANA) region, advocating for human rights across the globe, and organizing efforts toward Palestinian liberation. He has led numerous organizing and civil disobedience efforts in the occupied territories, which garnered international attention to the regime of Apartheid governing Palestinians, and resulted in multiple arrests and detentions. Previously, he served as the UN Advocacy Officer with Al-Haq’s legal research and advocacy unit in Palestine, where he specialized in international law and human rights advocacy. Beyond his advocacy work, he is an entrepreneur in the alternative energy sector, contributing to innovative solutions for sustainable energy. His insights and expertise have been featured in prominent media outlets, including The New York Times, NPR, The Guardian, AFP, TIME Magazine, Al Jazeera, and others. He holds degrees in Physics and International Relations from Stanford University. Follow him on Twitter @fadiquran for updates and insights.
Simone Zimmerman
Simone Zimmerman is an organizer and strategist based in Brooklyn, New York. She is the protagonist of the film Israelism, about the deepening generational divide in the American Jewish community over Israel and Palestine. She is a co-founder of the US-based Jewish anti-apartheid organization IfNotNow, which has been a part of the ceasefire mobilizations across the US since October 7. She is currently the director of Media & Special Projects for the Diaspora Alliance, an international organization dedicated to fighting antisemitism and its instrumentalization. She serves on the board of Jews for Racial and Economic Justice Action and the Advisory Board of Jewish Currents Magazine.
Reimagining Palestine
============================================================
Center for Constitutional RightsGaza Now
Date
Friday, September 20, 2024 1:00pm to 2:45pm
Location
Four Seasons Hotel, The Corniche, Doha, Qatar
Georgetown University in Qatar will host the Reimagining Palestine conference, September 20 – 22, 2024. Some of the world’s leading academics and practitioners will gather for a thought-provoking exploration of such pressing, forward-looking questions as the future of Gaza and how to make it livable again, pathways toward a viable Palestinian political future, and the regional implications of the current moment. This conference aims to advance academic discourse on Palestine, meaningfully engaging participants in dialogue that challenges the status quo and envisions new possibilities for justice and peace.
Center for Constitutional Rights Senior Staff Attorney Diala Shamas will join the session, “Gaza Now”, which will explore the devastating impact of the ongoing war on Gaza, focusing on effective advocacy for ending the suffering and upholding the protection and dignity of Palestinian lives. The discussion will reference international humanitarian law and established United Nations guidelines and court rulings, such as the International Court of Justice’s order for “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide.
Speakers:
- Diala Shamas, Senior Staff Attorney Center for Constitutional Rights
- Jehad Abusalim, Executive Director of Institute for Palestine Studies
- Safwan M. Masri, Dean of Georgetown University in Qatar
- Ghassan Abu Sittah, Associate Professor of Surgery
- Tareq Baconi, writer and author of Hamas Contained: The Rise and Pacification of Palestinian Resistance (Stanford University Press, 2018)
- Noura Erakat, human rights attorney and Professor of Africana Studies and the Program of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University
==============================================================
Gaza Now
This session will explore the devastating impact of the ongoing war on Gaza, focusing on effective advocacy for ending the suffering and upholding the protection and dignity of Palestinian lives. The discussion will reference international humanitarian law and established United Nations guidelines and court rulings, such as the International Court of Justice’s order for “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of “genocide.”
In Conversation withDean Safwan M. Masri
Safwan M. Masri is the Dean of Georgetown University in Qatar and a Distinguished Professor of the Practice at Georgetown’s Walsh School of Foreign Service. Prior to joining Georgetown in October 2022, Professor Masri was Executive Vice President for Global Centers and Global Development at Columbia University, and a Senior Research Scholar at Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs. Prior to that, Dean Masri was a professor at Columbia Business School, where he also served as Vice Dean. He previously taught engineering at Stanford University and was a visiting professor at INSEAD (Institut Européen d’Administration des Affaires) in France. Dean Masri is the author of Tunisia: An Arab Anomaly (2017). He is a lifetime member of the Council on Foreign Relations and an honorary fellow of the Foreign Policy Association. Dean Masri led the establishment of King’s Academy and Queen Rania Teacher Academy in Jordan. He is a trustee of International College in Beirut and serves as a director of AMIDEAST and of Endeavor Jordan.
Jehad Abusalim
Jehad Abusalim is the Executive Director of the Washington, DC-based Institute for Palestine Studies (IPS-USA). He grew up in Deir el-Balah in the Gaza Strip, where he spent most of his life. He co-edited the anthology Light in Gaza: Writings Born of Fire, published by Haymarket Books in 2022. His writings have been featured in the Washington Post, Al-Jazeera, The Nation, Journal of Palestine Studies, and Vox. He has also appeared on Al-Jazeera, CNN, ABC, TRT World, Russia Today, and various radio stations and podcasts in the United States and internationally.
Tareq Baconi
Tareq Baconi is a writer. He is the author of Hamas Contained: The Rise and Pacification of Palestinian Resistance (Stanford University Press, 2018). His writing has appeared in the London Review of Books, the New York Review of Books, the New York Times, the Washington Post, among others. He is the former senior analyst for Israel/Palestine at the International Crisis Group based in Ramallah. He serves as the president of the board of Al-Shabaka: The Palestinian Policy Network.
Noura Erakat
Noura Erakat is a human rights attorney and Professor of Africana Studies and the Program of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University, New Brunswick. She is the author of Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine (Stanford University Press, 2019), which received the Palestine Book Award and the Bronze Medal for the Independent Publishers Book Award in Current Events/Foreign Affairs. She is co-founding editor of Jadaliyya and an editorial board member of the Journal of Palestine Studies. Noura is a co-founding board member of the DC Palestinian Film and Arts Festival and a Board Member of Palestine Legal and the Center for Constitutional Rights. In 2024, she served as the Co-Chair of an Independent Task Force on the Application of National Security Memorandum-20 to Israel, which submitted a report to the White House recommending suspending U.S. weapons transfers to Israel. She has served as Legal Counsel for a Congressional Subcommittee in the US House of Representatives, as Legal Advocate for the Badil Resource Center for Palestinian Refugee and Residency Rights, and as national organizer of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. Noura has also produced video documentaries, including “Gaza In Context” and “Black Palestinian Solidarity.” Her writings have appeared in The Washington Post, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Review of Books, The Nation, Al Jazeera, and the Boston Review. She is a frequent commentator on CBS News, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, Fox News, the BBC, and NPR, among others. She has been awarded fellowships at Harvard Divinity School and Brown University’s Center for Middle East Studies. In 2022, she was selected as a Freedom Fellow by the Marguerite Casey Foundation.
Diala Shamas
Diala Shamas is a Senior Staff Attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, where she works on challenging government and law enforcement abuses perpetrated under the guise of national security in the U.S. and abroad. She also litigates a range of international human rights issues, particularly focusing on Palestinian rights. She has most recently been counsel on a landmark case in U.S. federal court challenging Israel’s genocide against the Palestinian population in Gaza in U.S. Federal Court and worked on related international accountability efforts. Prior to joining CCR, Diala was a Clinical Supervising Attorney and Lecturer at Stanford Law School and supervised the CLEAR project at CUNY School of Law. Her practice includes working with social justice movements and advocates, including those in support of Palestinian rights, as they face suppression, helping them craft creative legal and advocacy strategies that build their power. She has worked to challenge the Muslim Ban, and represented individuals targeted for surveillance or placed on federal watch lists.
Reimagining Palestine
==========================================================
https://ccrjustice.org/home/press-center/press-releases/legal-group-israeli-colonial-domination-necessary-contextLegal Group: Israeli Colonial Domination Is Necessary Context to Palestinian Resistance
Contact: press@ccrjustice.org
International Indifference to 16 years of a Suffocating Closure of the Gaza Strip and Decades of Israeli Impunity for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Against Palestinians Is Necessary Context
October 7, 2023, New York – In response to Palestinian armed resistance from occupied Gaza, following months of intensive Israeli military attacks against Palestinians in the West Bank including East Jerusalem, and Gaza, and in the context of 75 years of Israeli military occupation of historic Palestine, the Center for Constitutional Rights issued the following statement:
The Center for Constitutional Rights stands in solidarity with the Palestinian people in their decades-long struggle for self-determination and freedom from Israel’s regime of apartheid and prolonged belligerent military occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza. Israel’s brutal 16-year closure of Gaza has suffocated the two million Palestinians imprisoned there, while Israel has repeatedly launched military assaults that have killed thousands of civilians and injured tens of thousands more.
Israeli colonization of historic Palestine gives rise to the international legal right of colonized people to resist colonial domination and to pursue national liberation and self-determination. Under international law, armed groups, such as Palestinian resistance fighters, can lawfully carry out attacks on military targets. Israel, with the full support of the United States and much of the international community, has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity with complete impunity, resulting in the profound erosion of international norms and the necessary protections for occupied people and civilians. We echo demands for accountability and reaffirm our commitment to dismantling all forms of colonialism.
Learn more about our wide-ranging work supporting Palestinian liberation.
The Center for Constitutional Rights works with communities under threat to fight for justice and liberation through litigation, advocacy, and strategic communications. Since 1966, the Center for Constitutional Rights has taken on oppressive systems of power, including structural racism, gender oppression, economic inequity, and governmental overreach. Learn more at ccrjustice.org.
Last modified October 7, 2023
==========================================================
Letter
Letter to Co-Sponsors of Proposed American Bar Association Resolution 514 on Antisemitism
Document Date: January 19, 2023
The ACLU, Americans for Peace Now, Center for Constitutional Rights, Foundation for Middle East Peace, and Palestine Legal, along with 37 other organization signatories, wrote a letter expressing strong objection to the reference to the “International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism” in proposed American Bar Association resolution 514 (Resolution 514). Addressed to the co-sponsors of the proposed resolution, the letter explains how the IHRA definition has been continually instrumentalized to delegitimize critics and criticism of Israel and its policies, as well as suppress voices and activism in support for Palestinian rights. Consequently, any embrace of the IHRA definition by the ABA would undermine fundamental rights of free speech, freedom of assembly and protest, and academic freedom. Moreover, the reference to the IHRA definition in the ABA resolution would undermine the ABA’s own ability to engage on key issues related to Palestinian rights, including in support of human rights defenders who are increasingly under attack.
Juan Thomas, Chair Mark Schickman, Senior Advisor Paula Shapiro, Director ABA Section on Civil Rights and Social Justice Hon. Benes Z. Aldana (Ret.), Chair Skip Harsch, Director Ann Breen-Greco ABA Commission on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Twanda Turner-Hawkins, Chair Selina Thomas, Director ABA Coalition on Racial and Ethnic Justice Priya Purandare, Executive Director Navdeep Singh, Interim Policy Director Wendy Shiba, Past President, ABA Delegate National Asian Pacific American Bar Association James L. Schwartz, Chair Richard M. Leslie, Chair-Elect Jack Young, Delegate ABA Senior Lawyers Division Marcos Rios, Chair David Schwartz, Chair-Elect Michelle Jacobson, Policy Officer ABA International Law Section cc: Deborah Enix-Ross, ABA President Palmer Gene Vance II, Chair ABA House of Delegates
January 18, 2023
Dear Co-Sponsors of Proposed American Bar Association Resolution 514 on Antisemitism, We write to convey our strong objection to the reference to the “International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism” in proposed ABA resolution 514 (Resolution 514). We urge you to remove all mentions of the IHRA definition from ABA Resolution 514. With antisemitism surging in the United States and in countries around the globe, we agree with the co-sponsors of proposed Resolution 514 that the ABA – as a leading organization devoted to, among other things, justice and human rights – can and should be involved in fighting antisemitism. There are many constructive forms such involvement could take; embracing the IHRA definition of antisemitism is emphatically not among them. Ongoing efforts to codify the IHRA definition into law and policy, including at the ABA, are invariably framed as efforts to fight antisemitism. Yet, the clear objective behind the promotion of the IHRA definition is the suppression of non-violent protest, activism, and criticism of Israel and/or Zionism – a fact that is so well-documented as to be beyond reasonable dispute. The IHRA definition has been instrumentalized, again and again, to delegitimize critics and criticism of Israel and its policies, and to suppress voices and activism in support for Palestinian rights. The most common targets of IHRA-based attacks have been university students, professors, and grassroots organizers over their speech and activism on Israel/Palestine; IHRA has likewise been used to disparage (among others) human rights and civil rights organizations, humanitarian groups, and members of Congress for documenting or criticizing Israeli policies or speaking out about Palestinian rights. Indeed, regardless of the original intent of its drafters, in practice the IHRA definition has been used consistently (and nearly exclusively) not to fight antisemitism, but rather to defend Israel and harm Palestinians – at the cost of undermining and dangerously chilling fundamental rights of free speech, freedom of assembly and protest, and academic freedom. Any embrace of the IHRA definition by the ABA would legitimize and encourage this undermining of core democratic rights. Equally, extending its own credibility to the IHRA definition would implicate the ABA in ongoing efforts to pressure states and the federal government to adopt and enforce the IHRA definition, and the violations of basic democratic rights that have been at the center of its application, both as a matter of policy and of law. To be clear: while its champions present the IHRA definition as a “consensus” and “noncontroversial” definition, nothing could be further from the truth. The IHRA definition has been challenged, vigorously, by hundreds of antisemitism experts, rabbis, and scholars of Jewish studies, Jewish history, and the Holocaust, by Palestinians who have borne the brunt of its application, as well as by experts on fighting racism and free speech. These experts – who include Kenneth Stern, the original lead drafter of the definition – have published hundreds of reports and articles articulating their concerns and objections. They have given speeches at countless think tanks, universities, synagogues, and international forums. They have presented testimony before Congress, and even before the ABA in connection with this resolution. Concern about either the misuse of, and/or the plain text of, the IHRA definition among Jewish scholars is so acute that it has given rise (so far) to two mainstream, independent projects aimed at developing alternative definitions. Just as we believe the ABA should be involved in fighting antisemitism, we believe the ABA – consistent with its commitment to the rule of law, the legal process, holding governments accountable under law, human rights, and justice – has an important role to play in conveying concerns about Israel and its policies. With that in mind, we are concerned that the reference to the IHRA definition in the ABA resolution would undermine the ABA’s own ability to engage on key issues related to Palestinian rights, including in support of human rights defenders who are increasingly under attack. For all of these reasons, we urge you to remove all mentions of the IHRA definition from proposed ABA Resolution 514. Sincerely,
American Civil Liberties Union Americans for Peace Now Center for Constitutional Rights Foundation for Middle East Peace Palestine Legal Joined by: Adalah Justice Project American Humanist Association American Muslim Bar Association American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) Americans for Justice in Palestine Action (AJP Action) Anethum Global Arab American Institute Asian Law Caucus Boston University International Human Rights Clinic Center for Security, Race and Rights Coalition for an Ethical Psychology Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Defending Rights & Dissent Diaspora Alliance Human Rights Clinic, Inter-American University of Puerto Rico School of Law Human Rights First ICNA Council for Social Justice Indiana Center for Middle East Peace, Inc. International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) Jewish Voice for Peace Minnesotans Against Islamophobia MN BDS Community Muslim Advocates NAACP Rutland VT National Arab American Women’s Association (NAAWA) National Lawyers Guild Northfielders for Justice in Palestine/Israel Project South Promise Institute for Human Rights at UCLA Law The Civil Liberties Defense Center The Legal Resources Centre (South Africa) Twin Cities Assange Defense University Network for Human Rights US Campaign for Palestinian Rights Women Against Military Madness Women’s All Points Bulletin (WAPB)
=============================================
United Nations
Question of Palestine
Center for Constitutional Rights
=====================================================
Panel II “Role of Civil Society Organizations” of the 2024 Conference of Civil Society Organisations Working on the Question of Palestine (UNOG) – CEIRPP – Press Release
04 April 2024
The Role of Civil Society Organizations in Ensuring Third Party Responsibility: Perspectives from Global and Regional Voices
SAMAH SISAY, Attorney at the US Centre for Constitutional Rights (CCR), said the Centre worked to advocate for the rights of Palestinians in the United States and supported the work of the International Court of Justice into investigating human rights violations in Palestine. It had issued urgent warnings to the US Government on the events in Palestine; nevertheless, the US was failing to uphold its legal obligation to prevent genocide, and members of the Government were actively supporting that genocide. The Government had continued to express unwavering support for Israeli activities. The total siege and closure and mass starvation, among others, were evidence of the crime of genocide, one of the gravest crimes under international law. And yet, the United States Government continued to support the Israeli Government, providing financial and military support, even as the situation escalated.
The Centre for Constitutional Rights had brought a case to court against United States President Biden, and other members of the Government, for the United States’ failure to prevent and complicity in the ongoing genocide, asking the Court to establish that these officials had failed to prevent and were aiding and abetting genocide, and to prevent any further support, including the sale of fighter jets and munitions to Israel whilst the case was being considered. For the first time in history, Palestinians had been able to testify in a United States court about the Nakba and the harmful effects of United States support of the bombardment of, and displacement in, Palestine. The testimony of the plaintiffs and the expert opinions offered had indicated that the ongoing military siege of Gaza was intended to eradicate a whole population, and therefore fell within the definition of genocide.
Over the last few months, the US Government had sought to displace its liability, however it had a legal obligation to stop and not further this genocide. The Centre for Constitutional Rights would continue to work to hold them to their obligations.
Yasmine Ahmed, Director of Human Rights Watch UK, said Human Rights Watch had been documenting for decades the ongoing abuses in Palestine, the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and Israel. Today was the sixth month of ongoing atrocities in Gaza, and after decades of crimes, including apartheid, inflicted by the Occupying Power, Israel. Most of the international community stood at best indifferent and at worst complicit in these crimes. Over 20,000 Palestinian women and girls had been killed. Today, Gaza was literally starving. Israel was using starvation as a weapon of war, in violation of its international obligations and in direct contravention of the International Court of Justice’s provisional measures. This sat against a backdrop of decades of crimes against humanity inflicted on the Palestinians by Israel.
The hostages who were being held against international law and those subjected to crimes on 7 October 2023 must not be forgotten, but the atrocities inflicted on the Palestinian people in Gaza today would not be happening if not for the provision of arms, diplomatic cover, and other forms of support by other States, including some who claimed to be the pillars of the international order, making this order shake in the clear assault on democratic standards. This moment was not only about the Palestinian people but about the legitimacy and survival of the entire rules-based order. Unfortunately, this complicity had not begun in 2023, and there was a heavy historical responsibility that should weigh on the conscience of States such as the United Kingdom. The crimes seen today were a direct result of the cloak of impunity that had been provided to Israel over many decades by third States. States also had a duty with regard to arms transfer, where there was clear evidence that arms could be used to violate international human rights law: this threshold had clearly been met.
Human Rights Watch was working to push the United Kingdom Government to impose an arms embargo now, and to impose sanctions on Israel that went beyond this embargo. It was pushing for the Government to ensure that it supported accountability efforts at the International Criminal Court and the Human Rights Council, and to ensure that Israel ended its activities.
RAWAN ARRAF, Director of the Australian Centre for International Justice, said the Australian people’s response to the war on Gaza had been multi-faceted and widespread, due to their commitment to a ceasefire, with the greatest anti-war movement since the Iraq War, especially as the Parliament remained silent about the human rights violations taking place. The Government had ignored Israel’s attacks, despite clear evidence of genocidal intent. Concerted action by the right-wing Press and others had derailed attempts to advocate for Palestinian rights. Activists, union members and artists had worked to raise awareness of the situation, and many new groups had sprung up recently to work to protect Palestinian rights, educate communities, and end Australian complicity with Israeli crimes in all its forms. Support continued to grow.
Grassroots groups continued to call for an end to apartheid and the conflict. Australia had hardly condemned Israeli actions, allying with Israel, providing it with political cover, and developing economic and military ties, despite Israel’s violations of humanitarian law. Australia should be doing more, imposing the counter-measures available to it when States were committing violations of humanitarian law. The Centre for International Justice had filed a case in the Federal Court in an attempt to gain more transparency over arms transfers, and was determined to continue to find avenues to uncover information and challenge those transfers. The Government initially ignored the International Court of Justice’s order and instead immediately ended funding to UNRWA. Australia did not accept the premise of the South African application to the International Court of Justice, having stated that it was “binding on the parties”, but this did not absolve Australia of its own obligations. Australia must hold an inquiry and review and assess its political, economic and military links with Israel, and at minimum impose an arms embargo. A comprehensive response should consider a two-way arms embargo, and Australia should issue an advisory to dual nationals warning them of criminal liability if they participated in the Israeli military actions, and of the possibility of prosecution should they do so.
TILDA RABI, President of the Federation of Argentinian-Palestinian Entities, said the urgent and pressing need to respond and take action on behalf of Palestine and Palestinians, and put an end to the systematic and continuing genocide, was clear today. Regarding Palestine and the occupation of Palestinian land by Israel, this had culminated in multiple waves of aggression against the indigenous population, leading to expulsion, arbitrary detention, and death. There had been numerous crimes committed by the Zionist entity, going back more than 75 years. Today, and since last October, these oppressive activities had affected the world as a whole, challenging humanity. Faced with this, civil society and its actors had a critical and decisive role to play, bringing together all who were active in the sphere in different fora and processes in the Global South, putting an end to the dehumanising narrative.
The instruments that civil society organizations had available to them were awareness-raising and civil society mobilisation. Pursuing responsibilities and tasks took the guise of street activities, with mass gatherings calling for a ceasefire, accountability, the respect of the rights of the Palestinians, and an end to the silence or moral support of governments. At the beginning of 2022, a sizeable delegation had left Argentina for Israel, headed by the Minister of the Interior, with the aim of concluding various agreements including social and economic cooperation. However, Argentinian civil society had been working to cooperate further with Palestinian organizations, highlighting new forms of colonialization and settlement, which was also seen in Argentina. The Government was in full support of Zionism, and yet many sectors in society had had it brought home to them just what was meant by “colonial settler policy”, witnessing it first-hand in Argentina itself, where there had been a surge in repression of those who sought to speak out against the Zionist entity.
Community groups often served as the catalyst to achieving the resolution of a tragedy facing humanity. If civil society did not continue to pressure Israel, the deaths would only continue to increase. There was a vital need to approach all of this in a spirit of empathy and humanity, in the spirit of the acts of the Government of South Africa, which confronted an international community that was held hostage by illicit interests. Those who were perpetrating the most documented genocide in human history must be confronted, and contribute to peace and decolonisation, the absence of which cast a long shadow into the twenty-first century.
FRANK CHIKANE, Chair of the Steering Committee of the Global Anti-Apartheid Conference – South Africa, said listening since the morning session to the presentations and discussions, it was a repeat of the same show and same film: South Africans had been present at the United Nations in the 1980s to combat apartheid, and the same countries involved then were present today, where the same countries that supported apartheid were supporting Israel. These governments must be pressurised to not support Israel, and this could only be done by force, by putting pressure on them. He had visited Israel, and had come out convinced that what was experienced there was worse than what was experienced in South Africa at the height of the apartheid system.
Mr. Chikane had met Palestinians who had been driven from their homes, and noted that a Jewish person coming from any part of the world could claim belonging of land in Israel, but a Palestinian could not do the same. It shocked him that the world could allow Palestine to be illegally occupied for about 57 years, and that Gaza could be blockaded for 16 years, and expect the Palestinian people to do nothing. If the United States were blockaded, there would be hell raised. What was happening in Israeli prisons was unknown and it was unconscionable that the world continued to allow this to happen. Unless the international community was able to drill down into the situation, nothing would happen. The problem began with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, the 1948 Nakba, the United Nations resolution that partitioned Palestine.
The international community had allowed Israel to be emboldened to pursue the Zionist project, which was clearly expressed by the words of the current Finance Minister in the Cabinet of Israel, who had said that either Palestinians submitted, left, or died. Palestinians were being brutalised to the end of forcing them to leave, and the world had allowed Israel to do this publicly, in front of the whole world. The only way this could happen was in a context where Palestinians were not viewed as human beings. A racist, settler, colonial mind had to be in place to establish a racist, settler, colonial system. Brutalising Palestinians in the way that they were was simply racist. The worst part was that Israelis themselves were being brutalised and traumatised, and Israeli society would be reinvented to be something else that did not see anything wrong in killing so many children. States must be forced to do what they ought to do, and adopt sanctions. History had shown that no empire lasted forever: those who had power must remember that power came to an end.
In the ensuing discussion, speakers raised such issues as how the South African experience could be used to advance the Palestinian cause.
Regarding the United States failing its obligations to not aid and abet genocide, a speaker asked what these obligations were and what were the legal obligations of not living up to them. Regarding complicity, Palestinians had been calling for an arms embargo for many decades, a three-way embargo, namely on selling, buying, and transfer. The panellists were asked for more details on what sanctions could be implemented.
Another speaker pointed out the issue of changes in Government and how this could affect relationships between States and Israel and Palestine, highlighting various challenges that could arise in this context. No legal mechanism could work without political will, the speaker said. Priorities must be established, as the way that the international community had been working was not a long-term strategy that could provide change; it was not only the decades of impunity and lack of accountability, it was also the settler process that caused tensions. Focus should be on implementing a de-colonialist strategy.
A further issue raised by a speaker was on the value and potential efficacy of sanctions, and what possible effects could come from targeted effects of sanctions on certain corporations. Another spoke of the need to ensure the prosecution of the Israeli Government members for their actions over past years. Gaza was facing a famine, and this had not been discussed, whilst it should be urgently pursued by the United Nations and world governments. Humanitarian aid and food must be supplied before the people of Gaza died of starvation, as would happen within the next few weeks.
What was the role of neighbouring countries in terms of receiving Palestinian refugees and asylum-seekers, from a legal standpoint, asked another speaker. What specific role could Palestinian communities in the diaspora play in the context of the broader actions of civil society in their countries, another asked.
SAMAH SISAY, Attorney at the US Centre for Constitutional Rights, responding to questions raised, said under the United Nations Convention there was a legal provision to prevent genocide. The Convention did not say that it had to be underway to apply – it showed that if events had a likelihood of extending into genocide, it was up to all parties to intervene to end this. There was mass killing and targeted starvation, and Israel was creating a situation in which a mass of people was about to die. There was an obligation to not commit genocide, prevent it, and to prosecute those who had been or were engaged in it, and this applied to all, so all State parties should be doing everything possible to end the situation, which all knew was an unfolding genocide in Gaza. However, this was not the case in the United States. This was not a war nor just a humanitarian crisis; it was a situation that had been created to target Palestinians. The role of Palestinian society in the diaspora had been to show leadership on behalf of Palestinians, and this had been seen in the litigation against the United States Government that was underway in the United States: the voices and testimony of Palestinians was being heard loud and clear. There had been mass protests, which was causing a shift in the attitude in the United States Congress and legislature, who were calling to an end to weapons sales, and this was due to the efforts of Palestinian civil society, among others.
YASMINE AHMED, Director of Human Rights Watch United Kingdom, said when in such a situation, where it felt like it could not get worse, and yet unfortunately it could, this was an opportunity for change. This was a moment that the international community needed to take, to say enough was enough, and take steps for change. There was an appetite for change – many States were saying that the way forward had to be a two-State solution. What was happening now in Gaza was far from a two-State solution, and civil society must hold governments to account, demanding that action be taken to make this a possibility. Some action had been taken against settlers, but more needed to be done to ensure that those who were involved at the institutional and organisational level knew that they would be sanctioned, and their activities would not be tolerated. There was an obligation on States to not be complicit in action and not facilitate international crimes, but they also had other obligations under international texts, including the Geneva Conventions, to not allow atrocities to be committed. They therefore needed to look beyond sanctions, to options that would stop Israel from perpetrating its acts, with an entire gambit through which the State of Israel would be re-evaluated. States with particularly close relationships with a State that was committing violence had a greater obligation to ensure that this violence ended. There should be a suspension on buying, selling and transferring weapons to Israel.
On the role of the Palestinian diaspora community, they should be front and centre of all the work being done across the world, speaking of their rights and the rights of their communities. There was a weaponization of anti-Semitism across the world to shut down discussion of the rights of Palestinians. Anti-Semitism was egregious and must be fought, but it was not being used in the interests of Jews, undermining the real fight. It was critical for the United Nations to use its role – it was the role and the duty of the Security Council and the Special Committee to fight apartheid. For the first time the United Nations Secretary-General had spoken of the roots of the conflict, contextualising the suffering of the Palestinian people, and it was important to keep this context in mind.
RAWAN ARRAF, Director of the Australian Centre for International Justice, said civil society must play an important role, and should make recommendations in a multilateral fashion in the different jurisdictions with laws in response to targeted objectives linked to Israeli crimes. The Australian Centre had done so in the context of Myanmar regime and corporations linked thereto. It was looking into financial institutions and banks in this context, aiming to refer them to Australia in the context of sanctions.
TILDA RABBI, President of the Federation of Argentinian-Palestinian Entities, said regarding the role of the Palestinian diaspora, with regard to Argentina, that community was fairly small, but was getting stronger internally as well as externally. The Federation had always been convinced that civil society and its organization were its main support, and strove to work together, be it politically, within trade unions, the student movement, or others. The Federation was the main glue bringing all together, allowing for strategic action. It had waged battles. However, the landscape had changed. There had been demonstrations organised by the President, but progress had been made since then on Boycott, Diversion and Sanctions (BDS). In the past legislators did not wish to talk about Israel, but this was now changing. Argentina was not taking strong steps forward, but people’s awareness was changing, and they were taking a specific stance. However, how to arm-wrestle the Government into not being an accomplice to Israel was still the question. The starting point was to create a society that was ready, but the crimes in Gaza would only end when people were really aware of what was happening on the ground. There must be an end to apartheid, discrimination and colonialization, but there needed first to be a change in the political determination in many States.
FRANK CHIKANE, Chair of the Steering Committee of the Global Anti-Apartheid Conference – South Africa, said there were precedents in terms of what had happened with South Africa, which had been suspended from the United Nations, and only returned after the elections in 1994. There was therefore a basis upon which if, Israel defied all provisions of international law, it could be dealt with under international law. Regarding the International Court of Justice action, South African’s action there had been well known, and was a major development there. It was clear that there was a blockage within the International Criminal Court: South Africa had suggested that the whole War Cabinet of Israel be charged with crimes against humanity, but had received no response.
On the Special Committee, there should be adoption of a resolution against apartheid, and it should be generalised beyond Palestine. He was concerned that Western democracies were allowing themselves to reverse the gains of democracy, maintaining ignorance among their populations in order to avoid calls for change. This showed that democracy itself was at risk, and there was a reversion backwards into dictatorship. These countries should realise that such actions were detrimental to themselves. Member States of the United Nations would not tolerate the killing of their children in the way that children were killed in Gaza.
israel-academia-monitor.com 