The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

“I Wanted to Show the Beauty of Gaza, Not Only the Destruction.” Review – “Eyes of Gaza”

An Exhibition of Photographs by Children from Gaza Is More Relevant Than Ever Because of the Recent Bomb Attacks


28/05/2021

The opening of the Eyes of Gaza photo exhibition on 18th May was supposed to be broadcast live from the Forum Factory in Berlin. But, in solidarity with the Palestinian general strike on the same day, the event was recorded and broadcast the following day.

Preparation of the exhibition has been beset by setbacks. It was postponed from February because of the Coronavirus pandemic. Now only a small number of socially distanced showings can be organised in Berlin, before the exhibition moves to Gütersloh, Freiburg and Brühl.

Meanwhile, photographs and film by Amjad Al Fayoumi, which were supposed to accompany the exhibition, could not be seen after his office in Gaza was bombed by Israeli planes. Fortunately, Amjad’s office was not flattened, unlike the 33 press offices which were destroyed during the 11 days of bombing, as reported by the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate.

So, what’s it all about? It’s a simple concept, really. A group of kids in Gaza, aged between 13 and 17, were asked to take photographs of themselves, their families and of their lives. The results are remarkably powerful.

It was strange attending the exhibition while bombs were raining down on Gaza, knowing that the landscapes we were looking at may no longer exist. These photos were taken in 2020, during a time of relative peace when the greatest fear was of the early days of Covid. This means that we see plenty of photos of families cooking and playing together, not sure whether they can go outside.

When we do leave people’s homes, the images that we see of Gaza stand in great contrast to the recent destruction. Here is the olive harvest, here fishermen are going out to sea, there is a crab being held above the beach. Next to the photo of the crab, there is the following quote from Jan Khaled who took the picture:

I am the only girl in the family and the eldest. My hobbies are painting, music and acting. I like music a lot. I play guitar and the qanoon. I want to be an influencer on social media; I like to be in front of the camera. The sea is the place where I like to be the most. I wanted to show the beauty of Gaza, not only the destruction. Gaza and Gazan people are beautiful in my eyes.

These quotes from the photographers help contextualise what we are seeing. Many of the pictures remind us that Gaza looks out on a sea which is both tempestuousness and quite beautiful. Samar Sharaf, who photographed fishermen and sea shells explain what this means to her.

I go to the sea almost every day. I was born in Ukraine and I lived my early years of childhood there. In Ukraine there is no sea; when I came to Gaza I fell in love with the sea. I started collecting seashells, and I decided to celebrate what I had collected over the years in professional photos. I will send this photo to my family and friends in Ukraine, so they can see the sea of Gaza.

And yet for all the beauty and apparent normality, we are occasionally reminded that Gaza is anything but a normal place to live. The kids have all grown up during the debilitating blockade. The recent Israeli bombs were also nothing new to any of them.

Baraa Faraj chose to photograph his young cousin holding a teddy bear. He explains:

When I was 9 years old, our house was destroyed during the war on Gaza in 2014. I was very sad because I lost everything, my house and my room where I had my toys and all my things. Days after the destruction, I was able to save my teddy bear from underneath the rubble, and I was so happy to find it; I keep it with me in my room until this day. My little cousin is one of the few kids who are allowed to play with it.

In a similar vein, Dania Hamad took evocative monochrome pictures of tiles saved from her father’s uncle’s house which was destroyed in the 2014 bombing. Thinking of her father’s death that year and of Mahmoud Darwish’s poem ‘Forgotten As If You Never Were’, she says “I sometimes think the world forgot about us in Gaza.”

Because of the ongoing situation in Gaza, the exhibition opening was addressed by Fidaa Zaanin, a Gazan who is currently living in Berlin. After the opening Fidaa told me how the exhibition affected her:

The past 11 days were not easy, I barely ate or slept thinking of what is going on in the Gaza Strip, documenting names, and pictures of martyrs, seeing bombs fall like rain on my beloved Gaza, and massive destruction everywhere. All the time I felt I’m physically in Berlin but mentally in Gaza, with my people, but when I visited the “Eyes of Gaza” exhibition, seeing the faces of young Gazan photographers, looking at their work, their memories, their favorite spot in the house and their hobbies and how they view life in Gaza. All the amazing pictures they took tell us a lot about their lives and dreams, but also about Gaza, I could relate to their work, the sea is also my favorite spot in Gaza, the pictures they took became very personal to me too and at that moment I felt like I’m physically in Gaza.

I also had mixed feelings, of pride and heartbreak, knowing that the places in the pictures are being bombed by Israel at the moment, those memories might have been wiped out, I prayed that all those photographers are alive and safe, and will get the chance to be in Berlin one day and organize the exhibition themselves.

It would be easy to patronise the photographers and say that they are good for their age. In truth, they are good for any age. Eyes of Gaza gives us a view of Gaza which is rarely visible to Western eyes. Chances to view it are limited. If you do get a chance, don’t waste it.

The Eyes of Gaza exhibition can be seen in the following cities:

  • Berlin from 12 June: in Ulme 35, Ulmenallee 35, 14050 Berlin
  • Gütersloh from 18 June
  • Freiburg 9-16 July: in ArtRaum Gallery, Hildastraße 17
  • Brühl (near Cologne) in September

Hopefully, more dates will be announced soon. If you would like to host the exhibition in your town, write to contact@zaitwaza3tar.berlin

Read our interview with exhibition curators Nahed Awwad and Cora Josting here.

Christine Buchholz MdB on discussing Palestine in Germany

My contribution to the discussion with Haneen Zoabi and Susan Neiman organized by The Left Berlin – Internationals working group


27/05/2021

Question: How is the bombing of Gaza being discussed in Germany

My sympathy goes out to all those who have lost loved ones and friends in Israel and Palestine. In the current escalation, but also as a result of occupation and blockade over the last years.

At the same time, I know that grief and compassion are not enough to understand the recent escalation.

After the crimes of German fascism and the Holocaust, a left position can only be one that vehemently fights every form of discrimination, exclusion and racism. A position that consistently opposes antisemitism – in general (mostly antisemitic crimes come from the right) and also against attacks like those on Synagogues like in Gelsenkrichen- , anti-Roma Racism, anti-Muslim racism and every other form of racism.

A left position can only be a universalist one. That is, a position that defends human rights for all people – regardless of where they live.

A left position must be internationalist and emancipatory. It starts from the self-activity of people as the decisive means for social change.

A left position must always take as its starting point the critique of the actions of its own ruling class.

A left position has to be consistently against war.

The German government and media

The German government stands firmly by the Israeli government.

Heiko Maas tweeted on Thursday: “Hamas has caused the latest escalation by firing over 1000 rockets at Israeli cities. Those who act so recklessly also bear responsibility for the appalling humanitarian consequences. Israel defends itself because it has to.”

An Israeli friend wrote to me: “This is incitement to violence! Israeli media and politics openly quoting foreign politicians saying‚ ‘Israel’s right to self defence‘, is a carte blanche to bomb Gaza and refuse ceasefire talks.”

This is also the main position in mainstream media in Germany.

Positions in Die LINKE

There are different reactions in DIE LINKE.

There is a minority taking a similar position to Heiko Maas.

The main position is to take a balance between both sides and be against the violence of all sides.

This can lead to speechlessness in the face of the asymmetry of war.

I was positively surprised by the statement of the student association SDS, which took as its starting point the current escalation of forced evictions in Sheikh Jarrah and thus the structural violence that characterises the situation in Israel and Palestine. They wrote:

“As leftists, we are always on the side of the oppressed. We fight against all forms of racism, no matter who it affects. We want a good life for all in justice and peace. That is why we demand an immediate stop to the evictions as well as to the construction of further settlements. We demand a ceasefire. Because those who suffer from escalation are the populations in the whole region. We call for an end to discriminatory and racist laws. And we call for strengthening those who fight for peace and justice in Israel and Palestine. By not remaining silent, but by taking a stand.”

This is the right position to take. From here we have to criticize the support our government gives to the war.

Question: 2 years ago today (15th May), the German Bundestag passed a resolution against the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign. What are the various responses of Die LINKE to the Bundestag resolution?

The aim of this resolution is to silence criticism of the right-wing Israeli Government, to silence Palestinian voices and to silence critical jewish-Israeli voices.

It aims to silence criticism of the federal government supporting the right wing Israeli Government.

This is not forced upon the German government by something like a ‘Zionist lobby’. This is done in full consciousness by the German ruling class and it has to do with their own interest as an imperialist actor.

The debate about BDS was preceded by a resolution in the Bundestag against antisemitism.

In January 2018, the CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens and FDP introduced a joint motion on anti-Semitism in the Bundestag, which – in addition to positions that could be approved – blames Muslim migrants in particular for strengthening antisemitism in Germany. The motion also condemns the BDS campaign.

The AfD, which wants to hide its fascist wing and its antisemitism, was not attacked in the motion and could easily agree to it, since the motion assigned the main responsibility for antisemitism in Germany to Muslim migrants in particular.

For that reason, DIE LINKE did not vote in favour, but abstained, because it supported the other positions in the fight against antisemitism.

The initiative for the BDS motion clearly came from the right-wing spectrum of parliament. In April 2019 the FDP wrote a motion to condemn BDS, then the AfD put up a motion to ban BDS.

In May an inter-factional motion by the CDU/CSU, SPD, FDP and Greens under the title “Resolutely confronting the BDS movement – combating anti-Semitism” was passed by the Bundestag.

It claims that the BDS call “in its radicalism leads to the branding of Israeli citizens of the Jewish faith as a whole”. It says: “the patterns of argumentation and methods of the BDS movement are antisemitic”.

It adopts the IHRA’s working definition, which I have no time to go in to.

Position of Die LINKE

My position – and that of the majority of the left parliamentary group – was that this motion should be rejected.

My arguments:

  • It is inadmissible to denounce BDS per se as ‘anti-Semitic’.
  • DIE LINKE does not support the BDS campaign as other sister organisations do, but we respect it when people, out of criticism of the Israeli occupation policy, which has been condemned in numerous UN resolutions, support the BDS campaign.
  • Here, criticism and protest is directed against the policies of the Israeli government, and not against Jews. This is legitimate and must not be slandered in a blanket way.
  • Who benefits from equating criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism?
  • First of all, the right-wing government in Israel.
  • The space for open debate has been narrowed far more dramatically in Israel itself. But also in Germany.
  • Conversely, this also makes it more difficult for criticism of PA and Hamas corruption and policies to be articulated within the Palestinian population.

DIE LINKE voted NO, but it was a weak NO.

This is, because our own motion shared many of the false claims of the government’s motion.

I was against it, but this was a minority position.

It had a weaker formulation than the government motion, relating the criticism to Germany and not the international campaign, but continues to place BDS in the context of antisemitism.

I criticised this motion:

  • Because it promotes the thesis that the call for a boycott would “brand Israeli citizens of the Jewish faith as a whole“ and thus promotes antisemitism.
  • Because it did not express any criticism of the German government’s policy towards the Israeli occupation and settlement policy and human rights violation.
  • It had no reference to the policies of the right-wing Nethanyahu government other than a general call for a peaceful solution to the conflict and the two-state solution.
  • It did not have the intention of counteracting the desolidarisation with the Palestinians.
  • It was not an offensive but a defensive reaction to the attacks from the right.
  • And it was a fearful reaction, because it believed that one can thus evade the attacks from the right.

But far from it:

Effects of the BDS resolution

In the time surrounding the decision, there were several decisions that made the fatal effect clear:

  • Cancellation of the account at the Bank for Social Economy for “Jewish Voice for Just Peace in the Middle East”.
  • Peter Schäfer had to resign as director of the Jewish Museum.
  • The Rosa Luxemburg Foundation was forced to cancel an event at the Kirchentag Dortmund with liberation theologian Ulrich Duchrow, Kairos Europe and Farid Esack, South African Muslim liberation theologian, activist of the anti-apartheid movement and representative of the BDS movement in South Africa.
  • The event moved to a lawn outside the Kirchentag. Later the Kirchentag president apologized to Ulrich Duchrow.

But also:

  • The Scientific service of the Bundestag took the Resolution apart.
  • Excluding BDS-affiliated persons or groups from using the event solely because of expected undesirable expressions of opinion is therefore incompatible with Art.5 para.1 GG.28
  • In particular, the resolution of the German Bundestag of 17 May 2019 – as outlined above – also does not constitute a basis that could justify such a restriction”.
  • This position is even taken by the lawyer of the Bundestag in a court case against the Resolution as a reason not to deal with the lawsuit against it.

If this is the case, it proves my point from the beginning:

  • The aim of this resolution is to silence criticism of the right wing Israeli Government
  • To silence Palestinian voices and to silence critical jewish-Israeli voices.
  • It aims to silence criticism of the federal government supporting the right wing Israeli Government.

Answers to Questions:

The Party committee of DIE LINKE decided on a declaration that is not perfect, but better than the statement of Susanne Hennig-Welsow and Janine Wissler the day before.

The one-sided and unambiguous positioning of the political establishment on the side of the right-wing Israeli government is not the position, as I perceive it, among the broad population. Certainly there is a minority that criticizes Israel on antisemitic grounds. That needs to be countered. But my experience is that people are empathetic against war and oppression.

One clear change is the emergence of a new Palestinian left, anchored in the migrant movements of recent years – such as Palestine Speaks – and linking up with Jewish leftists organized in the Jewish Voice or the Jewish Federation. These organize together to protest war and occupation, anti-Muslim racism and antisemitism. These organizations have managed to build connections with other, especially migrant, organizations and thus are able to better discuss the question of Palestine. Already before the event, ‘Palestine Speaks’ had declared: “Just as we do not need the solidarity of those who abuse Palestine for their antisemitism, we do not need the solidarity of Turkish fascists who want to poison our struggle. We are absolutely in solidarity with the Kurdish liberation struggle.” Only the German left, with a few exceptions, stands apart from this new leftist movement.

The debate of the Jerusalem Declaration is very helpful. I also want to recommend the study by Peter Ullrich on the IHRA Definition that was published by the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation.

What should we do now?

My suggestion is that the German Left takes these positions on the following points:

  • Supports the goals of Palestinian civil society – an end to the occupation and construction of settlements in the Palestinian territories, the removal of the separation wall, the recognition of equal rights for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel and the right of return for Palestinian refugees supported by resolutions of the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council.
  • In Germany, die LINKE does not support the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions campaign, but rejects the characterisation of the BDS campaign as antisemitic and clearly opposes space bans and other forms of repression against the campaign, as this massively restricts freedom of expression in human rights discourse.
  • takes a firm stand against antisemitism, anti-Muslim racism, anti-Roma racism and any other form of racism and exclusion. It also does so in the case, when it identifies antisemitism in individuals acting within the BDS spectrum. The German Left bases its arguments on these statements or facts, not on their support for BDS.
  • openly and clearly says no to war

Finally I want to stress, that it is important to create spaces for common debate and action. And I invite you to join DIE LINKE, take part in our debates and make DIE LINKE better.

Appeal to the German Left – Solidarity with Palestine

Saying “the Middle East is too complicated” is no longer an option. It’s time to take a stand


26/05/2021

Open Letter with 220 first signatories, mainly non-Germans living in Germany

As people of diverse ethnic and national identities living in Germany, we are appalled by the reluctance of many people to criticise the Israeli state, despite its manifold crimes. We call on our counterparts in the German Left to join us in our unambiguous support for Palestinians against Israeli aggression.

Residential houses in Gaza have been bombed by Israeli jets with a large number of fatalities, many of them children. The Al Jazeera and AP offices have also been destroyed in a targeted strike. And yet the German media – and much of the German Left – chose to focus on missiles aimed at Israel by Hamas.

The Israeli assault on Gaza was generally reported as retaliation, or as counter-strikes. There was barely any mention of what came before – the invasion of the al-Aqsa mosque at the height of Ramadan with stun-grenades, tear gas, and “skunk-water”, the armed settlers attempting to expel the Palestinian inhabitants of Sheikh Jarrahfrom their homes in East Jerusalem, and the Israeli lynch mobs teerrorising Palestinians first in Jerusalem, later in many other cities. These dangerous provocations have been encouraged by Benjamin Netanyahu in an attempt to save his leadership – and to evade a prison sentence.

Twelve people died from rockets fired from Gaza, including two children. Meanwhile in crowded Gaza, with its extremely limited or unavailable clean water, electricity, and medical services, at least 248 Palestinians, including 66 children, were killed.

In Berlin, peaceful demonstrations for Palestine were brutally attacked by the police. The internationalist block of the Revolutionary Mayday demonstration was similarly attacked. These attacks on racially othered people speak to a pattern of targeted repression. Yet the extent to which the police will be able to criminalise solidarity depends in part on our ability to mobilise people who don’t fit their racist stereotypes.

The Left knows about media bias, about police violence, and about racial profiling. Yet when it comes to Palestine, too often too many people state that the Middle East is “too complicated” an issue. While most people do not support the Israeli government, many are reluctant to speak out against Israeli violence or to express clear solidarity with the Palestinian people. Many choose instead to focus on the distorting narrative that equates criticising Israel with being antisemitic, even though this has been exposed as false and manipulative again and again by many Jewish people and organisations; including the recent Jerusalem declaration.

Nonetheless, we are witnessing an international movement of solidarity with Palestinians mobilising in huge demonstrations. Even in Germany, we have seen unprecedented mobilisations, with an estimated 15,000 people demonstrating in Berlin on 15 May – 10 times as many as attended the most recent significant Palestine demo seven years ago.

It is true that there have been attempts by Turkish nationalists and Islamic fundamentalists to hijack some demonstrations and chant anti-Jewish slogans. We condemn such language wholeheartedly. Yet the overwhelming majority of demonstrations – many supported or organised by Jewish groups – have clearly opposed antisemitism, as did a statement by Palästina Spricht which organised most of the biggest demos. This has not stopped the media from demonising all demonstrations as being antisemitic.

Any serious movement for social change is a movement that fights colonialism, But for too long, while the international movement has taken to the streets to defend Palestine, Germany has stayed at home, It is finally time to seize this moment to get on the right side of anti-colonialist history. Fight to ensure that Palestinians can be free, equal, live in peace, and thrive, in Palestine, in Germany, everywhere.

You can sign the original appeal and view the names of the signatories here.

Deutsche Version

Appell an die deutsche Linke – Solidarität mit Palästina

Als Personen verschiedener ethnischer und nationaler Identitäten, die in Deutschland leben, sind wir entsetzt über die Zurückhaltung vieler Menschen, den israelischen Staat zu kritisieren, trotz seiner vielfältigen Verbrechen. Wir rufen unsere Mitstreiter:innen in der deutschen Linken auf, sich uns in unserer eindeutigen Unterstützung für die Palästinenser:innen gegen die israelische Aggression anzuschließen.

Wohnhäuser in Gaza wurden von israelischen Kampfflugzeugen bombardiert, wobei eine große Anzahl von Menschen getötet wurde, darunter viele Kinder. Auch die Büros von Al Jazeera und AP sind durch einen gezielten Angriff zerstört worden. Und doch konzentrierten sich die deutschen Medien – und ein Großteil der deutschen Linken – auf die Raketen, die die Hamas auf Israel abschießt.

Der israelische Angriff auf Gaza wurde im Allgemeinen als Vergeltungsmaßnahme oder Gegenschlag dargestellt. Es wurde kaum erwähnt, was davor kam – die Invasion der al-Aqsa-Moschee auf dem Höhepunkt des Ramadan mit Blendgranaten, Tränengas und “Stinkwasser”, der Versuch bewaffneter Siedler, die palästinensischen Bewohner:innen von Sheikh Jarrah aus ihren Häusern in Ost-Jerusalem zu vertreiben, und die israelischen Lynchmobs, die Palästinenser:innen erst in Jerusalem, später in vielen anderen Städten terrorisierten. Diese gefährlichen Provokationen wurden von Benjamin Netanjahu gefördert, um seine Macht zu retten – und um einer Gefängnisstrafe zu entgehen.

Zwölf Menschen durch Raketen aus dem Gazastreifen ums Leben gekommen, darunter auch zwei Kinder. Einstweilen sind im überfüllten Gazastreifen, in dem sauberes Wasser, Elektrizität und medizinische Versorgung extrem begrenzt oder nicht verfügbar sind, mindestens 248 Palästinenser:innen, darunter 66 Kinder, getötet worden.

In Berlin sind friedliche Demonstrationen für Palästina brutal von der Polizei angegriffen worden. Der internationalistische Block der Revolutionären 1. Mai-Demonstration wurde in ähnlicher Weise attackiert. Diese Angriffe auf rassistisch ausgegrenzte Menschen sprechen für ein Muster der gezielten Repression. Doch inwieweit die Polizei in der Lage sein wird, Solidarität zu kriminalisieren, hängt zum Teil von unserer Fähigkeit ab, Menschen zu mobilisieren, die nicht in ihre rassistischen Stereotypen passen.

Die Linke ist vertraut mit der Voreingenommenheit der Medien, mit Polizeigewalt und mit Racial Profiling. Doch wenn es um Palästina geht, behaupten zu viele Menschen, dass der Nahe Osten ein “zu kompliziertes” Thema sei. Während die meisten Menschen die israelische Regierung nicht unterstützen, zögern viele, sich gegen israelische Gewalt auszusprechen oder klare Solidarität mit den Palästinenser:innen zu bekunden. Viele konzentrieren sich stattdessen auf die verfälschende Darstellung, die Kritik an Israel mit Antisemitismus gleichsetzt, obwohl dies von vielen jüdischen Menschen und Organisationen immer wieder als falsch und manipulativ angeprangert wurde; so auch in der jüngst veröffentlichten Jerusalemer Erklärung.

Nichtsdestotrotz erleben wir eine internationale Bewegung der Solidarität mit den Palästinenser:innen, die sich in großen Demonstrationen ausdrückt. Selbst in Deutschland haben wir beispiellose Mobilisierungen gesehen, mit geschätzten 15.000 Menschen, die am 15. Mai in Berlin demonstrierten – zehnmal so viele wie bei der letzten bedeutenden Palästina-Demo vor sieben Jahren.

Dabei hat es Versuche von türkischen Nationalisten und islamischen Fundamentalisten gegeben, Demonstrationen zu unterwandern und antijüdische Slogans zu skandieren. Wir verurteilen das entschieden. Doch die überwältigende Mehrheit der Demonstrationen – viele von jüdischen Gruppen unterstützt oder mitorganisiert – hat sich klar gegen Antisemitismus ausgesprochen, wie auch eine Erklärung der Initiative “Palästina spricht”, welche die meisten der größeren Demos organisiert hat. Das hat die Medien nicht davon abgehalten, alle Demonstrationen als antisemitisch zu verteufeln.

Jede ernsthafte Bewegung für sozialen Wandel ist eine Bewegung, die Kolonialismus bekämpft. Deutschland ist allzu lange zu Hause geblieben, derweil die internationale Bewegung auf die Straße gegangen ist, um Palästina zu verteidigen. Jetzt ist die Zeit gekommen, diesen Moment zu nutzen, um sich auf die richtige Seite der antikolonialistischen Geschichte zu stellen. Kämpft dafür, dass die Palästinenser:innen frei und gleichsein, in Frieden leben und sich entfalten können – in Palästina, in Deutschland, überall.

Du kannst den Appell hier unterzeichnen, sowie die Namen der UnterzeichnerInnen sehen.

Pints, Chips and Guacamole

How the UK Labour Party lost Hartlepool and is losing the Red North


25/05/2021

The scene: Hartlepool in the North East of England, a constituency that voted 70% Leave in the Brexit referendum and historically votes Labour. It also elected a man in a monkey suit as mayor three times in a row. A by-election caused by the resignation of the incumbent Labour MP, who is facing sexual harassment allegations, is imminent.

Enter by parachute: Saudi Paul. Paul Williams, a People’s Vote (Remain) campaigner and recipient of an all-expenses paid trip to Saudi Arabia. After his lavish trip, Williams lauded Saudi Arabia as “modern and progressive”, hence the nickname ‘Saudi Paul.’ The only candidate on the party’s ‘long-list’ of potential election candidates, perhaps a nod to Saudi-style ‘democracy’ in the selection process. He’ll make a fine New New Labour candidate.

Background

The UK Labour Party is now firmly in the grip of its right wing. The Leader, Sir Keir Starmer, has devoted his first year of leadership to purging the left of the party and agreeing with the incompetent and murderous Conservative government. The former left wing leader, Jeremy Corbyn, remains unable to sit as a Labour MP although he is a member of the Labour Party and an MP. The party has lost many thousands of members and is rumoured to be struggling financially due to cuts in union funding, the reduction in membership fees, and money spent on expensive legal battles.

Starmer’s Labour has been floundering in the opinion polls for some time and struggling to offer a vision, or any actual policies, to the country. They just want you to know that they are not the dreadful other guy who articulated a vision of hope to millions of voters. It is probably not a great time for a by-election. However, play things right and it could be a platform from which to finally articulate a positive vision for the post-COVID UK. Spoiler alert comrades, they did not play things right.

Act 1: Election Campaign

The candidate, chosen from a Starmer’s office-approved long-list of one, was not local and as a prominent People’s Vote campaigner perhaps not the obvious choice for Leave-voting Hartlepool. Still, he looked respectable in a suit and was in tune with the leadership’s current (lack of) direction. Labour have held Hartlepool since 1974, how hard could winning here be? Surely it’s a place where anyone in a red rosette will win.

The campaign got off to a lethargic start. MPs were sent to campaign in Hartlepool due to an apparent lack of volunteers from the area. That awful Corbyn never had this problem. Local polling showed that the Conservatives looked likely to take the seat from Labour.

Enter centre stage: the Labour leader and his team of shiny blue suit-wearing minders. The plan was for the leader to be seen drinking pints of beer and eating fish and chips, like a working class person. So he did this over the course of a few days; photo ops holding pints, shovelling down fish and chips by the sea, awkwardly grinning near members of the public. He also embarrassingly tried his hand at boxing, down the coast in Hull. He pawed at a punch bag a few times and joked about wearing boxing gloves to debate the Prime Minister. Just one of the lads. Surprisingly, this patronising strategy did not cut through to voters.

Enter stage right: The Prince of Darkness himself; Lord Peter Mandelson (having been made a Lord for services to evil, or something). Remember him? Disgraced former MP of Hartlepool, stalwart Blairite, had to resign twice for corruption, good friend of dead paedophile Jeffrey Epstein? For some reason, the Labour Party thought it would be a good idea to dig him up and wheel him out during the election campaign.

The ‘guacamole’ in the headline refers to an incident during Mandelson’s time as Hartlepool MP where he reportedly mistook mushy peas (a northern takeaway staple) in a local chip shop for guacamole (I like guacamole but it doesn’t really go with pie and chips). This is not a man in touch with the local community!

I assume that by summoning this Blairite relic the Labour leadership hoped to repeat the success of the early Blair years, forgetting that it is no longer 1997 and Blairism is no longer popular (see UK election results of 2010 and 2015, and centrist parties across Europe). The Third Way is proving to be a dead end. Mandelson once said of working class Labour voters that they can be taken for granted because “they have nowhere else to go.”

The outcomes in Hartlepool and other former Labour Heartlands prove him wrong. Mandelson is now part of leader Starmer’s inner circle of advisors so we can look forward to seeing more of him and his doomed attempts to recreate New Labour. I doubt the electorate will cherish this opportunity as much as we’re expected to.

Interval: Time for a pie and a pint, fellow working class lads. Hold the guac.

Act 2: Election Result and Aftermath

On 6th May 2021, Labour lost the by-election to the Conservatives, who took 51.9% of the vote; a huge increase on their previous 28.9%. Labour immediately sought to explain this catastrophic defeat as a COVID ‘vaccine bounce’ for the government candidate, or due to the lingering demonic influence of previous leader Corbyn. The candidate, Saudi Paul, said that no one had mentioned Corbyn during canvassing, but Mandelson made the opposite point that a lot of people had mentioned Corbyn during canvassing. Hard to know who to trust here.

The by-election took place at the same time as the local council and mayoral elections in England. The results in the local elections were also bad for Labour, it lost a total of 327 seats and control of 8 councils, including Durham County Council which had been Labour-run since 1925. The argument for the ‘vaccine bounce’ doesn’t work here as a lot of council seats were lost to the Greens and Liberal Democrats, who campaigned to the left of Labour. Or at least offered some reasons to vote for them. Where Labour did well, it was due to candidates who had stood for something more than pints and flags, such as Andy Burnham in Greater Manchester.

Starmer said that he took full responsibility for the poor election results, then promptly sacked deputy leader, Angela Rayner, from her positions as Labour Party Chair and National Campaign Co-ordinator. Starmer was unable to sack her as deputy leader because that is an elected position, but I bet he wanted to. Rayner is a better politician than Starmer, not more principled, but more experienced and with a loyal group of supporters in the Parliamentary and wider Labour Party, and she was not having it.

Rayner’s team started briefing the press about the sacking and the poor relationship between her and Starmer. Shadow cabinet members were then sent on TV to insist that she wasn’t being sacked, but rather promoted. In an apparently panicked move from Starmer, Rayner was given 3 new shadow cabinet roles. As Starmer supporters liked to say, at least before he was doing so badly, thank goodness the grown-ups are back in charge!

Critic’s Review

I can’t see a way forward for Starmer’s Labour Party, in the North or elsewhere. Social Democratic parties who try to tread the neoliberal centre ground are not doing too well across Europe. The term ‘Pasokification’ applies here. In a recent TV interview, Labour’s shadow health secretary, Jonathan Ashworth, was asked to explain what the Labour Party stands for. He replied that he could not as it was confidential!

The current Labour leadership appear to stand for nothing. Or if they do stand for something, they’re not about to tell the likes of us what it is. They have no vision to communicate, no principles to uphold. They are waiting on their focus group results. To see which way the wind is blowing. They offer voters a vacuum; a void. With these uninspiring characters at the helm, Labour as a force for positive change is done for.

I’d urge UK socialists to get active in social movements, trade unions, and their communities. Recent anti-racist direct action in Glasgow prevented two men from being taken away in an immigration raid. It is through this sort of action we can effect positive change, rather than waiting for the beige Sir Keir and his shadow cabinet of empty suits to do it for us.

Anger and Dismay in Palestine

Berlin Bulletin No. 189 May 23 2021


24/05/2021

It’s no great surprise that most German media, reporting on the Israel-Palestine war, was one-sided, bigoted and misleading. There were samples of fairer treatment at first, showing the demolition of Palestinian homes, the shutdown of a meeting place for young people, the far-right gangs marching in East Jerusalem chanting “Death to Arabs,” and the invasion of the al-Aqsa Mosque at the height of Ramadan with stun grenades, tear gas and “skunk-fluid” spray. There were even timid hints that Netanyahu’s provocations aimed at distracting attention, gaining popularity and avoiding a prison term, even if it led, as he certainly knew and planned, to a major round of violence.

However, the fairer reports dwindled as the media returned to “Israel’s need for self-defense, the right of every country” – with no mention of any similar Palestinian need. It equated rockets fired from Gaza, or those ten percent which pierced Israel’s protective “Iron Dome” and then wreck homes and cause deaths, with the constant, hour-long torrents of death and destruction blasted by one of the strongest military forces in the world into a small, densely populated confine, which could in no way deter the fighter-bombers and missiles, the drones circling low, night and day, over homes and families, for Gaza had no “Iron Domes” sent over by US arms producers. The media seemed largely to accept the huge disproportion, showing the mourning and heartbreak when a Jewish child was tragically killed by a rocket, but remaining almost silent about Palestinian children.

Ibrahim al-Talaa, 17, told of feeling it was the end for himself and his family.

“The Israeli warplanes bombed many different places in my area with more than 40 consecutive missiles, without issuing the prior warnings they used to issue in the past three wars. The sound of the bombing and shelling was so terrifying that I cannot describe it… As the bombs fell heavy and close, the house was shaking as if it would fall on our heads… My nerves collapsed and I was about to cry out, but I tried to restrain myself, just to give my family some strength. I saw my 13-year-old sister crying in silence. I hugged her for a while trying to cheer her up.”

Maha Saher, 27, a mother of two daughters, Sara, 4, and Rama, five months old, told how, during the heaviest of attacks, her daughter Sara wept uncontrollably, asking for her father to return home.

“I don’t fear death itself. But I fear to lose one of my children – or they to lose me…I fear they will target my apartment while we are sleeping, as they did with the al-Wehda street massacre.”

Israeli warplanes had bombed three houses on al-Wehda street on Sunday, killing 42 civilians, mostly women and children. “They then destroyed the street itself to prevent the ambulances and fire trucks from reaching the destroyed buildings and wounded people,” she said.

It was Al Jazeera which quoted one father: “We awoke in the middle of the night to the sound of the bombardment… Now only two of our family are alive. 14 members, women, children and men, are gone. Six are still under the rubble.”

For much of the world, the sixty-six dead Palestinian children remained little more than numbers, like the daily count of new COVID cases. There almost seemed to be media rules for one-sided reporting.

Ongoing descriptions of conditions in Gaza were equally rare. Unlike Ashgerod or Bathsheeba in Israel, there was a water shortage, an almost total lack of clean water. We were not told what three or less hours of irregular electricity meant for people with COVID whose oxygen containers need electricity – or incubator babies when generators stopped working. And aside from the days and nights of bombing, how many were told of the decades of enforced shortages, joblessness, isolation, hopelessness and abiding fear in Gaza?

Such one-sidedness might be blamed only on Israel for not permitting journalists to enter Gaza. For the few already there, at Associated Press and Al-Jazeera, bombs aimed at their building, after a 60- minute warning, destroyed equipment and prevented further pictures of Gaza from their rooftop.

However, German media bias is part of a larger picture with a long history.

Back in 1949 the newly-founded Federal Republic of Germany soon grasped that the worsening Cold War enabled it to welcome back all but the most notorious Nazis in every field: schools, courtrooms, the police, universities, top military posts, the diplomatic service, all political levels, even as chancellor or president and, in the most essential, basic power positions, the same economic titans who built up Hitler and fattened themselves on war profits achieved with mass slave labor.

But there were two conditions for acceptance in the western community of nations. One was loud espousal of democracy and freedom, with elections and a variety of political parties, as long as they were not too conspicuously pro-Nazi – and safely supported western free-market rule.

The second obligation was a repeated, wordy repudiation of anti-Semitism and total approval of anything said or done by the government of the newly-founded Israel.

Germany has held to this exercise in bonding. A key episode was the Eichmann Trial in 1961. Israel refrained from any finger-pointing at active former Nazis and Shoah-leaders, most notably Hans Globke, known as “the second most important man in West Germany”. In gratitude, Globke’s protective boss Konrad Adenauer agreed to help finance and build up Israel militarily, with 2 billion marks for a starter.

This policy, praised as admirable repentance, cemented the West German rebirth as an industrial, political, military bastion and attack base against the “Bolshevik East”. However, the obligations remained. Did Israel support Guatemalan killer troops with Galil rifles und Uzi machine guns, and all bloody dictators in Central America with weapons and surveillance equipment? Was it eagerly supportive of apartheid South Africa, also in weapons development? Was it the last remaining supporter in the UN of Washington’s illegal blockade of Cuba after even semi-colonies like Palau backed away? Take care! While progressive Jewish journalists in Israel opposed their reactionary government, the mildest utterer of criticism in Germany was quickly condemned as an anti-Semite! Or if Jewish as a “self-hater!” Ignore that rule at your peril – of almost total censorship and ostracism!

This applied most strictly to the expanding settlement of the West Bank. Roads shut down for Palestinians, with roadblocks and checkpoints at every turn, ever smaller shares of limited water supplies, family ties between Arabs in Israel, Gaza or the West Bank restricted by walls and Israeli soldiers, West Bank children jailed, even tortured for throwing stones, homes with panicked children smashed into at all hours and the recurring bombing of Gaza recalling World War Two (or Korea and Vietnam) – it was all defended, even welcomed by nearly every political leader, publication and journalist as “necessary self-defense of our eternal friend” – through thick and thin.

As the polemics against “Palestinian terrorists” increased, whose violent or non-violent rebellion against occupation justified every countermeasure, I turned, always a history buff, to a speech by President Andrew Jackson in 1833, when he asserted that the Indians “…established in the midst of another and a superior race… must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear.” They soon did; the U.S. Army moved 60,000 Indians to arid territory west of the Mississippi, with thousands dying in the “Trail of Tears.” Are there no parallels today?

In November 1868 George Custer and his Seventh Cavalry attacked the Cheyennes and Arapahos and slaughtered 103 warriors, plus women and children. He reported “a great victory … the Indians were asleep… the women and children offered little resistance.” He boasted: “The Seventh can handle anything it meets … there are not enough Indians in the world to defeat the Seventh Cavalry.” We know what happened to him.

No, Hamas is not modeled after Sitting Bull or Crazy Horse. But don’t Custer’s boasts find echoes in loud words heard in the Knesset? And again we must face the question: Which are the terrorists?

In Pontecorvo’s film The Battle of Algiers about the fight for independence after 130 years of French oppression, explosives concealed in baskets kill innocent French civilians. To a bitter rebuke, the Algerian response was: “Give us your bombers and you can have our baskets.” Desperate desires for freedom and equality, with no available peaceful response to torture and repression, lead almost inevitably to violent responses – anti-apartheid bombs in South Africa or the explosive derailment of German trains, even with civilians, by antifascist French partisans. Rockets from Gaza were nasty and bloody, but what else was available against fighter-bombers? And with 12 Israelis killed, two of them children, but almost 250 Gazans, 66 of them children, I must again ponder: “Who are terrorists?”.

The world is grateful for the ceasefire, but the price for it was heavy. Beyond the tragedy of any human loss or maiming on either side, airstrikes in Gaza hit 17 hospitals and clinics, wrecked the only Covid testing laboratory. Fifty schools were damaged or closed, three mosques were leveled and 72,000 Gazans lost or had to leave wrecked homes. Water, electricity, sewage disposal are now almost hopelessly crippled, far worse than before.

As those eleven terrible days ground on, the German media (as in the USA and elsewhere) found it increasingly difficult to distort or ignore what was really happening. More and more people questioned the almost total support for Netanyahu by every party except the LINKE (and even it was sadly split on some aspects). As a result, as if by command, the focus was altered. It was not Gaza’s rockets that became Germany’s main enemy but again anti-Semitism.

Of course it existed and, as always, had to be fought, relentlessly, as part of a century-long struggle. Anti-Semitic attacks or actions have indeed increased in recent years – committed mostly by Germanic Nazi-types who hate Muslim “foreigners” as much or more than they hate Jews. In fact, “anti-Islam” attacks were in the majority, if only because so many more Muslims live in Germany than Jews. But also, perhaps, because there are neo-fascist nests ensconced in the ranks of the police, the armed forces – even in some of the high positions which fascists wholly dominated in postwar years.

Of course, Palestinian desperation inevitably spread to Germany among sons, daughters or cousins of those killed or again homeless in Gaza or suffering under repression in the West Bank and Israel.

A week ago I took part in a demonstration to oppose the bombing of Gaza, alongside many thousands, mostly young Palestinians and other Arabs living in the West Berlin borough of Kreuzberg. Anti-Israeli feelings prevailed in countless signs, most of them hand-made on cardboard. But I saw and heard not one example of an anti-Jewish nature, I saw no crossing of the line to racism. The atmosphere was determined but peaceful; the sunny weather lent almost a picnic aspect.

After two hours my feet gave out and I left for home. Then, in the evening news, I learned that at the end of the march some group had indeed shouted anti-Semitic slogans. This caused the police to step in – hard. Or was it because the huge crowd, though dutifully wearing the obligatory face masks, could hardly keep to full social distancing in the crowded streets? So the march, one of three in Berlin alone that day, ended in violence and many arrests. As for the shouters, it seems that some may have been far-right Turkish groups. Long experience also leads to a suspicion that they included, in part, some hastily recruited provocateurs, so at least the closing minutes of what had been a peaceful demonstration would provide the media and the politicians just what they wanted. They did. The sober, fair description of the event by a journalist on Berlin’s official TV channel was quickly deleted – and replaced by an amazingly abject apology for “biased reporting.”

This disturbed march became the centerpiece of a campaign fed by excited reports about stones thrown at a synagogue, anti-Semitic smearing of a few plaques, burning of Israeli flags in two cities, a punch to someone wearing a kippa. All nasty, but not very hard proof of what the media shouted: “Alarming Antisemitism on the Rise!!!” Yet under the klieg lights the politicians outdid themselves in their warnings, while always adding their defense of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state – but now tending to avoid direct mention of Benjamin Netanyahu. Who could admire him?

Interior Minister Horst Seehofer of the right-wing Christian Social Union, notorious for his efforts against refugees and immigrants, demanded “the full force of the law” against anti-Semitism.

Annalena Baerbock, the Greens’ candidate to be next German chancellor, interrupted her attacks on détente with Russia to visit a synagogue and declare that “I am shaken to hear that Israeli flags are being burned in Germany…In these difficult hours we stand firmly at the side of Israeli women and men…Israel’s security is part of German state reality“.

Armin Laschet, her Christian Democratic rival in the race for top office, not wanting to be outdone, demanded that the flag of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) be forbidden in Germany – although this secular, pro-Marxist organization rejects anti-Semitism.

A counter-demonstration was quickly organized at the Brandenburg Gate, where more political leaders added their anxious voices, denouncing burnt or torn flags and stones and again stressing Germany’s unalterable support for Israel’s right to protect itself. The dead children of Gaza went unmentioned.

It was a professor with Palestinian background who noted sadly: “I believe it is time for the people of Germany and the German elite to stop making Palestinian children in Gaza pay for the crimes of the German people against European Jews.” No halls were available for people with such ideas.

As for those Arabs demonstrating in Berlin; most of them, born here, could not be deported. But they had better watch their step! I could not help but recall the months after Pearl Harbor and how Japanese-Americans were depicted – and how they were treated! Or some Asian-Americans today!

So many people confuse the views and policies of some fanatics and some leaders, whether fundamentalist Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus or Buddhists, with large groups of very varied human beings in each category. To counteract this, in Germany, I would offer two suggestions – though without much hope of great success (except perhaps on a local scale):

Why couldn’t the Jewish Community in Germany state its disavowal of all repression of Palestinians in the West Bank, in Israel and in Gaza, its rejection of the accelerated settlement of West Bank areas, the discrimination of the Arab language within Israel, and the isolation and suffocation of Gaza – all policies of Netanyahu, his Likkud and other parties – and thus make clear that these are not “Jewish policies” and should not be Israeli policies. It could then call for a united front of both Jewish and Muslim groups and people in Germany to oppose all forms of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia or attacks against anyone because of color, religion or cultural differences. This might be the best way to oppose the sinister elements that have troubled Germany for so long, most terribly when in control, and still sinister when underground. Such a mass coalition could be a model for all of Europe and beyond.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Previous Berlin Bulletins, a bio, photo and a list of my books, in English and German, are available at: victorgrossmansberlinbulletin.wordpress.com