How the JDA supports and promotes Palestinian independence | The conflict between Israel and Palestine

[ad_1]
On April 21, before the escalation of violence in Israel-Palestine, Professor Mark Muhannad Ayyash provided a production edition of the Jerusalem Declaration on Anti-Semitism (JDA) on this page. They took several words from this document to give them trouble, to suppress the secret, or to think that Palestinian people or Palestinian politicians.
After reading Professor Ayyash’s interview, I found myself wishing I could, to use the line mentioned from the hymn Hamilton, “in the room where it happened”. My experience as one of the 20 people who argued and helped write the JDA proves that our goal is not to do our job subtlely with Eastern ideologies or to insult Palestine or other political ideologies.
At the same time, among those who advocated for the JDA, even those who despise the hardships and lack of power that Palestinians face, realize that our document will not help. This is because the JDA needs to be particularly useful in helping to clarify the meaning of anti-Semitism in order to help address the complexities of the practice of violence. Counted as fully developed, the JDA seeks in some other way to protect the weapons of war against the free and strong Jewish ideology of Palestine-Israel.
Indeed, the JDA’s audience is Jewish and non-Jewish leaders, among others, who are particularly concerned with anti-Semitism. During the development of the JDA, employers identified political instability due to instability and shortcomings in the first and foremost experimental presentation of anti-Semitism worldwide, the definition of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) anti-Semitism. The fall has prompted other organizations and human rights activists to ally or support Israeli policies under Netanyahu to urge other governments and groups to adopt the IHRA and use it specifically to reduce or distribute political responses that oppose Israeli policies against the Palestinians.
By providing a clear definition of anti-Semitism, and giving examples of various Israeli and Zionist political rhetoric that do not support this definition, the JDA is re-launching a global war against Semitism in the face of numerous global anti-Semitism scandals. oppressed. Like members of many sects, including Palestinians, who have found themselves persecuted for their cause, the Jews, who formed the JDA, have a right to know what may be anti-Semitism, and find common ground for those who have been persecuted. of any kind or attempted murder. In a nutshell, the JDA is a group that continues to perpetuate racism and xenophobia in an effort to curb these efforts, in part by speaking out against anti-Semitism and other forms of speech that Jews or other Israelis may not appreciate, but whose faces do not agree with my views. in the past anti-Semitism.
However, the JDA was criticized for using more space in the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, for its many examples, and for inadequate space, for refraining from explicitly speaking against Zionism or the anti-Palestinian politics of this state of Israel. Each of these misses the point. That is to say, the recent interpretation of IHRA’s interpretation of strategies in the context of the anti-Semitic rhetoric — needs to be redefined in order to disrupt Palestinian-Israeli politics from a necessary anti-Semitic goal, that is, to combat anti-Semitism.
Commenting on the initial criticism, JDA authors made it clear that a number of statements about Israel could be anti-Semitic, especially abandoning anti-Palestinian politics outside the anti-Semitic realms of modern times. The aim is to ensure a clear demonstration of anti-Semitic racism, which, in the course of history, is often associated with more dangerous races by whites or other groups, as examples in Part A. . But the authors felt that their role was to explain how they discriminated against Jews, rather than to imprison or discriminate against those who instigated racism.
With regard to the blatant criticism of Palestinian rights, the JDA is striving to remain completely neutral in Israeli-Palestinian politics, and its authors and signatories do not agree. Instead, we believe in the need for an open door for positive conflicts and political tensions in Israel and Palestine and positive outcomes for the future. If we read it carefully, the JDA points out in Point 12 that promoting a certain political or system different from the state of Israel, as one group controlled and divided by Israelis and Palestinians now, should not be anti-Semitism.
Contrary to Professor Ayyash’s concern that the JDA is just Orientalism or the Zionist supremacy of freedom, this view seems to be difficult and confusing in many Jewish and Jewish communities, and contradicts the IHRA models. These, and the other examples in the letter, are aimed at those who want to be interpreted and promoted to end anti-Semitism, in other words not to think that politics, even political rhetoric, is any anti-Semitic, anti-Semitic, anti-Semitic rhetoric.
The main point of this document is that JDA guidelines can help assess how all the words are affected. Such issues may include the personalities and experiences of the Palestinian people in relation to Israeli power, including others, including Jews, who testify to this. Obviously, the principles surrounding Israel and Palestine in the JDA can be read, as Professor Ayyash, in very different ways from his intentions with various people, especially unstable especially in Jewish politics and other politics in an effort to combat anti-Semitism.
In the end, the JDA is not a document, and it cannot be, a document that talks about Palestine, or anything else, directly political, or reforming Palestinian rights. The JDA’s only connection with Palestinian politics is that it refuses to utter any words that are critical of Israeli politics or practices, such as formal or even anti-Semitic propaganda. And this denial is supported by the richness of various groups, of all races, representatives of respected Jewish scholars, anti-Semitism and the Middle East.
As a result, while the JDA will not be involved in Palestinian-Israeli politics, it is part of the process of opening up anti-Israeli political seats and / or supporting Palestinians among Jews and civilians in the US. This important trend has accelerated due to the recent Israeli-Gaza war. The JDA’s intention in threatening the world with anti-Semitism, in a way that would be effective, without being a major weapon in the political arena of Israel, is ambitious. Given the common concern of Orientalism that Professor Ayash implies, for the JDA to seek re-participation in Palestine, in my view, would not be appropriate. However, it can also help others to do this.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editor of Al Jazeera.
[ad_2]
Source link