22 dec 2018
|
Veteran Israeli journalist Gideon Levy says all colonists and all Israelis share responsibility for the occupation and apartheid system in Palestine. There is sympathy for individuals, but there is no symmetry: the power is on the Israeli side.
TRNN Video & Transcript SHIR HEVER: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Shir Hever in Heidelberg, Germany. Gideon Levy is one of Israel’s most renowned journalists, and also one of the most controversial. In 2014, after publishing a Haaretz newspaper criticizing Israeli pilots for bombarding civilian neighborhoods in the Gaza |
Strip, he was assigned bodyguards because of numerous death threats which he received.
And this week, Gideon Levy has once again caused an uproar in Israel when he published in Haaretz a piece with the title I Feel No Sympathy For the Settlers. Levy argued that Israeli colonists in the West Bank are instrumentalizing Palestinian resistance, and used every murdered colonist as an excuse to expand land appropriation from Palestinians. Indeed, on Sunday, the Israeli Minister of Education Naftali Bennett did just that.
NAFTALI BENNETT: We are raising today a bill to regulate the colonization, which we call the law of fabric of life, because the residents of Judea and Samaria are not second-rate citizens. As in the dawn of Zionism, whenever there is terror, we have to build. We will achieve peace with the neighbors. How? When they will despair of the hope to get out of this country. And how? When we build more settlements, more schools, more kindergartens.
SHIR HEVER: [Serious] responses to Levy’s article were [not late] to follow, including calls on the Haaretz newspaper to fire him. We are joined by Gideon Levy now, so we can discuss this article. Gideon Levy is a prominent Israeli journalist, and author of the weekly column The Twilight Zone in the Israeli paper Haaretz. He’s also an editorial board member of Haaretz. Thank you very much, Gideon, for joining us.
GIDEON LEVY: Thank you, Shir. It’s my pleasure.
SHIR HEVER: Honestly, when I read your article, I also felt uneasy. There are extreme right and violent organizations which promote the colonization of Palestine, but not everyone born in an Israeli illegal colony should have their lives forfeit because of the crime of the state of Israel. Did you not write this article in order to cause a provocation?
GIDEON LEVY: No, not at all. And I wouldn’t write it if the settlers themselves and their leadership wouldn’t behave in such a cynical way. You know, hours after the attack on this pregnant woman, hours after it, immediately they took some caravans, and with their leadership–not just, you know, young people from the margins, but with their leadership, the official leadership, and brought it to what’s called an illegal outpost, which was already evacuated, declaring that this is their answer for the terroristic attack. If they are using pain and tragedy, human tragedy, and bloodshed in such a cynical way for their real estate ambitions and interests, I have the right to tell them if this is your behavior, I have no sympathy to you.
SHIR HEVER: I think my problem is when you say ‘they,’ as if all of the colonists in the West Bank are one unit. The attack on this pregnant woman that you were talking about, she has actually survived, but her baby did not. And the baby never had a political opinion, and never made a choice. And certainly the baby is not at fault of building these caravans. In a way, aren’t you actually helping the colonies with this kind of argument, as if all of the colonists are just one unit, and murdering a colonist is a political act which can justify in their own eyes the land appropriation and dispossessing of Palestinians?
GIDEON LEVY: Well, first of all, if you take it to this resolution, then, needless to say, no baby in the world deserves to be killed. I mean, that’s not a question at all. If they have political views, even if they’re responsible or not, nobody should be a victim of murders, of killings. And for sure no innocent babies, helpless babies. This goes without saying.
But yes, we can generalize the settlers–like, by the way, I think we can generalize the Israelis. Because as we, all of us, I think, all of us Israelis carry responsibility for the occupation project, whole apartheid system, because we all are part of this machinery even if we individually oppose it. But finally, we are part of it. I always say, I’m a settler. I’m part of this project, even though I dedicated my life to fight against it. But I’m still part of it. I cannot break away from the responsibility.
Because the settlers, it’s much more than this. It’s not only about political views. It’s not only about talking. It’s about their existence there. Once you go and live in an occupied territory, which contradicts international law, once you do it, once you continue to do it, you define yourself politically, morally, and legally. And you take a very terrible road by sitting there. So yes, all of them violate international law. All of them. And all of them should be [viewed] to criticism.
SHIR HEVER: Well, let’s take this idea of generalization perhaps even further. The Israeli government made several statements in the last few days that they believe that confiscating more land every time there is a Palestinian attack will deter Palestinians from resisting the occupation. But what would happen if this logic would be universally accepted as a kind of medieval justice system? But then, also, whenever a Palestinian is killed by Israeli forces, Palestinians would receive some of their land back. What would you say to this kind of double sympathy logic, as opposed to the no sympathy in your article?
GIDEON LEVY: You portray a theoretical picture of equality, and there is no equality between Israel and Palestine, as you know. So this cannot happen, not only because it’s far fetched on both sides, because nothing is equal and there is no symmetry. Wherever you touch it. There Is no symmetry about anything, by the way.
Now, getting back to what you say, the fact that Israel and the settlers are claiming that this is the Zionistic response to terrorism, mainly the [revanche] for terrorism will be new settlements. This has some political aspects, because the first time the settlers admit that their project is a punishment, and not–has nothing to do with the security of Israel. Has nothing to do with your political or religious belief.
Finally, it’s a way to punish the Palestinians and take revanche over them. OK, that’s quite a progressive step, because once we realize that it’s all about paining more the Palestinians, taking revanche more, antagonizing more, so it’s much easier to oppose this project.
SHIR HEVER: Well, that’s a very good point to end our conversation. Thank you very much, Gideon, for joining us.
GIDEON LEVY: Thank you, Shir.
SHIR HEVER: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.
Shir Hever is an economist working at The Real News Network. His economic research focuses on Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territory; international aid to the Palestinians and to Israel; the effects of the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories on the Israeli economy; and the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaigns against Israel. His first book: Political Economy of Israel’s Occupation: Repression Beyond Exploitation, was published by Pluto Press.
Gideon Levy is a prominent Israeli journalist and author of the weekly column Twilight Zone in the Israeli paper Ha’aretz. He is also an editorial board member of Ha’aretz. Between 1978 and 1982 Levy served in the Shimon Peres office when Peres was the leader of the Labor Party.
And this week, Gideon Levy has once again caused an uproar in Israel when he published in Haaretz a piece with the title I Feel No Sympathy For the Settlers. Levy argued that Israeli colonists in the West Bank are instrumentalizing Palestinian resistance, and used every murdered colonist as an excuse to expand land appropriation from Palestinians. Indeed, on Sunday, the Israeli Minister of Education Naftali Bennett did just that.
NAFTALI BENNETT: We are raising today a bill to regulate the colonization, which we call the law of fabric of life, because the residents of Judea and Samaria are not second-rate citizens. As in the dawn of Zionism, whenever there is terror, we have to build. We will achieve peace with the neighbors. How? When they will despair of the hope to get out of this country. And how? When we build more settlements, more schools, more kindergartens.
SHIR HEVER: [Serious] responses to Levy’s article were [not late] to follow, including calls on the Haaretz newspaper to fire him. We are joined by Gideon Levy now, so we can discuss this article. Gideon Levy is a prominent Israeli journalist, and author of the weekly column The Twilight Zone in the Israeli paper Haaretz. He’s also an editorial board member of Haaretz. Thank you very much, Gideon, for joining us.
GIDEON LEVY: Thank you, Shir. It’s my pleasure.
SHIR HEVER: Honestly, when I read your article, I also felt uneasy. There are extreme right and violent organizations which promote the colonization of Palestine, but not everyone born in an Israeli illegal colony should have their lives forfeit because of the crime of the state of Israel. Did you not write this article in order to cause a provocation?
GIDEON LEVY: No, not at all. And I wouldn’t write it if the settlers themselves and their leadership wouldn’t behave in such a cynical way. You know, hours after the attack on this pregnant woman, hours after it, immediately they took some caravans, and with their leadership–not just, you know, young people from the margins, but with their leadership, the official leadership, and brought it to what’s called an illegal outpost, which was already evacuated, declaring that this is their answer for the terroristic attack. If they are using pain and tragedy, human tragedy, and bloodshed in such a cynical way for their real estate ambitions and interests, I have the right to tell them if this is your behavior, I have no sympathy to you.
SHIR HEVER: I think my problem is when you say ‘they,’ as if all of the colonists in the West Bank are one unit. The attack on this pregnant woman that you were talking about, she has actually survived, but her baby did not. And the baby never had a political opinion, and never made a choice. And certainly the baby is not at fault of building these caravans. In a way, aren’t you actually helping the colonies with this kind of argument, as if all of the colonists are just one unit, and murdering a colonist is a political act which can justify in their own eyes the land appropriation and dispossessing of Palestinians?
GIDEON LEVY: Well, first of all, if you take it to this resolution, then, needless to say, no baby in the world deserves to be killed. I mean, that’s not a question at all. If they have political views, even if they’re responsible or not, nobody should be a victim of murders, of killings. And for sure no innocent babies, helpless babies. This goes without saying.
But yes, we can generalize the settlers–like, by the way, I think we can generalize the Israelis. Because as we, all of us, I think, all of us Israelis carry responsibility for the occupation project, whole apartheid system, because we all are part of this machinery even if we individually oppose it. But finally, we are part of it. I always say, I’m a settler. I’m part of this project, even though I dedicated my life to fight against it. But I’m still part of it. I cannot break away from the responsibility.
Because the settlers, it’s much more than this. It’s not only about political views. It’s not only about talking. It’s about their existence there. Once you go and live in an occupied territory, which contradicts international law, once you do it, once you continue to do it, you define yourself politically, morally, and legally. And you take a very terrible road by sitting there. So yes, all of them violate international law. All of them. And all of them should be [viewed] to criticism.
SHIR HEVER: Well, let’s take this idea of generalization perhaps even further. The Israeli government made several statements in the last few days that they believe that confiscating more land every time there is a Palestinian attack will deter Palestinians from resisting the occupation. But what would happen if this logic would be universally accepted as a kind of medieval justice system? But then, also, whenever a Palestinian is killed by Israeli forces, Palestinians would receive some of their land back. What would you say to this kind of double sympathy logic, as opposed to the no sympathy in your article?
GIDEON LEVY: You portray a theoretical picture of equality, and there is no equality between Israel and Palestine, as you know. So this cannot happen, not only because it’s far fetched on both sides, because nothing is equal and there is no symmetry. Wherever you touch it. There Is no symmetry about anything, by the way.
Now, getting back to what you say, the fact that Israel and the settlers are claiming that this is the Zionistic response to terrorism, mainly the [revanche] for terrorism will be new settlements. This has some political aspects, because the first time the settlers admit that their project is a punishment, and not–has nothing to do with the security of Israel. Has nothing to do with your political or religious belief.
Finally, it’s a way to punish the Palestinians and take revanche over them. OK, that’s quite a progressive step, because once we realize that it’s all about paining more the Palestinians, taking revanche more, antagonizing more, so it’s much easier to oppose this project.
SHIR HEVER: Well, that’s a very good point to end our conversation. Thank you very much, Gideon, for joining us.
GIDEON LEVY: Thank you, Shir.
SHIR HEVER: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.
Shir Hever is an economist working at The Real News Network. His economic research focuses on Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territory; international aid to the Palestinians and to Israel; the effects of the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories on the Israeli economy; and the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaigns against Israel. His first book: Political Economy of Israel’s Occupation: Repression Beyond Exploitation, was published by Pluto Press.
Gideon Levy is a prominent Israeli journalist and author of the weekly column Twilight Zone in the Israeli paper Ha’aretz. He is also an editorial board member of Ha’aretz. Between 1978 and 1982 Levy served in the Shimon Peres office when Peres was the leader of the Labor Party.
18 dec 2018
Veteran Israeli journalist Gideon Levy has reaffirmed his support for the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, speaking in a Haaretz podcast interview.
Asked about the backlash against the boycott, both in Israel and in the United States,
Levy said that the BDS campaign is still “the only game in town”, a description he first used in 2016.
According to Levy, “one of the biggest successes” of the boycott has been the way it has “changed the discourse” internationally; now “people start to ask and question Zionism”, and whether “it is the only regime we can have in this piece of land”.
“This discourse is a very fascinating one,” Levy said.
Responding to the claims made by the Israeli government that the BDS movement is “anti-Semitic”, Levy dismissed such charges as “the automatic response of the Israeli propaganda against any criticism of Israel, not just BDS”.
Levy said he believes that as BDS gains more momentum, Israelis will move beyond simply dismissing the boycott as a form of anti-Semitism and ask if “there is something wrong about us”.
Despite the denial and aggression, Levy continued, “there is this knowledge that something is burning under our feet”.
Addressing the goals of the BDS movement, Levy said his understanding was that “it’s about changing the regime from an apartheid one to a democracy”.
~ Haaretz/Days of Palestine
Asked about the backlash against the boycott, both in Israel and in the United States,
Levy said that the BDS campaign is still “the only game in town”, a description he first used in 2016.
According to Levy, “one of the biggest successes” of the boycott has been the way it has “changed the discourse” internationally; now “people start to ask and question Zionism”, and whether “it is the only regime we can have in this piece of land”.
“This discourse is a very fascinating one,” Levy said.
Responding to the claims made by the Israeli government that the BDS movement is “anti-Semitic”, Levy dismissed such charges as “the automatic response of the Israeli propaganda against any criticism of Israel, not just BDS”.
Levy said he believes that as BDS gains more momentum, Israelis will move beyond simply dismissing the boycott as a form of anti-Semitism and ask if “there is something wrong about us”.
Despite the denial and aggression, Levy continued, “there is this knowledge that something is burning under our feet”.
Addressing the goals of the BDS movement, Levy said his understanding was that “it’s about changing the regime from an apartheid one to a democracy”.
~ Haaretz/Days of Palestine
14 dec 2018
Israeli-American actress Natalie Portman said, according to Israeli daily Haaretz, that Israel’s nation-state law is “racist” and a “mistake”, and that she does not agree with it, in an interview she gave to London-based Arabic daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi, published Thursday.
Israel’s controversial nation-state law, which the Knesset passed in July, states that “Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people,” which has exclusive right to self-determination in the country. It defines Hebrew as the country’s sole official language, designating Arabic as a language with special status, although adding that Arabic’s status would not be harmed in practice.
Critics of the nation-state legislation, which, as a Basic Law, bears constitutional weight, object in part to the fact that it does not include a provision stating that all Israeli citizens are equal under the law, whereas Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence ensured “complete equality of social and political rights” for “all its inhabitants” no matter their religion, race or sex.
Following decades of egregious human rights violations against Palestinians, Israel’s massacre of peaceful protesters in Gaza, this past spring, has made its brand so toxic that even well-known Israeli-American cultural figures, like Natalie Portman, now refuse to blatantly whitewash, or art-wash, Israeli crimes and apartheid policies.
In April, Portman pulled out of an Israeli award ceremony, upon which right-wing activist Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, whose World Values Network and conservative activism is bankrolled by casino magnate and political financier Sheldon Adelson, bought a full-page New York Times ad to attack the actress.
Human Interest 12/06/18 “Occupying Hebron 2011-2017” – New Booklet of Testimonies
Israel’s controversial nation-state law, which the Knesset passed in July, states that “Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people,” which has exclusive right to self-determination in the country. It defines Hebrew as the country’s sole official language, designating Arabic as a language with special status, although adding that Arabic’s status would not be harmed in practice.
Critics of the nation-state legislation, which, as a Basic Law, bears constitutional weight, object in part to the fact that it does not include a provision stating that all Israeli citizens are equal under the law, whereas Israel’s 1948 Declaration of Independence ensured “complete equality of social and political rights” for “all its inhabitants” no matter their religion, race or sex.
Following decades of egregious human rights violations against Palestinians, Israel’s massacre of peaceful protesters in Gaza, this past spring, has made its brand so toxic that even well-known Israeli-American cultural figures, like Natalie Portman, now refuse to blatantly whitewash, or art-wash, Israeli crimes and apartheid policies.
In April, Portman pulled out of an Israeli award ceremony, upon which right-wing activist Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, whose World Values Network and conservative activism is bankrolled by casino magnate and political financier Sheldon Adelson, bought a full-page New York Times ad to attack the actress.
Human Interest 12/06/18 “Occupying Hebron 2011-2017” – New Booklet of Testimonies
24 sept 2018
Rabbis for Human Rights (RHR) announced on that they have set up sukkah's, which are temporary tents constructed for use during the week-long Jewish holiday of Sukkot, in the Bedouin village of Khan al-Ahmar, east of Jerusalem.
RHR decided to set up sukkah's at the Bedouin village to celebrate the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, also known as the Feast of Tabernacles, to show solidarity with the residents and as a protest against Israel's planned demolition of the village.
RHR said, in a statement, "We will express solidarity with our Bedouin brothers and we will live as they do for a little bit. We will remember that our forefathers lived as free human beings for 40 years in the Sinai Desert."
"We will sit during Sukkot in the Judean Desert during the seven days of the holiday. We will live a life of confidence in our temporary quarters, together with members of the Jahalin tribe, who have been living in this vulnerable situation for years."
RHR joins local and international activists along with residents of Khan al-Ahmar, who have started an open sit-in at the village, protesting the Israeli High Court's approval of the demolition at the beginning of the month.
Since July, Khan al-Ahmar has been under threat of demolition by Israeli forces; the demolition would leave more than 35 Palestinian families displaced, as part of an Israeli plan to expand the nearby illegal Israeli settlement of Kfar Adummim.
Although international humanitarian law prohibits the demolition of the village and illegal confiscation of private property, Israeli forces continue their planned expansion by forcing evictions and violating basic human rights of the people.
Israel has been constantly trying to uproot Bedouin communities from the east of Jerusalem area to allow settlement expansion in the area, which would later turn the entire eastern part of the West Bank into a settlement zone.
RHR decided to set up sukkah's at the Bedouin village to celebrate the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, also known as the Feast of Tabernacles, to show solidarity with the residents and as a protest against Israel's planned demolition of the village.
RHR said, in a statement, "We will express solidarity with our Bedouin brothers and we will live as they do for a little bit. We will remember that our forefathers lived as free human beings for 40 years in the Sinai Desert."
"We will sit during Sukkot in the Judean Desert during the seven days of the holiday. We will live a life of confidence in our temporary quarters, together with members of the Jahalin tribe, who have been living in this vulnerable situation for years."
RHR joins local and international activists along with residents of Khan al-Ahmar, who have started an open sit-in at the village, protesting the Israeli High Court's approval of the demolition at the beginning of the month.
Since July, Khan al-Ahmar has been under threat of demolition by Israeli forces; the demolition would leave more than 35 Palestinian families displaced, as part of an Israeli plan to expand the nearby illegal Israeli settlement of Kfar Adummim.
Although international humanitarian law prohibits the demolition of the village and illegal confiscation of private property, Israeli forces continue their planned expansion by forcing evictions and violating basic human rights of the people.
Israel has been constantly trying to uproot Bedouin communities from the east of Jerusalem area to allow settlement expansion in the area, which would later turn the entire eastern part of the West Bank into a settlement zone.
14 sept 2018
An American Jewish woman was temporarily detained at Israel’s Ben-Gurion airport, on Wednesday, and initially denied entry, as she had visited Palestinians facing home demolitions in West Bank.
Julie Shayna Weinberg-Connors, aged 23, who arrived on a flight from the United States in order to start studying at the Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies, in Jerusalem, was finally “informed that she could enter Israel on condition that she did not go into the West Bank without a permit,” according to Days of Palestine.
On arrival at the airport, Weinberg-Connors had already obtained a temporary resident’s visa and a potential immigrant’s visa.
According to the activist, she was told by the investigator at the airport that she “can’t go” to the West Bank; when she responded that, with the visa she had, visiting the West Bank was not illegal, the investigator replied, “No, it’s not [illegal] but we told you that you cannot go there.”
In addition, when she acknowledged having visited Khan Al-Ahmar, a Palestinian community slated for demolition in the West Bank, the investigator got up and said, “You cannot enter. You are here to make trouble.”
Only some two hours later, after the direct intervention of her lawyer, MKs Tamar Zandberg and Mossi Raz of Meretz, and Haaretz newspaper, Weinberg-Connors was told she would be allowed entry – but only after signing a form entitled “Declaration by a tourist of non-entry to [Palestinian] Authority areas without the approval of the Coordinator of Government Activity in the Territories”.
Julie Shayna Weinberg-Connors, aged 23, who arrived on a flight from the United States in order to start studying at the Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies, in Jerusalem, was finally “informed that she could enter Israel on condition that she did not go into the West Bank without a permit,” according to Days of Palestine.
On arrival at the airport, Weinberg-Connors had already obtained a temporary resident’s visa and a potential immigrant’s visa.
According to the activist, she was told by the investigator at the airport that she “can’t go” to the West Bank; when she responded that, with the visa she had, visiting the West Bank was not illegal, the investigator replied, “No, it’s not [illegal] but we told you that you cannot go there.”
In addition, when she acknowledged having visited Khan Al-Ahmar, a Palestinian community slated for demolition in the West Bank, the investigator got up and said, “You cannot enter. You are here to make trouble.”
Only some two hours later, after the direct intervention of her lawyer, MKs Tamar Zandberg and Mossi Raz of Meretz, and Haaretz newspaper, Weinberg-Connors was told she would be allowed entry – but only after signing a form entitled “Declaration by a tourist of non-entry to [Palestinian] Authority areas without the approval of the Coordinator of Government Activity in the Territories”.
20 aug 2018
Uri Avnery at 2010 demonstration
A laureate of the Israeli journalism Sokolov Award, a prolific writer, a fierce critic of Israeli policies and a prominent advocate of boycotts against Israel, Avnery, who attended Yasser Arafat's funeral and described him as a man 'with a warm heart' who demonstrated 'leadership', passes away after suffering a stroke.
The prominent journalist, peace activist, fierce critic of Israeli policies, and former MK Uri Avnery—who became the symbol of Israel's hard Left—passed away at age 94 overnight Sunday after suffering a stroke ten days ago.
He was hospitalized immediately after in Ichilov Hospital at the Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center where he passed away.
Avnery was the editor in chief for 40 years of the weekly magazine HaOlam HaZeh (This World) which ceased publication in 1993.
He served as and MK in the sixth and seventh Knesset for the “HaOlam HaZeh-Koah Hadash” movement, a small radical left-wing political party known as Meri. He also served in the ninth Knesset for the political party known as the Left Camp of Israel.
Born in Germany in 1923, Avnery and his wealthy family immigrated to Israel following the rise of Adolf Hitler in the country in 1933.
In Israel, the family lost its wealth and the young Avnery was forced to work instead of going to school. In 1938 when he was 15 years old, Avnery joined the Zionist paramilitary organization that operated in Mandate Palestine between 1931 and 1948, also known as the Irgun or Etzel.
He was a member of the organization for the next four years and during the War of Independence in 1948, Avnery was drafted into the Givati Brigade.
During the war, in which he was seriously wounded, he sent articles from the battlefield to the newspaper Haaretz.
In 1950 he left Haaretz and acquired, together with other friends, the HaOlam HaZeh publication, with each weekly edition carrying the slogan: ‘without fear, without bias.’
In the first decades of its publication the magazine followed a leftist political line, publishing a mix of sensationalist articles and gossip columns, alongside revelations of seminal moments in Israel’s history that influenced public life and politics in the country.
Avnery used the paper to call for the abolition of the military government to which Israeli Arabs were subjected and to separate religion and state.
The articles appearing in HaOlam HaZeh soon whipped up public and institutional opposition, while Israel’s first prime minister David Ben Gurion refused to even mention the paper by name, referring to it instead as “the particular weekly.”
After the Law of Defamation in Israel was passed in 1965, which Avnery decried as being designed to silence HaOlam HaZeh, he embarked on a ten-year career in politics, entering the Knesset an MK for the HaOlam HaZeh-Koah Hadash party and later for the Left Camp of Israel.
Avnery’s political stance made him the target of political violence beginning in 1953 when he was attacked with his co-editor Shalom Cohen, byt four men near his magazine’s printing premises on Glickman Street in Tel Aviv.
Cohen sustained serious wounds to the head and Avnery was injured on both hands, with two of his fingers broken.
In December 1975, he was attacked again by a man who was sectioned in a hospital due to mental illness. During the assault, Avnery sustained injuries to his entire body and was hospitalized in moderate condition.
His attacker claimed that Avnery planted microphones in his brain, but the left-wing activist posited that the man had been sent by others in the context of the incitement leveled against him in connection with his membership in the Council for Israeli-Palestinian Relations.
After the 1967 Six-Day War, Avnery was one of the leading advocates calling on Israel to withdraw from the territory it gained and enable within them the establishment of a Palestinian state.
At the height of the First Lebanon War in 1982, Avnery sparked a massive public controversy when he headed for Beirut to meet with Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Yasser Arafat.
Over the years, Avnery maintained contact with Arafat, and he was among a handful of Israelis who attended the Palestinian leader’s funeral in Ramallah.
Speaking in an interview with Ynet, Avnery explained the charm of Arafat, who had been responsible for launching the 2000-2005 Second Intifada which, through dozens of suicide bombings, claimed the lives of over 1,100 Israelis.
“On television he looks like a fanatic, aggressive, whereas in real life he is a man with a warm heart. Every person who met him, after a few minutes felt that he knew him forever,” Avnery said.
“There is no auror of authority around him like there is among us. Moreover, he projects leadership. He is a strong man who is confident in himself, a man who is able to make decision extremely quickly,” he continued as he furnished praise on the man many Israelis consider to be a mass murderer.
Avnery was a member of several organizations calling for Israeli-Palestinian cooperation and was one of the founders of the Gush Shalom peace group established in 1993. Throughout his career, he remained a staunch supporter of the creation of a Palestinian state next to Israel and was the recipient of numerous international awards for his efforts toward that goal.
Over the course of the last two decades, Avnery remained at the forefront of the political scene, and continued to polish his reputation as a symbol of the far Left in Israel.
In 1999, he led a group of around 100 Gush Shalom activists in a march to Orient House in eastern Jerusalem that served as the headquarters of the PLO in the 80s and 90s where he submitted a declaration to the prominent Palestinian politician, Faisal Husseini "recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to the entire West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.”
Avnery also opposed the construction of Israel’s security barrier and participated in protests against it, arguing that it was a precursor to annexing Palestinian territory.
He also took part in demonstrations against IDF activities during the intifada in the territories conquered during the Six-Day War.
In 2004, Avnery became a laureate of the Israeli journalism Sokolov Award and continued to conduct interviews and express opinions largely at odds with the mainstream Israeli public.
Avnery also took his political battles to the High Court of Justice (HCJ) submitting in 2011 a Gush Shalom-sponsored petition against Boycott Law.
The petition’s authors argued that the law harmed the basic principles of democracy and that boycotting Israel is a legitimate tool in a democratic society, the use of which cannot be curtailed.
“The Boycott Law is a black stain on the law book of the State of Israel,” Avnery said at the time. “I sincerely hope that the HCJ will rule against it and salvage that which remains of Israeli democracy.”
An uncompromising critic until the end, Avnery continued to voice his opposition to Israeli policie. In January 2017, he published in Yedioth Ahronoth an article stating that he had signed a letter calling on members of the Irish Senate to support a bill proposal that imposes high financial penalties and a prison sentence of five years on people trading with companies located in Israeli settlements.
A laureate of the Israeli journalism Sokolov Award, a prolific writer, a fierce critic of Israeli policies and a prominent advocate of boycotts against Israel, Avnery, who attended Yasser Arafat's funeral and described him as a man 'with a warm heart' who demonstrated 'leadership', passes away after suffering a stroke.
The prominent journalist, peace activist, fierce critic of Israeli policies, and former MK Uri Avnery—who became the symbol of Israel's hard Left—passed away at age 94 overnight Sunday after suffering a stroke ten days ago.
He was hospitalized immediately after in Ichilov Hospital at the Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center where he passed away.
Avnery was the editor in chief for 40 years of the weekly magazine HaOlam HaZeh (This World) which ceased publication in 1993.
He served as and MK in the sixth and seventh Knesset for the “HaOlam HaZeh-Koah Hadash” movement, a small radical left-wing political party known as Meri. He also served in the ninth Knesset for the political party known as the Left Camp of Israel.
Born in Germany in 1923, Avnery and his wealthy family immigrated to Israel following the rise of Adolf Hitler in the country in 1933.
In Israel, the family lost its wealth and the young Avnery was forced to work instead of going to school. In 1938 when he was 15 years old, Avnery joined the Zionist paramilitary organization that operated in Mandate Palestine between 1931 and 1948, also known as the Irgun or Etzel.
He was a member of the organization for the next four years and during the War of Independence in 1948, Avnery was drafted into the Givati Brigade.
During the war, in which he was seriously wounded, he sent articles from the battlefield to the newspaper Haaretz.
In 1950 he left Haaretz and acquired, together with other friends, the HaOlam HaZeh publication, with each weekly edition carrying the slogan: ‘without fear, without bias.’
In the first decades of its publication the magazine followed a leftist political line, publishing a mix of sensationalist articles and gossip columns, alongside revelations of seminal moments in Israel’s history that influenced public life and politics in the country.
Avnery used the paper to call for the abolition of the military government to which Israeli Arabs were subjected and to separate religion and state.
The articles appearing in HaOlam HaZeh soon whipped up public and institutional opposition, while Israel’s first prime minister David Ben Gurion refused to even mention the paper by name, referring to it instead as “the particular weekly.”
After the Law of Defamation in Israel was passed in 1965, which Avnery decried as being designed to silence HaOlam HaZeh, he embarked on a ten-year career in politics, entering the Knesset an MK for the HaOlam HaZeh-Koah Hadash party and later for the Left Camp of Israel.
Avnery’s political stance made him the target of political violence beginning in 1953 when he was attacked with his co-editor Shalom Cohen, byt four men near his magazine’s printing premises on Glickman Street in Tel Aviv.
Cohen sustained serious wounds to the head and Avnery was injured on both hands, with two of his fingers broken.
In December 1975, he was attacked again by a man who was sectioned in a hospital due to mental illness. During the assault, Avnery sustained injuries to his entire body and was hospitalized in moderate condition.
His attacker claimed that Avnery planted microphones in his brain, but the left-wing activist posited that the man had been sent by others in the context of the incitement leveled against him in connection with his membership in the Council for Israeli-Palestinian Relations.
After the 1967 Six-Day War, Avnery was one of the leading advocates calling on Israel to withdraw from the territory it gained and enable within them the establishment of a Palestinian state.
At the height of the First Lebanon War in 1982, Avnery sparked a massive public controversy when he headed for Beirut to meet with Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Yasser Arafat.
Over the years, Avnery maintained contact with Arafat, and he was among a handful of Israelis who attended the Palestinian leader’s funeral in Ramallah.
Speaking in an interview with Ynet, Avnery explained the charm of Arafat, who had been responsible for launching the 2000-2005 Second Intifada which, through dozens of suicide bombings, claimed the lives of over 1,100 Israelis.
“On television he looks like a fanatic, aggressive, whereas in real life he is a man with a warm heart. Every person who met him, after a few minutes felt that he knew him forever,” Avnery said.
“There is no auror of authority around him like there is among us. Moreover, he projects leadership. He is a strong man who is confident in himself, a man who is able to make decision extremely quickly,” he continued as he furnished praise on the man many Israelis consider to be a mass murderer.
Avnery was a member of several organizations calling for Israeli-Palestinian cooperation and was one of the founders of the Gush Shalom peace group established in 1993. Throughout his career, he remained a staunch supporter of the creation of a Palestinian state next to Israel and was the recipient of numerous international awards for his efforts toward that goal.
Over the course of the last two decades, Avnery remained at the forefront of the political scene, and continued to polish his reputation as a symbol of the far Left in Israel.
In 1999, he led a group of around 100 Gush Shalom activists in a march to Orient House in eastern Jerusalem that served as the headquarters of the PLO in the 80s and 90s where he submitted a declaration to the prominent Palestinian politician, Faisal Husseini "recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to the entire West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.”
Avnery also opposed the construction of Israel’s security barrier and participated in protests against it, arguing that it was a precursor to annexing Palestinian territory.
He also took part in demonstrations against IDF activities during the intifada in the territories conquered during the Six-Day War.
In 2004, Avnery became a laureate of the Israeli journalism Sokolov Award and continued to conduct interviews and express opinions largely at odds with the mainstream Israeli public.
Avnery also took his political battles to the High Court of Justice (HCJ) submitting in 2011 a Gush Shalom-sponsored petition against Boycott Law.
The petition’s authors argued that the law harmed the basic principles of democracy and that boycotting Israel is a legitimate tool in a democratic society, the use of which cannot be curtailed.
“The Boycott Law is a black stain on the law book of the State of Israel,” Avnery said at the time. “I sincerely hope that the HCJ will rule against it and salvage that which remains of Israeli democracy.”
An uncompromising critic until the end, Avnery continued to voice his opposition to Israeli policie. In January 2017, he published in Yedioth Ahronoth an article stating that he had signed a letter calling on members of the Irish Senate to support a bill proposal that imposes high financial penalties and a prison sentence of five years on people trading with companies located in Israeli settlements.