Wednesday, May 15, 2024

Gaza Protests in the Pacific Northwest

                                              Gaza Protests in the Pacific Northwest

In my most recent post I surveyed campus protest nationally. Here in wish to share happenings in the sleepy Pacific Northwest where I and many of my readers reside.

Here in the Pacific Northwest we’ve only seen a forceful police crackdown at Portland State University. There the university police asked Portland police to remove students occupying a university library after talks over the lists of student demands broke down. This was after the university “agree to suspend accepting any financial gifts from Boeing until there could be a broader debate about the issue.” That was a reasonable place to start. But PSU students made the mistake of assuming they should get everything they were demanding. That’s not how negotiations work! 

Otherwise, protests around the region have been peaceful. At the University of Washington, after a week of encampments and calls for it to cut its ties to the Boeing Corporation, the university refused to do so. Addition demands include divesting materially from Israel and “ending study abroad programs there,” and ceasing “the repression of pro-Palestinian students and faculty.”

At Washington State University and the University of Idaho students presented demands centered around calling for divestment from Israel to their respective administrations. Then they returned to classes. One can only hope that discussions behind closed doors at those schools will begin soon

Evergreen State University is the alma mater of pro-Palestinian activist Rachel Corrie who was killed by Israeli troops bulldozing a Palestinian home in Gaza in 2003. Administrators at Evergreen have pledged to work toward divesting from “companies that profit from gross human rights violations and/or the occupation of Palestinian territories.”

At Western Washington University a coalition led by Jewish Voice for Peace and the Arab Student Association issued a letter to President Sabah Randhawa regarding the Gaza situation. It called, among other things, for acknowledgement of Western’s lack of protection for Arab students during the Israeli military campaign, and complete divestment from all“companies and institutions” with “investments, agreements and contracts” with the Israeli national security apparatus.  Early in the morning on May 14, the coalition set up a tent encampment in solidarity with Palestine, and coalition members continue to detail their positions via social media.

This is all as it should be. Students have made a splash with their demands and building encampments on campuses. They, like high-powered lobbyists in D.C. and Olympia, are a “special interest group.” Well-heeled interests lobby politicians, engage in litigation and election candidate support to peddle their influence: all very expensive activities. 

The poor and marginal have always engaged in direct action; nonviolent protest and even civil disobedience where laws or institutional practices are judged to be immoral. All these actions except for law-breaking are protected by the First Amendment and are the only way those without money can often be heard. But we all know that breaking the law also has its place in movements to make our world a better place.

From the students at North Carolina A&T who began the civil rights sit-in movement in 1960, to anti-Vietnam War protesters who stormed the Pentagon in 1967, students have often lit the spark that led to humanitarian social change.

But direct action alone cannot change the entrenched policies of educational and other institutions. These issues can only be tackled through deliberate and gritty negotiations. Students can also become educators. In the Vietnam War and South African divestment eras, students held teach-ins examining the issues and giving attention to a wide range of their historical, sociocultural and political dimensions. Western students have a series of events they’re calling “Israeli Apartheid Week” as I write.

In the words of Graham Nash from back in the day, children, “teach your parents well”!

 

 

Sunday, May 5, 2024

Campus Protests over Gaza Part of a Proud Tradition

 

Campus Protests over Gaza Part of a Proud Tradition

 

Contention is raging over the rectitude of university protests over the Israeli military campaign in Gaza.

 I speak as a veteran of student protests since the Black Power boycotts at my high school in Cincinnati Ohio following the assassination of Martin Luther King in 1968. I went on to participate in Black Power and anti-Vietnam War campus protests in the 1970s at Akron University, and the campaign to divest Washington State University from its stock holdings in companies doing business in South Africa, as a graduate student in the 70s and 80s.

 From this vantage point I wish to separate the question of the propriety of the protests over Gaza from the propriety of the acts taken by some of the student protesters.

 The fact that students feel compelled to protest is a good thing. It is a teachable moment for an issue of enormous complexity which is gut-wrenching for people on all sides of it. The conflict fleshes up issues of two peoples claiming the land as their ancestral home. It raises uncomfortable questions of settler colonialism and dispossession, terrorism and the right to self-defense, and yes even genocide.

 Let's not forget that protests calling for a ceasefire have been going on in the streets and before chambers of all levels of government since the month after the Israeli offensive began. It is noteworthy that Jewish activists, especially Jewish Voice for Peace, have been prominent in those campaigns.

 Campus protests calling for a ceasefire, as well as Boycotting, Divesting from and Sanctioning Israel (BDS) have grown over the months. US government complicity in the crimes against humanity occurring in Gaza have been in the spotlight. And the refusal of Biden to threaten ending military allocations to Israel if it won't accede to a ceasefire make him look weak.

 Many university administrations, tied as they are to defense contractors and Zionist donors, have abandoned their obligation to offer a space that is physically safe, simultaneously protects free speech, affords students deep knowledge of a complex historical situation, and even training in non-violent direct-action protests.

 While responses to encampments and the most aggressive protests have been confused and ham-handed, a handful of administrations have responded with calm like they were the grownups in the room. See the processes at Northwestern, the University of Minnesota and some other schools where administrations have engaged in negotiations with students over stockholdings, the ceasefire, and the Palestinian and Arab presence on campus among other issues.[1]

 For their part, students have made a splash with their demands and building encampments on campuses. But they mustn’t think that universities can make weighty decisions about a ceasefire and their stock portfolios overnight. These issues can only be tackled through deliberate and gritty negotiations. Students can also become the educators. In the Vietnam War and South African divestment eras, students held teach-ins examining the issues and giving attention to a wide range of their historical, sociocultural and political dimensions.[2]

Once the media splash of building occupations and tent encampments have drawn attention to their issues, students need to engage in negotiations, return to classes and allow the rest of the campus community to get on with business as usual. By remaining encamped or occupying campus buildings, they prevent the university from operating effectively, turn less activist sympathizers against them, and take the spotlight away from Israeli atrocities in Gaza.

From the students at North Carolina A & T who began the civil rights sit-in movement in 1960, to the lonely anti-Vietnam War protesters in 1965, to those who began to call for South African divestment in 1977 (after South African student protesters were gunned down in 1976), students have often lit the spark that led to humanitarian social change.

 This time the students have joined the cacophony of voices from civil society pressuring their institutions to pressure the US government to pressure Israeli to stop its genocidal campaign in Gaza. Simultaneously, however, the US must pressure Hamas to release the hostages and recognize the right of Israel to exist. Then both sides must be forced to enter negotiations for a long-term settlement involving a just, humane and secure peace for both peoples.

 If Israel will not agree to US terms they should face the loss of military assistance. If Hamas fails to comply, they should face annihilation and the annexation of Gaza by Israel. Then of course a sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank would have to forced upon Israel as the price for genocide and their annexation of Gaza.

Sleepy Joe! Wake up and smell the coffee!

Monday, March 25, 2024

Biden in the Vise Between Right and Left in Foreign Policy: A Reprise

 

 The Reprise

On March 13 I offered an analysis of the ways in which President Joe Biden is challenged by right-wing populists on both border policy and continuing support for the Ukrainian war against Russia. And he is also bedeviled by left-populist in his own party over his refusal to support a ceasefire in Gaza.


I was closing by speculating about whether the left would refuse to vote for Biden over his Gaza stance in November and hand the election to Donald Trump. Here now, is that full last paragraph ...


"Would brown immigrants, POC in general and the young rather blow things up in exasperation or are they just playing a shrewd hand in the war of position inside the Democratic Party to leverage their steadily growing power. These demographics could well vote for Biden in November and come out of the election with yet more power in ways reflecting their growing percentages in the population. And between now and November. let’s not rule out Biden coming to his senses on Israel and Palestine, by forcing both sides to the table to hammer out a two-state solution whereby both nations can live alongside one another with security and in peace."


Since that post, a planned visit to Washington by a high-level Israeli delegation was canceled, when the US announced that it wouldn't veto today's UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza ... Maybe Biden is coming to his senses!!!

Wednesday, March 13, 2024

Biden in the Vise Between Right and Left Populism in Foreign Policy

 

Biden in the Vise Between Right and Left Populism in Foreign Policy

As we head toward the 2024 presidential elections foreign policy has become a key area where Biden and Democratic Party establishment will be tested by populist forces on the right and left.

 

From the right in 2022 governors Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida were prominent among who began piling asylum seeking immigrants onto busses and planes and dumping them in blue states that were less restrictionist in their outlook toward immigrants. Led by New York City mayor Eric Adams, the former New York cop, blue states began to call on federal support to serve their swelled asylum-seeking populations, and institute stricter border enforcement polices as well.  

 

By last September even the likes of left populist firebrand Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez were being heckled by protesters seeking answers to the influx of immigrants overwhelming New York City's social services.[1] Red state Republican governors had cleverly elevated immigration to a leading national issue.

 

Governor Abbott has mobilized the Texas National guard to take charge of the border, usurping and replacing the US Border Patrol in the process. This is a blatant affront to federal authority. But rather than a standoff at the border that might result in an armed clash, the feds relented, and the Texas National Guard currently patrols the border. Abbott has announced that the state plans to build a military base at Eagle Pass, a major place where illegal crossings have occurred recently.

 

Abbott has boldly undermined federal authority saying that the Biden administration is failing to uphold immigration law. But court decisions all the way up to the Supreme Court have consistently ruled that the federal government has sole jurisdiction over immigration enforcement. So the Abbott administration is also breaking the law!

 

Abbott is demonstrating classic populist impatience and willingness to blow up the system when they don’t like the way things are going. Lurking beneath the surface of course, is the the right populist fear of the “browning of America” that will make white Americans a minority by mid-century.

 

Abbott has allies in the US Congress where their populist refusal to compromise, be pragmatic and legislate precipitated crisis for policy in Ukraine and Israel as well as the border. After war exploded in israel-Palestine from October 7, and military aid for Ukraine was set to expire, House Republicans sought to tie those two issues to border policy in one “national security” bill. The populist House Group of 20/Tea Party faction behind Speaker Mike Johnson thought that divisions between the two parties over border policy and divisions among the Democrats over Israel-Gaza would make passing a bill impossible.

 

That position threatened to undo the entire system of international security established after World War Two. In the case of Ukraine failure to prevent Russia from steamrolling it would recall the horrors of the Napoleonic Wars and the two World Wars of the 20th Century. In the Middle East lack of support for Israel might undermine the West’s most reliable ally in the region and risk a wider regional war. Regarding the border, they figured even Senate Republicans could never agree on a deal with Democrats that gave enough to both sides.[2]

 

But in early February when Senate Republicans led by James Langford (Oklahoma) brokered a deal with Democrats including all three issues, Trump and the Group of 20 were stunned. Herr Trump instructed his minions in Congress to oppose the package arguing it was still a bad bill. In short order Mike Johnson announced that the bi-partisan bill would be dead on arrival at the House. Then Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who’d worked hard to craft the bill, announced that he didn’t have enough votes to prevent a Republican filibuster.[3]

 

The legislation offered more restriction and control at the border than ever before, but Democrats have since been shouting to the high heavens that Trump wants to demonstrate that Biden can’t get anything done on the issue so he can use it to energize his white nationalist base in November.[4]

 

It’s bad enough that Republicans are willing to stall pragmatic border policy reform, but they’re simultaneously willing to risk continuing Russan aggression across the vast European plain that has witnessed the bloodiest wars in history. In the Middle East the Republican willingness to let aid to Israel lapse is hard to understand, though the Christian fundamentalists among them are likely secretly salivating, because the whole mess over there could signal that the War of Armageddon imminent!

While Biden’s foreign policy is teetering under pressure from the far right, in the Middle East he is also being pressured from his left anti-imperialist populist base in the Democratic Party. The Hamas attacks on people reveling at a concert on October 7 was a monstrous crime against humanity. However, the Israeli military campaign to “eliminate Hamas” defies the laws of just war and what is considered a proportionate response.

By December 60 Congressional Democrats were calling for a lasting ceasefire in Gaza and the release of all Israeli hostages and Palestinians arbitrarily detained by Israel.

 

As the presidential primary season unfolded the Michigan contest offered an early challenge to Biden’s Middle East policy. The state is home to the largest Arab American population, by sheer numbers and more importantly, by percentage of state population, in the country. Biden won Michigan by only 154,000 votes in 2020. Some observers estimated that the Arab and larger Muslim vote may have brought him the margin for victory.[5] Before the Michigan primary Rashida Tlaib, the Palestinian American congresswoman from Dearborn led the movement urging Michigan Democrats to vote uncommitted in the primary to send a message to Biden regarding his Gaza policy.

 

In the February 27 primary over 100,00 voters totaling 13.2% of the vote went for uncommitted. This campaign reportedly tapped young voters and voters of color who are more likely to disapprove of Biden’s Gaza policy, while young voters are also troubled by his age. On March 5 Democratic primaries (Super Tuesday) uncommitted garnered 18.9% in Minnesota, 12,7% in North Carolina, 8.1% in Colorado and 7.9% in Tennessee. And in my home state of Washington activists early estimates were showing over 7% of Democratic primary votes going uncommitted.

 

It's hard to know what these alienated voters will do in November, but the answer to that question keeps the Democratic establishment up at night. Would Arab and other

Muslim voters, and young voters, populations without as much experience with politics

in America’s formal processes actually risk not voting in November and handing the election to the neo-fascist Trump? Surely, they must know that in a second Trump term the fate of Palestinians in the occupied territories as well as Arabs, Muslims, immigrants and brown people in the US will be much worse than if Biden were re-elected. Likewise, can the young, who all the data shows trend left, think another Trump term will favor them?

 

Would brown immigrants, POC in general and the young rather blow things up in exasperation or are they just playing a shrewd hand in the war of position inside the Democratic Party to leverage their steadily growing power. These demographics might well vote for Biden in November and come out of the election with yet more power in ways reflecting their growing percentages in the population. And between now and November,


[1] Greg Norman, ”AOC other Dems drowned out by screaming protesters at NYC migrant crisis news conference,” Fox News Channel, September 15, 2023.  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-other-democrats-drowned-out-screaming-protesters-nyc-migrant-crisis-news-conference

 

[2] Associated Press, “Republicans Want to Pair Border Security with Aid to Ukraine. Here’s Why That Makes a Deal So Tough,” US News and World Report, November 26, 2023. https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2023-11-26/republicans-want-to-pair-border-security-with-aid-for-ukraine-heres-why-that-makes-a-deal-so-tough

 

[3] Sahil Kapur, Kate Santaliz, Frank Thorp V and Julie Tsirikin, “Senate Republicans knife bipartisan border security bill, declaring it dead,” NBC NEWS, February 6, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-republicans-knife-bipartisan-border-security-bill-declaring-dea-rcna137572

 

[4]  Julia Mueller, “Harris: House Republicans don’t want immigration fix, because  they want a political issue to run on in November,” THE HILL, January 24, 2024.  https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4427270-harris-house-gop-immigration-border-security-november/

 

[5]  Ali Harb, “How Arabs and Muslims helped Biden win Michigan and the White House, “  Middle East Eye, November 10, 2020. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/how-arabs-and-muslims-helped-biden-win-michigan-and-white-house