On Monday, March 18, Rachid Khalidi, who is the Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University, appeared on the Brian Lehrer show to talk about his last book, Brokers of Deceit. The book's thesis is that although the U.S. posed as an honest broker between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the U.S. has in effect prevented the emergence of a viable Palestinian state and used its power as a cover for the continued oppression of Palestinians.
There's a part of the interview (approximately from 5:08 to 6:45) where Khalidi explains why he uses the term "apartheid" to describe the situation in Palestine/Israel. I found the bit incredibly lucid and well-argued, so I thought it might be useful to put it in writing because few people will take the time to listen to a whole interview and might miss it.
Q: Why do you use that word [apartheid]? Is it to be provocative? Is it because you really think it's like South Africa? [...]
A: Authorities like Bishop Tutu, who should know a thing or two about apartheid, authorities like two Israeli prime ministers (Ehud Olmert and Barak) have [all] used the term [...] as has almost anyone who is acquainted with South Africa in any detail.
When you have:
You can call it whatever you want -- if people are offended by "apartheid" they can call it Jim Crow segregation, they can call it whatever they please.
There's a part of the interview (approximately from 5:08 to 6:45) where Khalidi explains why he uses the term "apartheid" to describe the situation in Palestine/Israel. I found the bit incredibly lucid and well-argued, so I thought it might be useful to put it in writing because few people will take the time to listen to a whole interview and might miss it.
Q: Why do you use that word [apartheid]? Is it to be provocative? Is it because you really think it's like South Africa? [...]
A: Authorities like Bishop Tutu, who should know a thing or two about apartheid, authorities like two Israeli prime ministers (Ehud Olmert and Barak) have [all] used the term [...] as has almost anyone who is acquainted with South Africa in any detail.
When you have:
- Two legal systems for people
- Movement restrictions on one people
- Segregation -- Jim Crow-like restrictions on one people
You can call it whatever you want -- if people are offended by "apartheid" they can call it Jim Crow segregation, they can call it whatever they please.
But you have to really avoid looking at reality to avoid seeing that you have a system which is grossly unequal and that's been erected in large part over the last 20 to 30 years when there was supposedly a peace process ongoing. [...]
We [the U.S.] bankroll this, we run diplomatic interference for this system all the while claiming that we are honest brokers in a peace process, which in fact I don't think we have been.
No comments:
Post a Comment