MESA Board Joint Statement with CAF concerning escalating repression of protest on campuses

The Board of Directors of the Middle East Studies Association and its Committee on Academic Freedom view with increasing alarm the growing number of attempts to intimidate, repress, and criminalize campus protests against the ongoing Israeli state violence against Palestinians and the US diplomatic, military, and economic support for it. Federal, state and local government officials—from the president, to congressional members, to governors and mayors—have exacerbated the threats on campuses by encouraging university administrators to violate basic commitments to freedom of expression, while casually smearing overwhelmingly peaceful protesters with unsubstantiated claims of violence or discriminatory speech. University leaders should constitute the first line of defense for students and faculty in the face of forces seeking to vilify, harass, and silence them. Instead, we regret that several university boards of trustees, presidents, and their administrations have acquiesced in the ugliest of campaigns targeting their students and faculty for engaging in what have been peaceful protests, joined by a wide cross-section of their campus community.

As Palestine solidarity and anti-war demonstrations have proliferated and intensified, sweeping characterizations of them as violent, dangerous, and antisemitic have been deployed as part of a campaign that has weaponized the language of “safety” to delegitimize, intimidate, and forcibly disperse legal, peaceful dissent. University administrations, most egregiously at Columbia, New York University, and Yale have—in some cases, in violation of their own university policies—called in the police to break up protests and arrest tens of students, some of whom have been summarily suspended and evicted from university housing. At NYU, faculty, too, were arrested. The University of Southern California cancelled the valedictorian’s commencement address after a slanderous hate campaign was launched against her for her pro-Palestinian views; the University of Pennsylvania revoked Penn Against the Occupation’s status as a registered student group; Harvard has now banned that university’s Palestine Solidarity Committee. Given the developments of the past several weeks, we are extremely concerned about what these disturbing events portend as commencement season approaches.

Attempts by universities to limit or suppress Gaza war-related speech and protest have been all too common since shortly after the 7 October attack. But the growing securitization and outright repression on campuses have reached levels not seen since the 1960s. We are witnessing a situation in which, in the name of security, it is university leaders themselves who have become the primary threat to the rights and safety of members of the campus community. The appeasement of malign forces seeking to destroy academic freedom, faculty governance, and curricular diversity, in which Columbia’s president Nemat Shafik so willingly participated during her 17 April congressional hearing, must not be allowed to metastasize. Today the goal is to suppress speech on Palestine, but the battle over free speech and academic freedom on our campuses did not begin, nor does it end, there.

We therefore call upon college and university boards of trustees, presidents, and administrations across the country immediately to clearly and forcefully recommit themselves to the freedom of inquiry, expression, and protest on campus that have been pillars of the US academy for decades. As the massive killing and destruction in Gaza continue, we also demand that you fulfill your responsibility to your profession and your campus community to defend peaceful protesters, uphold academic freedom, and reject all pressures seeking to criminalize peaceful encampments and demonstrations against this horrendous war—and our government’s complicity in it.

Headlines by most mainstream media outlets were close to identical. They skipped words such as “Gaza,” “Palestine,” or “genocide”—even though Bushnell used precisely such words in his final statement. Some outlets, CNN for example, did narrate his final words (at least in one of their reports).

But, unlike the media treatment of a similar self-immolation in Atlanta some three months ago, this incident was so well-spread on social media that the mainstream was forced to provide coverage.

Al Jazeera English Video: “Who was Aaron Bushnell, the US airman who died protesting over Gaza? | Al Jazeera Newsfeed”

Self-immolation, as the ultimate form of protest, is a sign and expression of individual and collective powerlessness against the controlling systems—even in the so-called democratic societies. And history tells us that, more often than not, it has had a significant impact on the prevalent political climate.

The 1963 self-immolation in Saigon of the Buddhist monk Thich Quang Duc became a turning point in the collapse of the Diem regime. That photo, showing hundreds of other monks surrounding the city square so Quang Duc could complete his protest, is now part of humanity’s photo gallery.

During the American war on Vietnam, there were several US citizens who gave the same sacrifice in protest. Norman Morrison is perhaps the most well-known.

Morrison’s self-immolation took place soon after President Johnson’s authorization of napalm in Vietnam. He set himself ablaze at the Pentagon, underneath the window of Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, who himself acknowledged that “Norman R. Morrison … burned himself to death within 40 feet of my Pentagon window.” (Morrison was likely not aware of this fact.)

In his 1995 book (In Retrospect: The Tragedy in Lessons of Vietnam), McNamara acknowledged the effect of Morrison’s sacrifice:

“It was an outcry against the killing that was destroying the lives of so many Vietnamese and American youth.

“I reacted to the horror of his action by bottling up my emotions and avoided talking about them with anyone—even with my family. I knew Marge and our three children shared many of Morrison’s feelings about the war. And I believed I understood and shared some of his thoughts. The episode created tension at home that only deepened as the criticism of the war continued to grow.”

And then we are aware that the “Arab Spring” began when Mohamed Bouazizi, a young Tunisian street vendor, set himself on fire as an act of protest against the autocratic regime.

An extreme protest from Airman Aaron Bushnell points to the sentiment within a certain segment of the US military. That sentiment can simply not be ignored.

Negating the system-induced powerlessness, and asserting his freedom, Bushnell expressed his conviction in a social media message just before his final act in this world:

“Many of us like to ask ourselves, ‘What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?’

“The answer is, you’re doing it. Right now.”

Set ablaze by the despair of the all-encompassing repression in our world, Bushnell leaves behind a flickering hope that we humans can decide to change in this world.

Perhaps he is counting on you and me to live, and carry forward the flame!

—–

Azam Saeed is author of bestseller Radical Revolution of Values .

An effective criticism of social and political woes by public intellectuals might get the attention of some segments of the public, especially those who might be labeled “politically aware”—individuals who regularly follow the news and crises of the day. But there is more to being a public intellectual than becoming a gadfly gnawing on the pestiferous hide of the establishment. Eloquently depicting misdirection, mismanagement, and overweening ambitions among the political class can be motivating but often prove insufficient. Worse yet, it could become a self-defeating enterprise when these criticisms lead to public despair and political alienation. It is akin to the proverbial heralding that “the emperor has no clothes,” with the added twist that no tailor can sew one either. When others pile on, we get closer to a political black hole.

Churning out critical essays and commentaries should not be the end but an inducement to search for remedies. What utility do such analyses offer if their message only intimates a rotten and entrenched status quo immune to change and improvements?

Channel 4 New Video: “Hannah Ritchie on replacing eco-anxiety with ‘cautious optimism’ & how to build a sustainable world”

The public intellectual must go beyond criticism of the unsatisfactory status quo and policies by inspiring a sense of optimism in the public’s mind about change and reform and suggesting how they might be achieved. How can this be done responsibly?

Paul Romer, a Nobel laureate in Economics (2018), distinguishes complacent optimism from contingent optimism (he calls it  “conditional optimism”; I prefer contingent optimism to  accentuate the difference with complacent optimism) by giving an example of each: “Complacent optimism is the feeling of a child waiting for presents. “Contingent optimism “ is the feeling of a child who is thinking about building a treehouse. ‘If I get some wood and nails and persuade some other kids to help do the work, we can end up with something really cool.” In the first case (complacent optimism), the child is passive, awaiting a present with earnest expectation. In the second case (contingent optimism), the child lays out a plan to make her wish a reality. The optimism of the first child is wholly dependent on the largesse of others; she makes herself the object of her expectations. The optimism of the second child is born of her agency to identify and secure the resources she needs to build her treehouse.

Contingent optimism begins by taking stock of the challenge. Once the problem is defined, you search for credible solutions to change the situation in the desired direction. In other words, contingent optimism makes the reason for developing an optimistic outlook contingent on working out a strategy of change that makes it likely to achieve the outcomes one seeks. It is the careful mapping out of a plan that justifies feeling optimistic about change. That optimism is contingent on having correctly defined the problem and potential solutions.

We should expect contingent optimism from public intellectuals, not despair. They are uniquely equipped and positioned to critically analyze our societal ills and propose remedies that can change the system to better serve the common good. The same goes for the rest of us. Deluding ourselves with passive hope is the essence of complacent optimism. Planning how to achieve our wishes justifies optimism—contingently, of course!

Biden is hiding inside the White House protected by a fence, military police, and snipers on the roof while the children in besieged Gaza are left unprotected from Israel’s genocidal bombing that kills five children every hour.

That’s around 117 children murdered daily. pic.twitter.com/YLf5T4bQGD

— Melissa Garriga 💕 (@MelissaAGarriga) January 13, 2024

The crowds demanded a ceasefire and insisted that Mr. Biden force Israel into one. They also called for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas in Gaza.

Middle East Eye: “Thousands rally in Washington DC demanding Gaza ceasefire and end to US aid to Israel

American Near East Refugee Aid said Saturday, “The death toll in Gaza is immense and difficult to estimate due to telecommunications cuts. UNOCHA reports that, as of January 11, at least 23,469 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza and 59,604 injured. And some 1.9 million people, nearly 85% of Gaza’s population, are internally displaced.

Among the organizers, the Council on American Islamic Relation (CAIR), said “We thank every person who attended this historic event to call for an end to the Israeli government’s genocide in Gaza and an end to our government’s support for their atrocities. The Biden administration can no longer ignore the millions of Americans who are saying ‘enough is enough.’ It is time for the administration to listen to the people and demand an immediate ceasefire, end its support for the Israeli apartheid government, and hold Israeli officials to account for their crimes against humanity.”

Before the event began, six Palestinian-Americans from Gaza shared the catastrophes that have befallen their families. CAIR writes that, e.g., “Dr. Alaa Hussein Ali (MI) shares the story of the more than 100 members of his family who were killed in November in Israeli attacks, including the murder of his brother by sniper as he attempted to fetch water, and all of his in-laws after fleeing for safety to the south of Gaza.”

Also speaking were presidential candidates Cornel West and Jill Stein, Rep. Andre Carson, Code Pink Director Medea Benjamin, and prominent Muslim-American leaders, including Ilyasa Shabazz, the daughter of Malcolm X. Gaza-based Aljazeera journalist Wael Dahdouh, many of whose close family members have been killed by Israel, spoke by video.

President Biden had left the White House for Camp David.

One of the more poignant world-wide rallies was staged at the US Consulate in Johannesburg, South Africa, as the International Court of Justice at the Hague deliberates on the charge of genocide brought against Israel by Pretoria. There was also a big protest in Capetown. The organizers had a statement read out at the latter, according to Matthew Hirsch at Ground Up: “We are here today to be part of the global day of action that will see demonstrations planned in more than 66 cities and at least 36 countries. Today’s rally will be part of a united front of global voices, calling unconditionally for an immediate and permanent ceasefire.”

Imtiaz Sooliman of the aid group “Gift of the Givers,” which has had teams in Gaza and the West Bank, said according to Hirsch, “People like us and people all over the world will make sure that the ceasefire comes. The power of the people is more powerful than any government and any weapon in the world.” Of the case brought by South Africa at the Hague, he said, “I feel great to be South African. When we sent our people to the ICJ we brought back the Mandela magic.”

South African attorneys are saying that if the ICJ issues a ruling in South Africa’s favor they will bring civil suits in the U.S. and U.K. on that basis, because of the collaboration of those two governments in the massacre of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

SABC News: “Activists gather outside US Consulate”

Hundreds of thousands also demonstrated in London, and similarly large crowds came out in numerous other cities around the world.

Middle East Eye: “Hundreds of thousands gather in London for Palestinian solidarity and Gaza ceasefire”

In this article I’m going to outline why it is wrong for the British government to pursue such dangerous policy and why supporting the BDS is important for peace and democracy for Palestinians and westerns alike.

The BDS movement is a Palestinian-led global campaign for freedom, justice and equality. It upholds the simple principle that Palestinians are entitled to the same rights as the rest of humanity. It was established in 2005 in response to the failure of the international community to hold Israel to account especially after the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice which declared the wall being built around the West Bank by Israel as violation of the International Law. The BDS movement includes unions, academic associations, churches and grassroots movements across the world. It uses non-violent pressure on Israel to end its occupation of all Arabs land and dismantle the wall, to recognize the rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel and to respect the rights of the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes according to UN resolution 194.

Novara Media: ” MPs Vote To Protect Israel; We Speak To The Founder Of BDS | #NovaraLIVE ”

Some of the notable supporters of the BDS movement include Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Pink floyd musician Roger Watters and the renowned physicist the late professor Stephen Hawking who joined the academic boycott of Israel when in 2013 he famously puled out of a conference hosted by former president of Israel the late Shimon Peres in protest against Israel treatment of the Palestinian.

I find the British government move to prevent public bodies from engaging with the BDS disgraceful for several reasons. To start with, by its peaceful nature, the BDS movement allows larger public participation in politics and humanitarian issues where ordinary people and institutions can express their objection to Israeli policies, especially the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Putting increasing pressure on Israel peacefully including through cultural, economic and academic boycotts, is more likely to make Israeli politicians reconsider their inhumane treatment of the Palestinians. This has the potentials to prevent or at the least reduce bloodshed and save lives.

For any government to outlaw such harmless methods of protest and resistance means to push them in the opposite direction and to encourage more violence and bloodshed. This stance is astonishing, especially for the British government, considering Britain’s moral and historic responsibility in creating the suffering of the Palestinians. London accomplished this through the infamous 1917 Balfour Declaration in which it gave Palestine to the Zionist movement and allowed it to ethnically cleanse most of the Palestinians and turn them into refugees in order create Israel in 1948 based on ideas of supremacy, racism and bloodshed.

Inasmuch as it outlaws civil protest, the British government’s bill gives a green light to extremist Israeli politicians such as the Israeli Heritage Minister Amichai Elyahu, who said that “one of Israel’s options in the war in Gaza is to drop the nuclear bomb.”

The legislation is also a threat to British democracy as it seems to be the case that supporting Israel oppression of the Palestinians by western governments is increasingly becoming a threat to free speech and therefore to democracy. Denying public sector organizations the right to decide their own policies in relation to ethical procurement of services and goods is an attack on their basic right to make their own decisions to reject dealings with governments and businesses involved in human rights violations.

For us as Palestinians, boycotting Israeli goods has been a method of non-violent resistance for many decades, wielded against illegal occupation, colonization, ethnic cleansing, land theft, killing, persecution and apartheid. Now, defending the right to boycott Israel and to stand for justice for the Palestinians is becoming a new battle ground in defending democracy and free speech in the west.

( Al-Shabaka ) – Israel’s 2023 genocide of Palestinians in Gaza has horrified many around the world and drawn widespread public outcry, with unprecedented levels of solidarity organizing taking place across the globe. Millions have gathered in the streets, issued public statements, and mobilized to block corporate and state-led support not only for the Israeli regime’s recent onslaught but for its decades-long colonial occupation of Palestine. But as this unparalleled solidarity has emerged, so too has extraordinary repression at every level. 

Al-Shabaka spoke with Layla Kattermann of the European Legal Support Center (ELSC) and Diala Shamas of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) for further insight on this suppression of mobilization. Together, they detail some of the intimidation tactics and punitive actions taken by governments across North America and Europe and offer concrete advice for how to resist such efforts to stifle Palestine solidarity. 

This interview is a lightly edited version of a conversation featured on Al-Shabaka’s podcast series, Rethinking Palestine, hosted by Senior Analyst Yara Hawari, in October of 2023. The full discussion may be listened to here.¹

Since the start of the assault on Gaza, what has the repression of solidarity with Palestine looked like in Europe?

Layla Kattermann

The repression we are currently witnessing in Europe is the culmination of a decades-long attempt to connect the Palestinian identity and experience with terrorism and antisemitism. This false connection has been particularly exploited to suppress protests and demonstrations. Although the right to protest is considered fundamental in Europe—and demonstrations are an indicator of a healthy democratic system—several countries, such as Germany, France, and Austria, are violating that right by banning demonstrations in solidarity with the Palestinian people. 

The language used by European media, politicians, and police orders to justify Palestine solidarity repression is aimed at thwarting any divergence from the colonial mainstream narratives Click To Tweet

In Germany, for example, not only are protests being banned, but we are also witnessing police violence, arrests, and harassment for any displays of Palestine solidarity. In Berlin alone, there were roughly 600 police detentions between October 11th and October 20th, 2023, for this reason. This crackdown has also extended to schools: The Berlin Senate Department for Education, Youth and Family, for example, sent a letter to all Berlin school authorities and supervisors asking them to ban students from wearing keffiyehs and other Palestinian symbols or slogans, such as “Free Palestine.” School authorities were likewise asked to notify the police of any violations of this ban, and in at least one instance a school director has been suspended for refusing to comply.

Work suspensions and terminations of employment such as these are also on the rise for expressions of solidarity with Palestine. Other forms of repression that we are seeing at increasing rates include smear campaigns of individuals and groups, online de-platforming, withdrawal of use of venues, cancellations of events, and disinvitations. Many of these punitive measures are justified through racist arguments and bolstered by the rise of far-right parties across Europe, which have consistently dehumanized migrants, refugees, and particularly those of Muslim backgrounds.

What about in the US?

Diala Shamas

In the US, there has been a range of incidents of both institutional and private repression. On the institutional side, law enforcement officers, including the FBI, have summoned Palestinians for questioning through “voluntary interviews,” often leveraging immigration concerns or status to coerce individuals into speaking. Additionally, local police departments have circulated notices indicating plans for special monitoring or surveillance of Palestine solidarity protests. This has come as a directive from the highest levels of government—indeed, President Biden himself mentioned that he was instructing law enforcement to monitor the situation closely. In New York City, Mayor Eric Adams went further to essentially equate protesters marching and speaking out in support of Palestinian rights with support for terrorism. Such discourse has been widespread, from elected officials across city, state, and federal levels. It is really concerning to witness the exploitation of this tremendous power imbalance, especially when these officials start publicly naming different activist groups, and sometimes even specific individuals.

Private repression is also taking place at a frightening level. For example, a conference by the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights was cancelled because the venue—a Hilton hotel—received threats and ultimately pulled out from hosting the event. There has also been a surge in hate crimes, from the violent murder of 6-year-old Palestinian-American, Wadea Al Fayoume, in Chicago, to the attempted murder of three Palestinian university students in Vermont.

Photo by Ian Hutchinson on Unsplash

There is an infrastructure behind the repression of Palestine solidarity that includes both legislation and a discourse that equates anti-Zionism with antisemitism. In moments like this, the switch can be flipped and all tactics may be… Click To Tweet

Similarly, the professional repercussions of voicing support for the Palestinian people at this time have been at an all-time high. At academic institutions, for example, professors have come under pressure for statements made about October 7th and the unfolding genocide in Gaza. And across various professional fields we are learning of reports of individuals demanding that staff face severe consequences or be terminated from their positions for statements made in their personal capacities. This is happening all over the US, and we are yet to understand the full scale of it.

Doxxing is likewise on the rise, with the posting of private and identifying information of people speaking out against the genocide in Gaza. On the Harvard University campus, for instance, pro-Israeli groups sponsored digital billboard trucks to drive around with pictures of student activist leaders under the headline “antisemite.” The students featured had signed statements condemning Israeli atrocities in Gaza. Acts such as these are clearly intended to intimidate those in support of Palestinian rights and to inflict both mental health and professional consequences. It is worth noting that many of the people subjected to doxxing are Palestinian, Arab, or from other communities of color. 

Is this level of repression unprecedented?

Layla Kattermann

Not necessarily. Rather, it should be understood as a continuation and acceleration of a worrying trend. The repression of the Palestine solidarity movement or Palestinian rights advocacy did not start with the latest bombardment of Gaza. While the ELSC has monitored Europe’s crackdown on Palestine solidarity since 2019, it of course existed long before. It is a repression that has long been justified through racist depictions of Palestinians that depict them as either terrorist threats and/or inherently antisemitic. 

In Europe, there is the Orwellian strategy used to portray the Other as a barbaric threat and the Self as a barometer of moral security. Within this strategy we see new words being invented and undesirable ones stripped of their meaning. Thus, the language used by European media, politicians, and police orders to justify Palestine solidarity repression is aimed at thwarting any divergence from the colonial mainstream narratives. As part of this strategy, we see a huge effort by European politicians and mainstream media that echoes the “us versus them” and “civilized versus uncivilized” dichotomy of 9/11.

While the tactics used to silence criticism of the Israeli regime today are not as visible or obvious as imprisonments or assassinations of dissidents, what we see instead is the attempt to damage activists’ psychological and organizational strength. Indeed, the censoring of civil society organizations and the demonization of solidarity groups are efforts to reduce the political capabilities of the Palestine solidarity movement. Likewise, the attempts to criminalize certain slogans, such as “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” are obvious efforts to frighten activists. This repression is the continuation of a trend that started several years ago, with implementation of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism in many institutions and the passing of anti-BDS legislation. 

Diala Shamas

The repression itself is not unprecedented, but the level and scale feel like nothing we have had to face before. Those particularly working in the legal response to this crackdown have noted that the numbers of reported instances of repression are at an all-time high. But I do think it is helpful to think of all of this as part of the architecture of repression that has been built over the last decade. Indeed, there is an infrastructure behind the repression of Palestine solidarity that includes both legislation and a discourse that equates anti-Zionism with antisemitism. In moments like this, the switch can be flipped and all tactics may be activated at once. These are mechanisms of repression that have become very well oiled in many ways over a long period of time.

It is important that both individuals and the movement as a whole are not intimidated into silence or inaction Click To Tweet

On the other hand, because this has been happening over a period of years, we also now have institutions and professionals well prepared to challenge these oppressive strategies. In a moment such as this, they are able to provide support and a line of defense. For example, Palestine Legal has a network of attorneys that they’ve built up to support people facing attacks for their advocacy in favor of Palestinian rights. Meanwhile, CCR is also doing similar work but on a broader range of civil and human rights issues. Nonetheless, there is a dire need to expand our movement defense capabilities to be able to handle the unprecedented caseload.

How have the ELSC and CCR responded to this repression?

Layla Kattermann

The ELSC comprises movement lawyers who consider themselves accountable to Palestinian civil society. In that sense, we view the law in a pragmatic way and are very aware of the fact that it can be used as an exploitative and even oppressive tool. But we also see law as a tool to both push back against repression and one that can mobilize people. The ELSC has three pillars that define our work: defense, monitoring, and empowerment. The defense pillar works as a filter between clients and lawyers, where we offer co-counseling and expertise to defend those facing repression. The monitoring pillar involves keeping a record of the mechanisms used to silence advocates and the criminalization of Palestine solidarity work, not only for archival purposes but also to track trends of repression. The empowerment pillar involves working on campaigns of strategic litigation, such as holding companies accountable for human rights violations, and strengthening the Palestine solidarity movement.

Diala Shamas

Since the outset of the assault on Gaza, we have been in rapid response mode. It’s very hard to strike the right balance of focusing on repression and making sure that people are protected as they speak out and also not losing the focus on what’s happening in Gaza and throughout Palestine. In that regard, we have been really attentive to trying to offer language and legal analysis about what the Israeli regime is doing to the Palestinian people in Gaza. Not only have we reaffirmed that the Israeli regime’s current assault constitutes genocide, but we have also laid out US complicity in that genocide.

Simultaneously, we have increased our work to support those who are doing important advocacy in the US. For example, we have represented individuals who have been contacted by the FBI for questioning, and we have fielded calls from people across the country who are dealing with consequences in their workplaces for speaking out against the genocide in Gaza. Relatedly, Palestine Legal has been building a network of attorneys, largely with a focus on experts in employment law, to help respond to these calls. We have also been increasing our capacity to advise individuals facing doxxing attacks, both in terms of personal safety as well as online reputation.

What has been really great to see is so many people within the legal community reach out and ask how they can support.

What advice would you give organizers at the moment—particularly those who might be feeling apprehensive or fearful in light of this repression?

Layla Kattermann

It is important that both individuals and the movement as a whole are not intimidated into silence or inaction. The allegations and accusations that politicians and the mainstream media use against the Palestine solidarity movement are nothing new. I think we should therefore be confident enough in countering and challenging them. It’s also important to remember that we are stronger in numbers, as demonstrated in Berlin, where the masses defied the police prohibition on protests. Of course, the authorities can still resort to violence, but it’s important in these moments that people stick together.

Now more than ever is the time to speak up and out against what is happening. Not only is there a moral imperative in doing so, but it will also enable you to connect with other like-minded people and organize together. Smear and doxing campaigns usually aim to isolate a person from support networks and wider society. Indeed, it is always easier to attack one person rather than a group. Therefore, strength in numbers when it comes to defying the current repression cannot be underestimated.

Diala Shamas

We must remind ourselves that, while we’re seeing an unprecedented scale in repression, we’re also witnessing an unprecedented amount of solidarity and people speaking out against what’s happening to Palestinians in Gaza. The rise in repression is, in fact, in direct correlation with the growing Palestine solidarity movement. In this moment, we cannot stop speaking out and opposing genocide. 

With this in mind, it’s also important to be cautious. We are all really angry and outraged at what we are seeing and experiencing. We have seen some of the most horrific images and videos coming out of Gaza, and the sense of abandonment coupled with feelings of both rage and sadness is overwhelming. In this climate, it is really difficult to remain clear-headed and rational. This is when we see lapses in judgment that are sometimes exploited by the other side. Yet as Palestinians and as advocates for Palestinian rights, we cannot afford the luxury of a lapse in judgment because it results in our energies and attention being diverted.

If one finds themselves in a situation where they are facing repression, it is imperative to know your rights. In the US, if you are approached by any authorities for an interview, you are entitled to decline and refer them to your lawyer. Alternatively, you can take their number and have your lawyer reach out to them. For legal representation, you can contact Palestine Legal, the Center for Constitutional Rights, your local National Lawyers Guild chapter, your local CAIR chapter, or your local ACLU affiliate.

We must remind ourselves that, while we’re seeing an unprecedented scale in repression, we’re also witnessing an unprecedented amount of solidarity Click To Tweet

If you are called into a meeting with your employer or your university administration, try to get a legal consult before going into that meeting, or don’t go in alone. It is also important to document everything. This can be in the form of notes or self-written emails, with timestamps of events as they occur. It might also make sense to try to be preemptive and reach out to your employer or your university administration to let them know what is happening and make sure that they are hearing from you first and not from those who are trying to smear you. Importantly, remember you’re not alone—if you can and are confident, speak out about the repression so that you can find solidarity with others and vice versa.

Over the years, we’ve gone back and forth on the question of whether we want to talk openly about how difficult it is to speak about Palestinian rights, because we don’t want to discourage folks from doing it. However, we are well past this point—everybody knows that this kind of repression is happening—so we now feel that speaking out actually draws support and solidarity and can also build on political organizing. We’ve seen really inspirational instances of activists coming together to support each other, as well as professionals offering support to colleagues to find alternative employment when someone’s employment has been terminated. This kind of solidarity is a really important way to build resilience in these moments of heightened repression.

Which legal resources would you suggest for people navigating this repression?

Layla Kattermann

We have several resources available on the ELSC website that are also country-specific and are aimed at educating people on their rights, because much of the current repression is unconstitutional and unlawful. Certainly, in many countries across Europe, the police are exercising unlawful conduct. In those situations, it’s always useful to record the police, to register the officer and unit number, and to make the abuse or conduct publicly known. As Diala said, one shouldn’t deal with such repression alone. From our experience, once publicized, people usually reach out and offer support. Indeed, at the moment, we are seeing people really helping each other and standing in solidarity with one another against this pushback.

If you are in Europe, you can report to the ELSC. There are also a lot of collectives of lawyers at the moment that are actively helping the Palestine solidarity movement.

Diala Shamas

People in the solidarity movement across the US should familiarize themselves with Palestine Legal’s website. It has a range of resources, including on how to navigate doxxing and hostile environments on university campuses. If someone is struggling with something specifically regarding state repression, whether it’s federal or local law enforcement, there are a range of organizations that can support you. The organizations I mentioned previously may be able to also refer you.

I’d also be remiss to not mention the importance of taking care of yourself—to breathe and remember that you have a community, because these small things allow us to continue our work. These are really, really difficult times. We are all feeling it. But we don’t have a choice other than to continue speaking out. Indeed, the consequences might be difficult for us here in the US or Europe, but the conditions are far worse for the people in Gaza, as well as for those in the rest of colonized Palestine.

1. This interview is not a substitute for legal advice. Please pursue guidance from legal counsel should you have questions pertaining to a specific case or incident.

A UMass Dissenters organizer discusses the growing youth-led antiwar movement and how they are organizing against weapons manufacturers and the war in Gaza.

By Alessandra Bergamin | –

( Waging Nonviolence ) – In January 2020, Dissenters — a grassroots, youth-led antiwar movement — began with the mission to connect violence against Black and brown communities in the U.S. to the systems of oppression that fund, arm and enable global militarism. While born from the legacy of the U.S. antiwar movement, Dissenters takes an intersectional approach that connects global wars with corporate elites, local police, border walls, surveillance and prisons. Operating across the country through campus chapters, training fellowships and a strong social media presence, Dissenters has been organizing for college divestment from weapons manufacturers, ending campus recruitment from military-affiliated companies and disbanding campus police departments.

Since Oct. 7, in the aftermath of the Hamas attack and the subsequent siege of Gaza, Dissenters chapters have doubled down on antiwar organizing, holding local and national rallies, sit-ins, student walkouts and training events both on and offline. One campus chapter — at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst — has organized protests, disruptions to sports games, and a sit-in at the chancellor’s office to pressure its university to cut ties with the weapons manufacturer Raytheon, now known as RTX. 

UMass Students gathered for a Palestine solidarity protest on Oct. 12. (UMass Dissenters)

Over the past two months, Raytheon/RTX — which develops and sells weapons systems used by the Israeli Defense Forces — has seen stock prices skyrocket and company executives discuss the rise in violence as a financial opportunity. According to UMass Dissenters organizers, the company is deeply entrenched at the college through recruitment practices and the Isenberg School of Management, which has a close educational and financial partnership with the weapons manufacturer. 

I spoke with Bre Joseph, a UMass Amherst senior and organizer with the campus chapter of Dissenters. We discussed organizing college students against weapons manufacturers, the radicalizing impact of activist arrests, and the lessons learned from successes and setbacks.  

In relation to the siege on Gaza, what are the main goals or demands of the UMass Dissenters chapter?

Number one is that the school must divest and cut ties with weapons manufacturers like Raytheon, but also Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and so on. Our second demand is that the administration must call for an immediate end to Israel’s siege on Gaza and end U.S. funding. A third demand is that the administration must replace weapons manufacturers with jobs working toward a demilitarized future. 

I think that third one acknowledges that — while moving away from Raytheon as a campus partner would technically decrease opportunities afforded to UMass students — the onus is on the campus to replace jobs that increase death and violence with jobs that are sustainable and help the earth. We’ve heard students express this on an app called Yik Yak where you can post anonymously. It’s usually unserious, but every now and then I’ll open it and see people say, “I’m an engineering major, and I’m tired of having Raytheon pushed down my throat as an employment option. I don’t want to build bombs. I don’t want to make money for this company that’s killing people. I want better options.” That’s really been our goal from the beginning — get those jobs out and center a demilitarized future instead of militarizing it further. 

How does intersectionality both inform and impact Dissenters’ organizing? 

Today I was listening to a quote from Martin Luther King’s daughter who was speaking about the three evil points in society — poverty, militarization and racism. These things are inextricably linked in a way where they cannot be pulled apart from one another. I think that’s really the power and the driving force behind our movement. 

Every day we learn about how the Israeli Defense Force is connected to something like Cop City or was connected to something like apartheid in South Africa. So I feel like we’d be doing our movement a disservice — and we’d be doing Palestinians here and abroad a disservice — by not acknowledging how militarization is directly linked to their identities. 

At Dissenters, one of our principles is that the people who suffer under oppression have the tools and ideas to fix it. In order to allow them to use these tools, we have to be willing to give them the space and the platform, and we have to acknowledge their pain and suffering as part of a larger system of militarization and criminalization. 

How has UMass Dissenters organized to inform and mobilize students on the connections between the campus and weapons manufacturers? 

In terms of education, we have a document that we’ve made public via our Instagram and emails we’ve sent out to interested students really detailing UMass’s connection to Raytheon — and detailing Raytheon’s connection to the IDF and the war on Palestinians. At our weekly meetings, we’ve also had things like teach-ins for interested students. We’ve also crashed Raytheon information sessions to do this thing we call “being the common sense,” where we ask recruiters: “What exactly would students be building? What exactly is making the company money?” We ask the questions they don’t really want to answer but that they need to to be held accountable.

In terms of actions, we regularly flyer as much of the school as possible. We canvas, we hand out papers and speak with people, and we really try to make people aware on an individual basis in one-on-one conversations. Those are our foolproof methods of just reaching the school generally. But then we have more targeted approaches to make sure we’re getting all the little communities that haven’t had the opportunity to join yet and are maybe curious but still on the sidelines. 

Within our outreach, we have seven subgroups who are in charge of mobilizing grad students, alumni, parents and others. For example, we’ve sent out emails to parents that they can then send to the school or to the chancellor, expressing their support for the students, for the movement and calling for an end to UMass’s ties to Raytheon. I mainly work with student organizations, reaching out to them via email and on social media — and trying to get them to come to meetings so they can plug in their members. When it comes to mobilization, I would say picture an octopus with a million arms doing a million things. 

Since Oct. 7, UMass Dissenters has organized several campus actions from disrupting a hockey game to a sit-in in the Chancellor’s office. What does it take to organize these kinds of actions in a college environment?

There are some actions that are more meticulously planned than others. If actions require a lot of people, those will be discussed at least a week or two in advance so we have time to properly mobilize. Things are rarely off the fly, though, especially when you’re interacting with other campus populations, and we’re not sure how they will react. For example, at hockey games crowds are known to be rather boisterous and people are kind of amped up. So something like that has to be planned a little further in advance for the safety of our members and to make sure we know how to conduct ourselves in any scenario. 

Similarly, we hold something that you could call a teach-in at our meetings, where we teach people the basics of canvassing, flyering, one-on-one conversation, and how to operate as part of a protest space, among other topics. Ahead of two big actions we recently organized, we held workshops around topics like how to navigate being approached by someone aggressive. The advice is — don’t talk back, don’t entertain it, remain safe and respectful at all times. Then when we actually got to the protest and everyone was there, we disseminated that information once again. We’re trying to give everybody the best information possible and keep everybody informed.   

We also have a research team within Dissenters that is tasked with looking up rules and regulations and making sure that whatever we do, we remain inside of those. Because some hockey games are televised, we researched campus policy around disrupting an event like that to make sure our students wouldn’t get into trouble. From that, we found a regulation about flags, so we couldn’t bring a flag on a pole or a crazy big banner. That was one thing for safety. Then at bigger rallies or sit-ins, we’ve had to be really careful about the possible consequences of our actions so that students who might have been previously arrested, don’t get into more trouble.  

At the sit-in, 57 activists were arrested on trespassing charges. How does the UMass Dissenters chapter plan and organize around student arrests?

Arrests are not something that we leave up to chance. To prepare, we hold workshops and have a lawyer present who explains what being arrested means, possible consequences and also “know-your-rights” type stuff. Basically, we want people to be informed so they can give their informed consent if they want to participate. After that, we have everybody sign documents listing their important information, and we collect and hold onto those.

When people are arrested, we have systems in place for knowing where they are going to be held, posting bail, getting them in contact with lawyers or possibly their parents, and picking them up from jail or taking them to the arraignment. We also help people get food, water, whatever they need, in case this process takes longer than expected. These things are well planned in advance.

A year after Mahsa Amini’s death, Iran intensifies surveillance on women

Written byGuest Contributor

This piece was first published by Alliance for Universal Digital Rights (AUDRi), on September 16, 2023, and was written by Emma Gibson, the global coordinator for AUDRi.  An edited version is republished here with permission

( Globalvoices.org ) – September 16, 2023, marked a year since the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini following her arrest by the Iranian government’s “morality” police. In the week leading up to the anniversary, human rights organizations Equality Now, Femena, and Centre for Supporters of Human Rights (CSHR), made a joint submission to the UN Human Rights Committee expressing “deep concerns about the condition of women and girls in Iran regarding the continued prevalence of female genital mutilation (FGM), child marriage, and sex-discriminatory personal status laws in the country.” 

In recent years, protests against the mandatory hijab or the so-called “morality police” in Iran have made international headlines. The bravery of women, often leading the charge, cannot be overstated. However, these protests are often met with severe consequences, increasingly driven by the government’s sophisticated digital surveillance apparatus. 

A controversial new hijab bill includes 70 articles that prescribe harsher penalties for women, as well as severe sanctions against public figures, businesses, and service providers who support them. The bill proposes the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to enforce dress code violations, reflecting a disturbing manifestation of gender-based persecution.

In today’s digital age, Iran’s government has been wielding a two-edged sword: the same technology that has the potential to empower voices is being used to silence them, especially when those voices call for gender equality. Using advanced facial recognition software and tracking online interactions, the government identifies and harasses those who dare to dissent. 

This technological might is disproportionately used against women, whose demands for equal rights are seen as direct threats to the state’s ideological foundation.

It’s not just about cameras on street corners or drones in the sky. The real Orwellian nightmare lies in the shadows of the internet. Popular platforms are censored, and encrypted messaging apps, on which protesters often rely to organize, are blocked. Bloggers, influencers, and even ordinary citizens face intimidation, arrest, or worse for simply expressing their opinions online.

Iran Protests,’ Ottawa, Canada, September 25, 2022, by Taymaz Valley on Flickr (CC BY 2.0.).

Perhaps most disturbing is the state’s increasingly invasive eye into private spaces: the cars and walking routes of private citizens. 

A chilling testament to this is the fact that, within a mere span of three months, almost a million women were texted warnings from the nation’s police force. Their crime? Being captured by ever-watchful cameras without a hijab, as detailed by a harrowing report from Amnesty International.

According to the report, the police “issued 133,174 SMS messages requiring the immobilization of vehicles for a specific duration, confiscated 2,000 cars, and referred more than 4,000 ‘repeat offenders’ to the judiciary across the country.”

From Iran to the world: An international call to action

Digital rights are, at their core, human rights. A society where individuals cannot communicate freely, privately, and securely is one where fundamental freedoms are under assault. 

Digital rights exist alongside the right to peaceful protests in multiple ways. Encrypted communication tools can offer activists and protesters a way to communicate without the fear of government interception or retribution. When mainstream media is censored or muzzled, social media platforms can allow for the rapid dissemination of information, rallying supporters for a cause. Furthermore, the digital realm offers an expansive library of resources on peaceful protest tactics, rights awareness, and international solidarity efforts.

Iran is far from being the only regime restricting digital freedoms while using technology to suppress dissent or co-opting its surveillance. In India, for example, police have made use of an app which allows them to access privately-gathered CCTV footage.

In China, mass surveillance has been used to gather information about the movements and activities of private individuals in a form of “predictive policing.” Across all these examples, there is evidence that surveillance and infringement on privacy rights disproportionately target individuals and groups whose identities make them vulnerable, such as women or minorities, or whose political activities challenge the status quo. 

But here lies the challenge: As governments like these become more adept at quelling online dissent, how can activists stay a step ahead?

The international community can play a crucial role. Tech companies must be pressured to safeguard user data and prioritize end-to-end encryption. Digital rights organizations and civil society should be consulted on the threats posed by state-led digital surveillance and censorship and the implications of the technology being produced. 

Most importantly, the global community should consistently spotlight abuses, ensuring governments understand that the world is watching. And regulation of the digital space along human rights principles will ensure that this does not become a new environment in which Iranian women, or any others, are vulnerable to abuse and harm. 

While the Iranian government’s tactics are emblematic of a more significant global issue, the world must remember and uplift the unique bravery of Iran’s women, who stand tall even when shadows loom large. For Mahsa Amini and countless others like her, we must persist in our shared fight for digital and human rights. Their courage deserves nothing less. 

The Bridge features personal essays, commentary, and creative non-fiction that illuminate differences in perception between local and international coverage of news events, from the unique perspective of members of the Global Voices community. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the opinion of the community as a whole. All Posts

This post is part of Advox, a Global Voices project dedicated to protecting freedom of expression online. A

Via Globalvoices.org