Archives: Articles

By Rick Sterling

27 Mar 2025 – There are many contrasts between the 35th president, John F. Kennedy, and the 45th and 47th president, Donald J. Trump. One extreme example is regarding U.S. policy toward Israel.

JFK and Israel/Palestine

Unknown to many people today, JFK supported Palestinian rights and sought a sustainable peace in the region.

In 1960, when JFK was campaigning to be president, he spoke at the convention of the Zionists of America. In his speech, Kennedy was complimentary about Israel but frankly said,

“I cannot believe that Israel has any real desire to remain indefinitely a garrison state surrounded by fear and hate.”

That warning, issued when Israel had only existed for 12 years, was ignored.

Kennedy did not just issue warnings. To the chagrin of the Israelis, JFK established friendly relations with Egypt’s President Nasser. The Kennedy administration provided loans and aid to Egypt.

The JFK administration supported UN resolution 194 which called for the right of return for Palestinian refugees driven out of their homeland. Although Israel committed to abide by UN resolutions when it was admitted to the United Nations in 1949, the Israelis reneged on this commitment and were hostile to the resolution. The day before JFK was assassinated, the New York Times reported (p 19), “Israel Dissents as U.N. Group Backs U.S. on Arab Refugees” and “U.S. Stand Angers Israel.”  The second item begins, “Premier Levi Eshkol expressed extreme distaste today for the United States’ position in the Palestinian-refugee debate.”

John Kennedy’s brother Robert was Attorney General and headed the Department of Justice. For two years, up until the end of 1963, the DOJ made increasingly strict demands that the American Zionist Council (AZC)  register as agents of a foreign country. In response, the AZC stalled, delayed, and created the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

The most intense disagreement between Tel Aviv and Washington was regarding the nuclear site under construction at Dimona. JFK was intent on stopping the expansion of countries which possessed nuclear weapons. Although Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion said the nuclear site was for peaceful purposes, JFK insisted that the US needed to inspect and confirm this. The inspection deadline was December 1963.

In each of these four areas of contention, US policy changed dramatically after JFK was assassinated and Lyndon Johnson became president. Dimona was never properly inspected, and LBJ did not object to Israeli acquisition of nuclear weapons. The demand that the American Zionist Council register as an agent of a foreign country was dropped. Over time, the US withdrew their support of UN resolution 194, and LBJ was hostile to Nasser and ended US loans and support. Details of this process are described in this article and this book.

Israel Policy since JFK and Today

With few exceptions, US policy has been subservient to Israel’s wants ever since JFK.  An extreme low point was the treachery of President Johnson in covering up the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty during the June 1967 “Six Day War”. News about the Israeli killing and injuring of over 200 US sailors was suppressed for decades.

Now we are in a new extreme low point. In his first presidency, Trump flouted international law and longstanding US policy by moving the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The significant move was driven by mega donor Sheldon Adelson who wanted it announced on Trump’s first day in office.  Another prime concern of Adelson was to torpedo the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran. Trump responded as expected and withdrew the US from the agreement, effectively killing it.

Now President Trump’s administration is trampling on the right to free speech and aggressively suppressing critics of Israel. This repression on behalf of Israel was taking place under Biden but has escalated dramatically. Authorities have imprisoned a perfectly legal resident, Mahmoud Khalil. They have forced Columbia University to punish students without just cause and to impose obvious restrictions and prohibitions on speech and opinion. Why did they do this? It appears to follow the wishes of megadonor Miriam Adelson. She is president and chief funder of the Maccabee Task Force, which has campaigned on these issues for months.

As reported at Responsible Statecraft, “Adelson’s support for the administration’s campaign to stifle criticism of Israel on college campuses isn’t a new focus but her alignment with the levers of state powers to implement her vision are unprecedented. In fact, tax documents reveal that she is directly overseeing a social media campaign targeting Khalil and Columbia University.”

In addition to suppressing free speech and punishing critics of Israel, the Trump administration has bombed and attacked They are doing this despite the fact that Yemen did NOT threaten U.S. ships in the region. The Houthi government only threatened Israeli ships after Israel unilaterally broke the ceasefire and prevented food and other necessary humanitarian aid into Gaza. Israel, with U.S. support,  is blatantly defying the International Court of Justice which ordered Israel to “Maintain open the Rafah crossing for unhindered provision at scale of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance” and “Immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” Israel is in violation of this order and the US is complicit by providing most of the weapons.

President Trump, who campaigned and won election on the pledge to STOP needless wars, has started a new war with Yemen which is of no benefit to the US but serves the interests of Netanyahu’s Israel.  Will he authorize attacks on Iran, in further subservience to Bibi?

Corruption of the Political Process

When Jewish donors to JFK’s 1960 campaign suggested they should determine his Mideast policy, JFK was shocked and definitively said NO.  As reported by Seymour Hersh in “The Samson Option”, Kennedy talked with a friend who described what happened:

“As an American citizen he (JFK) was outraged to have a zionist group come to him and say, ‘We know your campaign is in trouble. We’re willing to pay your bills if you’ll let us have control of your Middle East policy.’”

At that time, JFK vowed to change the US electoral system to prevent this corruption if he got elected.  As president, he tried,but faced big hurdles and did not succeed.

Ever since JFK’s death, pro-Israel forces have had undue influence on U.S. policy.  If the International Court of Justice decides that Israel is committing genocide, as seems likely, the U.S. will be the primary collaborator in the war crimes. The US is increasingly alone in supporting the zionist state as it practices apartheid within Israel, theft of land in the West Bank, and massacres in Gaza including attacks on hospitals, schools, and UN facilities. Fourteen countries now support South Africa’s charges of genocide against Israel.

Under Democratic President Joe Biden, U.S. policy to Israel was unwaveringly obsequious. Despite 70% of Democratic Party voters wanting the U.S. to get a ceasefire in Gaza, the Biden/Blinken team refused to do this.  The Democratic Party leaders zionist ideology combined with zionist financial influence superseded their party members’ wishes. Netanyahu ignored Biden’s “red lines” with impunity.

Republican  President Trump has taken this to a new level. His zionist donors determine his Israel policy. To protect Israel, Trump issued an executive order which weaponizes antisemitism. Universities are being compelled to implement a new definition of antisemitism which conflates criticism of Israel with ethnic discrimination.  Trump’s campaign to “Make America Great Again” has evolved into “Miriam Adelson Gets All”.

It is a remarkable descent from the days when JFK did what was best for the U.S. as well as being best for Palestinians and non-zionist Jews.

Rick Sterling is a member of the TRANSCEND Network and an investigative journalist who lives in the SF Bay Area, California.

31 March 2025

Source: transcend.org

By Ilan Pappé

12 Mar 2025

Is the Zionist narrative collapsing? Historian Ilan Pappé breaks down the ideological contradictions at the heart of Israel’s settler-colonial project and why October 7 exposed the impossibility of being both a Zionist and a democrat.

From Gaza’s destruction to the West’s complicity, Pappé unpacks the Nakba al-mustamirra (ongoing Nakba), Israeli genocide, and the urgent need for global solidarity to challenge apartheid and safeguard human rights. What does this mean for the future of Palestine—and the world?

Video:

The Unraveling: Zionism, October 7, and the Ongoing Nakba w/ Ilan Pappe

Prof Ilan Pappé was born in Haifa, Israel in 1954. He graduated from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 1979 and received his Ph.D. from the University of Oxford in 1984. He taught at the University of Haifa until 2006 and then moved to the University of Exeter in the UK, where he is currently the director of the European Center for Palestine Studies. Pappé is the author of 20 books, among them The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2007) and On Palestine, with Noam Chomsky (2010).

31 March 2025

Source: transcend.org

By Richard Falk

28 Mar 2025

In this unmissable, must-watch conversation, Professor Richard Falk—international law expert, former UN Special Rapporteur for Palestine, and leading scholar on global justice—breaks down the complexities of international law, the right of resistance, and the enforcement gaps in global governance.

From the historic context of decolonization to the current war in Gaza, Falk sheds light on the accountability challenges facing Israel and the role of civil society in pushing for change. Listen to his insights on the urgent need for justice-driven action and the role of geopolitical dynamics in shaping the international order.

Video:

UNMISSABLE: Do Palestinians Have the Right to Resist? w/ Richard Falk

31 March 2025

Source: transcend.org

By Jonathan Kuttab

One of the key strategic elements to Israel’s control over Palestinians has been the establishment of a focused system of fragmentation of the Palestinian community. Palestinians have been forcefully divided into distinctly separate categories, each with a different legal system, economic system, leadership, and community-specific concerns. These include: Israeli Citizens, East Jerusalemites, West Bankers, Gazans, and the Diaspora (lacking any status whatsoever). Israel adamantly refuses to interact with the Palestinian people as a unified entity and insists on dealing with each component separately, sometimes making it physically impossible for members of each group to communicate with, trade with, or even intermarry with members of the other Palestinian communities.

An explicit hierarchy of rights and privileges has also been established by Israel between each category. The highest level (within the Israeli hierarchy of control) are those Palestinians who have Israeli citizenship, who managed to remain in the land in 1948. There are currently about 2 million Palestinian citizens of Israel, constituting approximately 20% of the Israeli citizen population. They enjoy the highest standard of living, the greatest freedom of movement, and some of the benefits of Israeli society because they do hold citizenship. Some of them are occasionally trotted out as proof of the tolerance and equality in a “democratic” state of Israel, as promised in the not-legally-binding Declaration of Independence.

This community often complains of systematic discrimination, in a state which openly declares itself to be a Jewish state and NOT a state for all its citizens. Yet, compared to other Palestinians, their situation is truly enviable. It reminds me of free blacks living in the American North during the pre-Civil War era. Often victims of terrible discrimination, but surely they are to be envied when compared with those living under brutal conditions of chattel slavery.

I have been curious as to how this segment of my people are faring these days. In my travels this month, I met and talked with many of them, particularly in the Galilee, where (in addition to the Negev) most Palestinian citizens of Israel today live. In addition to their usual situation, as Arabs (second-class citizens) in a Jewish state, they had two major concerns.

First, is the rampant criminality in the Arab Community, which the Israeli police—particularly under their Minister of Police Ben Gvir—is doing very little to curb. Protection rackets, municipal corruption, shootings and homicides are frightening daily occurrences. Already, 55 homicides have been reported this year, with the vast majority not “solved” by the police. In fact, it has even been admitted by the authorities that many of the criminal elements have special relationships with the Shin Bet (Israeli secret service) and perform “valuable services” to the security of the state, giving them wide latitude if not outright immunity.

Second, they report that since October 7 there has been open hostility, hatred and repression, particularly on free speech and political expression. While Israeli Jews daily demonstrate, block roads, disrupt government offices, and debate intra-Jewish differences almost to the point of civil war, Palestinian citizens of Israel are often forced to cower in fear. They face persecution, the loss of jobs, criminal charges and jail time, with long sentences for even the mildest expressions of concern for the victims of the Gaza genocide or even expressing “grief for the innocent babies” being killed in Gaza. Technical eavesdropping and artificial intelligence is used to monitor, report, and prosecute any postings on social media, or even “likes” on individual posts, that show sympathy for the people of Gaza. Such expressions are considered “support and sympathy for terrorism” and are being harshly repressed. Even Israeli Jews opposed to Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies feel some of the heat, but for Palestinian citizens of Israel there does not exist even the semblance of democracy or freedom of speech.

A friend of mine told me, “The Israel that you knew previously no longer exists. There is not even the pretense that we have democracy or freedom of expression.”

One well-known TV journalist lost her job and was threatened with criminal persecution when she commented on the apparent good health of some of the released female Israeli hostages. One university student was jailed and persecuted for tweeting on her social media that “God is Victorious.”

An attorney colleague of mine said, “I feel like this is the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad on steroids. You have to watch every word and especially anything you say on the phone or on social media. I can still say some things in court that I would not dare put in an email or say on my Facebook account. I do not know how long this will last.”

I even heard on the radio a “Public Service Announcement” urging anyone who hears or sees anything suspicious, anything appearing to reflect enemy propaganda giving aid and comfort to the enemy, to “call *911 and report it to a special unit that fights hostile cyber propaganda!”

Indeed, many reports about outlandish behaviour by the police seem to be in response to complaints by Jewish citizens upset at the utterances or “unpatriotic behavior” of Palestinian citizens. One Jewish lawyer lodged a complaint to the bar association against a Palestinian lawyer who dared to write on her social media “Good Morning Gaza!” a few days after October 7. This complaint is being investigated.

The Arab members of the Knesset and leaders of the community who usually speak fearlessly in the Knesset on behalf of their community have been silent, and everyone seems intimidated. Genocidal language by Israelis against Palestinians, clearly in violation of Israeli law, is widely tolerated. Yet, the mildest expressions of Palestinian views, symbols, or even sympathy are immediately investigated and prosecuted. The fear among Palestinian citizens of Israel is that the wrath being visited upon Gaza, and now the West Bank, may next be turned on them. The thin façade of democracy and freedom seems to have been removed, and they find themselves facing the full force of unmitigated bigotry, racism, and anti-Arab hatred.

It does not bode well for future coexistence.

29 March 2025

By Sally Dugman

One of my friends sent me an article that suggested that Bernie Sanders’s recent rallies that goad Donald Trump had paid attendees. In response, I think that such a plan is dubious, although I do remember Trump paying actors to come to at least one of his public meetings to make him look popular and desirable.

So, what does it matter, anyway, about  the number and whom attended Bernie Sanders’s rallies? What matters much more so is about whom runs the narrative about happenings.

All considered, we, as a country’s citizens, aren’t acting conscionably when our main leader who is liked is someone who wants to steal Gaza for his own personal, cut-throat (literally so) financial gain (so as to build a high-end resort catering to the extremely wealthy) and we think that this action is okay. I, certainly, don’t do so.

Yes, maybe lots of U.S. citizens think that it is okay to steal land and resources (especially since our country was founded on murder and theft from millions of natives for self-gains). I do not.

Maybe most U.S. citizens think that it is okay to provide “hush money” to shut up a porn star who one solicited for sex so as to be able to present a lily-white image of self during the time that one is running for office and at that point, one’s wife has just given birth or about to do so. I do not.

Maybe they even like that Trump followed a woman, who verbally stood up to him, into a store dressing room and by forcing his finger or fingers into her vagina showed his dominance and control over her with his pay-back revenge in the way that war-mongering thugs do in conflict war zones do. I do not.

Maybe they think that it is all right to publicly make fun of a disabled reporter who is asking you an earnest question at a news conference.I do not.

Maybe they don’t mind that Trump was caught lying again and again on a frequent basis about all sorts of topics such as consuming cleaning solutions for handling a virus, I do not.

Maybe they think that it is okay that he gives funds and weapons of mass destruction at taxpayers’ expense that are used to purposefully kill children and elderly citizens in Palestine so that they simply die off in a massive genocide. I do not.

Maybe they think that it’s okay to ravage USA forests, meadows, waters, and more while causing lots of species to go extinct and climate change to run amuck while not leaving much by way of resources for future generations of humans. I do not.

Maybe they even imagine that it’s favorable to dismantle assorted U.S. agencies via a fawning lackey named Elon Musk who is on the dole for billions of dollars for his provisions to the United States government. I do not.

Maybe they think that in reverse Robin-hood style, it’s okay to steal Medicaid, SNAP, WIC and more from the poor to have ample money available to give tax breaks to billionaire personal pals. Imagine that happening being condoned by the brunt of the public. I cannot.

Perhaps Trump and the brunt of the general public like shabbily treating as a way to publicly humiliate the Ukraine leader. I do not. …and the list of the grievous and morally slipshod wrongs goes on and on all of which some people wildly condone Trump’s actions overall, including his sending  would-be Immigrants to a notorious prison in another nation! I do not … and adamantly so since I lack having any degree of liking moral lassitude.

Sally Dugman lives in and writes from Massachusetts in the USA.

25 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Vijay Prashad

On 5 March 2025, Lieutenant General Herzi Halevi stepped down as chief of the general staff of the Israeli military. He had held that post since 16 January 2023 and therefore led the military during its war against the Palestinians. Several appreciations of Halevi appeared in the aftermath of his departure from this important post. In one of these long articles, in the hugely influential Yedioth Ahronoth, one of Israel’s most well-known journalists – Nahum Barnea – profiled Halevi. In this profile, Barnea described the cabinet meeting forty-eight hours after the Hamas attack on the Israeli border posts. Halevi presented the military operations that had taken place during these two days. He said that the Air Force had attacked 1,500 targets in this short time. Halevi is not a dove. This was a ferocious attack on a largely civilian area.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ‘erupted in anger’, wrote Barnea.  He began to yell and bang on the table, around which sat his cabinet. ‘Why not 5,000?’, Netanyahu scolded Halevi. ‘We don’t have 5,000 approved targets’, responded the military man. ‘I’m not interested in targets,’ said Netanyahu. ‘Take down houses. Bomb with everything you have.’

Netanyahu’s statement on 9 October 2023 set the tone of the entire war. But Netanyahu was not alone in this attitude. Those Israelis who fashion themselves to be more liberal than him, and to be less ferocious, are equally committed to the bloodbath.

In June 2024, the members of National Unity (Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot) resigned from Netanyahu’s cabinet. They argued that Netanyahu was not able to focus on the war because he brought ‘outside considerations and politics’ into the discussions. Eisenkot, a former chief of staff of the military who has said he supports a two-state solution, nonetheless has pushed for more ruthless military action against the Palestinians in Gaza.

It was widely reported when Itamar Ben-Gvir’s far-right Otzma Yehudit members of cabinet resigned in January 2025 because of the ceasefire. They did not want any stoppage to the war.

So, neither the more liberal National Unity nor the far-right Otzma Yehudit wanted the bombing to cease.

Preparations to Break the Ceasefire

A ceasefire deal had been prepared on 31 May 2024, but the Israelis refused to sign it. They did, however, accept the ceasefire on 15 January 2025. It went into effect four days later. During the ceasefire, the Palestinian factions and Israel swapped political prisoners according to the timetable established during the negotiations. Ramadan began on 28 February. The first phase of the ceasefire was set to expire on 1 March, but Israel demanded that it be extended so that all Israeli prisoners could be released; Hamas argued instead that it wanted to move to the second phase of the ceasefire, which would have allowed greater humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip. On 2 March, Israel stopped the entry of humanitarian aid, and on 9 March cut off electricity to Gaza. Life inside Gaza became even more intolerable because the hope of the ceasefire had now been crushed. Palestinians waited for the Israelis to act.

Was the Israeli action really about the political prisoners that Hamas had not yet released? On 14 March, Hamas agreed to release Edan Alexander (a dual US-Israeli citizen) and the bodies of dual nationals. Israel and the United States refused to accept this offer. Other issues seem to have been at play, not the prisoner exchange.

On 16 March, Gadi Eisenkot and other members of the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee of the Knesset (Israeli Parliament) sent a letter to Netanyahu and his Defence minister Israel Katz. They argued that the ceasefire has allowed Hamas and Islamic Jihad to regroup. Hamas, they said, now has 25,000 armed fighters, while Islamic Jihad has 5,000 fighters. And, they said, that these groups had used the ceasefire to plan another 7 October style attack. These lawmakers argued that Netanyahu’s war policy and the ceasefire show a ‘failure to achieve the war’s objectives’ and ‘damage… national security interests’.

On 17 March, the Israeli cabinet held an emergency meeting to discuss intelligence claims that Hamas was planning another attack. The next day, Katz went to the Otef Israel Forum – made up of Israeli residents who live along the edge of Gaza – and told them that ‘there are constant preparations being made by Hamas for an invasion’ that is ‘similar to 7 October’. ‘We must strike them and completely finish the job’, Katz said at the forum. It was clear that the entire Israeli political class – from Netanyahu’s cabinet to his opposition – had begun to generate fear about another Hamas attack.

Hamas responded immediately that the allegations of an attack ‘are baseless and merely a flimsy pretext to justify its return to war’. Hamas said that it had ‘adhered to the agreement’ and that it was Netanyahu – ‘seeking a way out of his internal crises’ – who wanted to ‘reignite the war’.

The Israeli bombardment began on 18 March with the massacre of 400 Palestinian civilians (including 174 children).

On 22 March, the Israelis destroyed the Turkish Friendship Hospital located on al-Hurriya Street in the central Gaza region. It was the only real cancer hospital in Gaza and had provided treatment for 13,000 cancer patients who still remain in the area. When Israel had occupied the region with its soldiers, it had converted the hospital into a military barracks. When it withdrew on 19 January 2025, medical personnel hastily tried to recover the hospital for the cancer patients. Now it is destroyed.

Israeli Options

Major General Tamir Heyman heads the Institute for National Security Studies, a major think tank in Israel. In an important column, widely circulated, Heyman argues that the Israelis have two goals: rescue the prisoners and destroy Hamas. To do so, he proposes three scenarios:

First, Israeli soldiers enter Gaza and hold it under military rule, seeking out and destroying Hamas, and finding the prisoners. Second, Israel imposes an even harsher siege on Gaza and weakens Hamas (but it might not get its prisoners). Third, a ‘Hezbollah model’, where Israel recognises that Hamas ‘cannot be wiped off the face of the earth’ but the link between Hamas and the Palestinian people can be eroded by the creation of an alternative political force in Gaza.

All three options share one element: pain for the Palestinians. Across the Israeli political spectrum, apart from a small section of dissidents, this is the general orientation.

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor, and journalist. He is a writing fellow and chief correspondent at Globetrotter.

25 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Quds News Network

Occupied West Bank (Quds News Network)- Palestinian film director and Academy Award-winner Hamdan Ballal was arrested by Israeli forces after being severly assaulted and beaten by what his colleague described as a “lynch mob” of Israeli settlers on Monday night in the Palestinian village of Susya, south of Hebron in the occupied West Bank.

Ballal’s co-director and fellow Oscar winner of the documentary No Other Land, Yuval Abraham, said in a post on X featuring a shaky cell phone video that masked settlers “attacked Hamdan’s village, they continued to attack American activists, breaking their car with stones”.

The Center for Jewish Nonviolence said in a statement released on Monday that the five Jewish-American activists at the scene “are participating in a three-month long coresistance project” in Masafer Yatta, the village at the heart of No Other Land. Masafer Yatta is a short drive southeast of Susya, which is also the site of an illegal Israeli settlement.

The activists “responded to calls to come and support the village of Susya while it was under attack,” and “when the activists returned to their car to seek shelter, the settlers surrounded the car, slashed its tires, and smashed the windows with stones”, the statement read.

Ballal’s whereabouts were unknown after Israeli soldiers seized him from the ambulance that arrived to treat him, Abraham, a journalist for +972 magazine, said on X.

Later Abraham confirmed that Hamdan was “assaulted and beaten.. He’s injured and being held at a police station in a settlement. They did not let his lawyer speak to him yet so we don’t know more.”

Basel Adra, the Palestinian resident of Masafer Yatta whose story is told in the oscar-winning film, said on Monday that he was “standing with Karam, Hamdan’s 7 year old son, near the blood of Hamdan’s in his house, after settlers lynched him”.

Ballal “is still missing after soldiers abducted him, injured and bleeding”, Adra said. “This is how they erase Masafer Yatta.”

The Israeli forces confirmed later on Monday that it had arrested Ballal. He was arrested for allegedly “throwing stones.”

Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank are illegal under international law. However, Israel has continued to build settlements across the occupied territory over the past several decades.

Israeli settler violence against Palestinians has been on the rise for several years now. Since Israel began its war on Gaza in October 2023, the attacks in the occupied West Bank have spiked even more.

The United Nations humanitarian agency, OCHA, has documented at least 220 attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinians in 2025 alone.

“Local and international activists regularly document the actions of settlers carrying out similar attacks, often calling the police for some sort of recourse, but settlers are rarely, if ever, held accountable for their crimes,” the Center for Jewish Nonviolence said.

25 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Quds News Network

Gaza (Quds News Network)- The colleagues of Palestinian journalist Hossam Shabat, who was killed in a targeted Israeli attack on Monday, have shared his final words.

Shabat, a journalist for the Al Jazeera Mubasher channel, was killed in northern Gaza. Witnesses said his car was targeted while in the eastern part of Beit Lahiya.

In a post on X, pre-written by Shabat, he wrote, “If you’re reading this, it means I have been killed — most likely targeted — by the Israeli occupation forces.

When all of this began, I was only 21 years old—a university student with dreams like anyone else. Over the past 18 months, I have dedicated every moment of my life to my people. I documented the horrors in northern Gaza minute by minute, determined to show the world the truth they tried to bury. I slept on sidewalks, in schools, in tents—wherever I could. Every day was a battle for survival. I endured months of hunger, yet I never abandoned my people.

By God, I fulfilled my duty as a journalist. I risked everything to convey the truth, and now, at last, I am at rest—something I have not known for the past 18 months. I did all of this out of faith in the Palestinian cause. I believe that this land is ours, and the greatest honor of my life was to die in its defense and in service of its people.

I ask you now: Do not stop talking about Gaza. Do not let the world turn away. Keep fighting, keep telling our stories—until Palestine is free.

For the last time, Hossam Shabat, from northern Gaza.”

[https://twitter.com/HossamShabat/status/1904219854183313461]

25 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Dr. Ramzy Baroud

My journey into the realm of people’s history began during my teenage years when I first read Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. This initial exposure sparked my curiosity about how history is constructed, and it led me to delve deeper into historiography—particularly the evolution of people’s history as an intellectual movement. Over the years, I encountered a wide range of historians, from Michel Foucault and Marc Bloch to Lucien Febvre and Chris Harman, each offering unique perspectives on the study of ordinary people in history.

However, it wasn’t until I immersed myself in the work of Antonio Gramsci that I discovered a more universal, less provincial, and Western-centric approach to history. Although Gramsci did not explicitly position himself as a historian of the people, his ideas on organic intellectuals and cultural hegemony have provided invaluable tools for understanding how ordinary people can shape history. Gramsci’s theories have brought a more relatable and applicable understanding of Marxism, particularly by liberating it from the confines of rigid economic theories.

The Contribution of Linda Tuhiwai Smith

A significant turning point in my intellectual journey came with Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s ‘Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples’. Her work further deepened my understanding of how to approach history from a decolonial perspective. Smith’s methodology allowed me to, once again, revisit and reconsider Palestinian history, challenging the orientalist and elitist perspectives that have long distorted the narrative. It also opened my eyes to a lingering issue within indigenous history: many of us, as indigenous historians, unknowingly replicate the very methodologies used by Western historians to portray us as the ‘other.’

Smith’s work fundamentally challenges the traditional view that history is written by the victor.

“It is the story of the powerful and how they became powerful, and then how they use their power to keep them in positions in which they can continue to dominate others,” she wrote.

Instead, history can be written to empower the oppressed, enabling them to challenge their victimhood. However, for this alternative history to be effective, it must be acknowledged not just by historians but also by those affected by the misreading of history.

Malcolm X’s Empowerment and Global Resonance

One of the most profound aspects of Malcolm X’s message, aside from his courage and intellectual rigor, was his focus on empowering Black communities to challenge their own inferiority and reclaim their power. He did not prioritize confronting white racism; rather, he sought to inspire Black people to assert their identity and strength. This message has resonated globally, especially in the Global South, and continues to thrive today. For a deeper understanding of Malcolm X’s impact, I recommend The Dead Arising: The Life of Malcolm X by Les Payne.

In the Palestinian context, there is a similarly pressing need for a reclamation of the narrative—a reclaiming of both identity and history. While a people’s history of Palestine is beginning to emerge, there are still misunderstandings about what this form of research truly entails.

The Role of Refaat Alareer in Palestinian History

Refaat Alareer, a Gaza-based Palestinian historian, will be remembered for his significant contributions to articulating the Palestinian struggle for freedom. In the years leading up to his assassination by Israel during the Gaza genocide on December 6, 2023, he consistently emphasized the centrality of resistance in Palestinian discourse, gaining recognition for his courage, poetry, and intellectual work. It is also essential to highlight Alareer’s unwavering belief that Palestinians must control what I refer to as “the means of content production.” This control is vital to prevent the Palestinian narrative from being hijacked or manipulated by external forces.

“Gaza writes back because the power of imagination is a creative way to construct a new reality. Gaza writes back because writing is a nationalist obligation, a duty to humanity, and a moral responsibility,” he wrote.

Misunderstandings in People’s History Research

There are several common misunderstandings about people’s history that need to be addressed. These misconceptions often stem from the way this form of research is applied, especially in newer contexts.

People’s History is Not Just Oral History

While oral history and storytelling are essential components in laying the foundation for people’s history, they should not be confused with people’s history itself. Oral history can provide raw material for research, but true people’s history requires a broader, more comprehensive approach that avoids selectivity or bias.

The collective messages of ordinary people should shape the intellectual outcomes, allowing for a more accurate understanding of complex phenomena.

Concepts like sumud (steadfastness), karamah (dignity), and muqawama (resistance) must be seen not just as sentimental values, but as political units of analysis that traditional history often overlooks.

People’s History Cannot Be Used to Validate Pre-Existing Ideas

It is crucial to differentiate people’s history from opportunistic attempts to validate pre-existing ideas. Edward Said’s concept of the “Native Informant” highlights how seemingly indigenous voices have been used to legitimize colonial interventions.

Similarly, political groups or activists might selectively present voices from within oppressed communities to validate their own pre-existing views or agendas.

In the Palestinian context, this often manifests in the portrayal of “moderate” Palestinians as the acceptable face of the Palestinian discourse, while “radical” Palestinians are labeled as extremists. This selective representation not only misrepresents the Palestinian people but also allows Western powers to manipulate the Palestinian narrative without appearing to do so.

People’s History is Not the Annunciation of Pre-Existing Agendas

In traditional academic research, the study typically follows a hypothesis, methodology, and a process of proving or disproving ideas. While people’s history can follow rational research methods, it does not adhere to the traditional structure of validating right or wrong.

It is not about proving a hypothesis, but about uncovering collective sentiments, thoughts, and societal trends. The responsibility of the historian is to reveal the voices of the people without subjecting them to pre-established notions or biases.

People’s History is Not the Study of People

Linda Smith emphasizes the importance of liberating indigenous knowledge from the colonial tools of research. In traditional Western research, the colonized people are often reduced to mere subjects to be studied.

People’s history, on the other hand, recognizes these individuals as political agents whose histories, cultures, and stories are forms of knowledge in themselves. When knowledge is harnessed for the benefit of the people it belongs to, the entire research process changes.

For example, Israel ‘studies’ Palestinian culture as a means to subdue Palestinian resistance. They attempt to manipulate societal faultlines to weaken the resolve of Palestinians.

This is a crude but effective manifestation of colonial research methods. While these methods may not always be violent, their ultimate goal remains the same: to weaken popular movements, exploit resources, and suppress resistance.

Conclusion

People’s history is an urgent necessity, especially in contexts like Palestine, where it is vital to communicate the empowered voices of the people to the rest of the world.

This form of research must be conducted with a deeper understanding of its methodologies to avoid further marginalization and exploitation. By prioritizing the narrative of ordinary people, we can shift the historical discourse towards greater authenticity, justice, and empowerment.

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle.

24 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org

By Raymond Lotta

On March 13, the Trump fascists issued an outrageous and unprecedented list of demands that Columbia University must comply with in order to even negotiate with the government for federal funds. This comes five days after the Gestapo-like abduction of Mahmoud Khalil (the Palestine solidarity activist and a movement spokesperson at Columbia) by ICE agents! It comes six days after the federal government cut off $400 million for scientific research conducted at Columbia. Meanwhile, the fascist regime announced a new round of government investigations into 52 universities to crack down on “DEI” (diversity, equity, inclusion) programs in campus curriculum and hiring.

On March 21, Katrina Armstrong, the interim president of Columbia, cravenly capitulated to the Trump administration’s demands.

Fascist Demands, an Accommodating Administration

Let’s look at some of these nine demands that Columbia has now agreed to meet. They require that Columbia:

• Grant “full law enforcement authority, including arrest and removal of agitators,” to public safety officers;
• Abolish the University Judicial Board;
• Complete disciplinary proceedings for students involved in the Gaza protests;
• Enforce a ban on masks [used by protesters to protect their identities and safety];
• Place the Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies department under “academic receivership” [a process that requires an outside chair to run the department for a minimum of five years];
• Implement “a plan for comprehensive admissions reform”’ [read: vet racial-national backgrounds and political views of prospective students].

Never has the U.S. government taken such extreme measures to discipline and compel the university to align its views and practices to the politics and priorities of the government. What is happening now is even more extreme than what happened at the height of McCarthyism of the early 1950s, when left-wing and communist professors were targeted by Congressional committees. These demands to Columbia gut any degree or semblance of university independence. This fascist diktat, or decree, is the spearpoint of the war on the university as it has existed for generations. (A diktat is a punitive decree imposed unilaterally on a country, party, or institution.)

This is the playbook of a Nazi-like takeover. As Columbia classics professor Joseph Howley at Columbia put it: “If the federal government can show up and demand a university department be shut down or restructured, then we don’t have universities in this country.”

And what has been the response of Katrina Armstrong, interim president of Columbia? Outcry, rebuke, a call to the academic and broader community to resist and protect the integrity and very survival of intellectual life in the university and society? The demand that ICE agents get off the campus?

On the contrary! In response to the cancellation of federal research funds, Armstrong declared that Columbia is “committed to working with the federal government to address their legitimate demands.”

Note the invocation of “legitimate”—that these fascists somehow have “legitimate” concerns and claims. Truly a “profile in cowardice.” Truly a lesson NOT learned from the rise of Hitler, when most academic institutions either enthusiastically embraced Hitler or thought they could accommodate and squirm their way to survival. Which of course begs the question: survival for what and as what?!

On March 21, the Columbia University administration utterly prostrated itself before the Trump fascist regime, acquiescing to its outrageous assault on the right to protest and academic freedom.

Stepping Back

This fascist assault on the university, including and especially the “elite” schools, took a qualitative leap in response to the courageous student movement to stop the U.S.-Zionist-Israeli genocide in Gaza and the complicity of the university in war crimes and Zionist apartheid. This movement has faced unrelenting repression from the start—from university administrations, Zionist donors and thugs, and local police… up to the highest levels of governance. Now it is facing whole new levels of repression, with the university itself as we know it on the chopping block.

Why is this movement the target of such intense attack and vitriol? Because criticism of and opposition to the state of Israel is a kind of “third rail” of American politics and political life—a “no go” because it touches on the most strategic interests of U.S. imperialist interests. The apartheid state of Israel is financially, militarily, and diplomatically propped up by U.S. imperialism to function as a “watch-dog” and “attack-dog” for the interests of Western, especially U.S., imperialism in a strategic part of the world. (See the series of social media messages from Bob Avakian titled “Palestine, Israel, U.S. Imperialism and Revolution.”)

And here is something that people need to appreciate. The university is one of the few spaces in society where critical thinking and dissent have some initiative, and where radical movements have space to develop, where ideas have space to incubate. This happened in the 1960s.¹ The potential for this kind of dissent to spread and influence society more broadly is threatening to the rulers of society. Last spring in particular, the protest and dissent on the campuses jolted large sections of society to seriously re-examine their views on Israel and the U.S. This protest powerfully included the willingness of students to be arrested and to stand up to violent attack from Zionist thugs. It is this questioning—not the few incidents of anti-Semitism that in no way characterize the movement—that the capitalist-imperialist ruling class finds so threatening and that they are determined to crack down on.

And here is something else to reckon with: If the Trump fascist regime has its way—and it is well on its way—that university as “incubator of ideas” will be no more.

The Trump MAGA fascists in power are aiming to restructure the university: to outlaw protest; to monitor and regulate curriculum: from Black history to the history of the Palestinian people as a people uprooted, oppressed, and subjugated by the apartheid state of Israel. They aim to harass and drive out professors who stand with righteous protest and who fight to teach “inconvenient truths” of empire, history, and the world… who foster critical and creative thinking.

“Nazification” An Apt Description

The phrase “Nazification of the university” describes the process that has taken a dangerous and unprecedented leap in the last few weeks: a) suppression and criminalization of dissent; b) thought control over faculty, curriculum, acceptable discourse; and c) semi-militarization, with agents of repression like ICE and Department of Homeland Security now infiltrated on to campus with license to surveil, intimidate, arrest, and deport.

In examining the larger situation we are facing, the revolutionary leader Bob Avakian has drawn the important parallel to the rise of Hitler in the early 1930s. Hitler came to power through “normal” processes and “trampled on and quickly put an end to the basic norms and principles of that republic, forcibly imposing in its place the open fascist dictatorship by the Nazis. This laid the basis for all the horrific atrocities committed by the Hitler/Nazi regime… what is happening now with Trump fascist rule also involves a terrible momentum that will involve massive monstrous crimes against humanity, in this country and in the world overall.”

Our Historic Responsibility

We, who live in the “belly of the beast,” have a limited time to act. As Bob Avakian goes on to argue,

Before Trump’s fascist rule can become fully consolidated and carry out even far worse horrors than what it is already perpetrating, it must be defeated through powerful mass mobilization— overcoming all “divide and conquer” schemes, uniting all who can be united, from many different viewpoints and perspectives, in actively opposing, defying and resisting this fascism, in continually growing numbers—moving to quickly involve millions, determined to create such a profound political crisis that Trump cannot govern the country and continue to implement his fascist program, with all its terrible consequences.

Columbia-Barnard has been the epicenter of both student-faculty resistance and the repression against it. The fascists want to turn this assault on speech, protest, and academic freedom at Columbia, at this Ivy League university, into a proving ground for restructuring the university. They want to turn this university (and all universities) into a “dead-zone” of compliance with and obedience to fascism—with all of the ominous implications for the political and intellectual life of society overall, and for people’s capacity and willingness to resist, that go with that.

We must draw the line here and now: refusal, defiance, resistance… no business as usual. We must turn this into our proving ground. To make the battle to defeat this fascist onslaught at Columbia—as we unite ever more broadly and draw growing numbers into this fight from all corners of society—into an example and clarion call to others.

This only stops when we dare to stop it, when we dare to stand on principle and humanity—and challenge others to do the same. It only STOPS when we grow to the millions and say, “The Trump Fascist Regime Must Go. NO! In the name of humanity, we refuse to accept a fascist America.”

Free Mahmoud Khalil Now!

Stop the Fascist Assault on Academic Freedom, Protest, and Basic Rights

In the Name of Humanity, We Refuse to Accept a Fascist America

_______________

An earlier version of this article appeared in revcom.us

FOOTNOTE:
1. Bob Avakian discusses this in his social media message Revolution #33, “The powerful positive experience of the 1960s movement—the crucial importance of uniting broadly against injustice and atrocity, with open-minded engagement of different ideas and programs…”

Raymond Lotta is a political economist; spokesperson for Revolution Books, New York City; and an advocate for the new communism developed by the revolutionary leader Bob Avakian.

23 March 2025

Source: countercurrents.org