Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Israel and apartheid" in English language version.
12 Israeli human rights organizations have since expressed "grave concern" about attempts to associate Amnesty's report with antisemitism, and they have rejected the Commission's failure to recognize Israel's apartheid. These organizations argue that weaponizing antisemitism to silence legitimate criticism actually undermines attempts to address rising antisemitism.Republished from Geddie, Eve (13 March 2023). "EU needs to understand the realities in the West Bank". Politico. Retrieved 19 April 2024. Eve Geddie was writing as the director of Amnesty International’s European Institutions Office.
While official de jure apartheid of the African variety does not exist in Israel, national apartheid on the latent and informal levels ... is a characteristic feature of Israeli society.quoted in Lyon, David (2011) [2010]. "Identification, colonialism, and control: surveillant sorting in Israel/Palestine". In Zureik, Elia; Lyon, David; Abu-Laban, Yasmeen (eds.). Surveillance and Control in Israel/Palestine. London: Routledge. p. 58. doi:10.4324/9780203845967. ISBN 978-0-415-58861-4.
The Hebrew term Hafrada is the official descriptor of the policy of the Israeli Government to separate the Palestinian population in the territories occupied by Israel from the Israeli population, by means such as the West Bank barrier and the unilateral disengagement from those territories. The barrier is thus sometimes called gader ha'hafrada (separation fence) in Hebrew. The term Hafrada has striking similarities with the term apartheid, as this term mean 'apartness' in Afrikaans and Hafrada is the closest Hebrew equivalent.
While official de jure apartheid of the African variety does not exist in Israel, national apartheid on the latent and informal levels ... is a characteristic feature of Israeli society.quoted in Lyon, David (2011) [2010]. "Identification, colonialism, and control: surveillant sorting in Israel/Palestine". In Zureik, Elia; Lyon, David; Abu-Laban, Yasmeen (eds.). Surveillance and Control in Israel/Palestine. London: Routledge. p. 58. doi:10.4324/9780203845967. ISBN 978-0-415-58861-4.
In the Language of "us" and "them" we could have expected an undoing when an integrative policy of the two communities was introduced. Obviously the [Peace] Process moves in the opposite direction: separation. Actually, one of the most popular arguments use by the government to justify its policy is the "danger" ("the demographic bomb", "the Arab womb") of a "bi-national state" if no separation is made: the Process is thus a measure taken to secure the Jewish majority. The term 'separation' "hafrada" has become extremely popular during the Process referring to fences built around Palestinian autonomous enclaves, to roads pave in the Territories exclusively for Israelis to the decrease of the number of Palestinians employed in Israel or allowed to enter into it altogether. The stereotypes of the Palestinian society as "backward" have not changed either.
It is clear that public attitudes about Israel are shifting. The term "apartheid" appears to have become a common term among many Americans, especially Democrats
A regime that uses laws, practices and organized violence to cement the supremacy of one group over another is an apartheid regime. Israeli apartheid, which promotes the supremacy of Jews over Palestinians, was not born in one day or of a single speech. It is a process that has gradually grown more institutionalized and explicit, with mechanisms introduced over time in law and practice to promote Jewish supremacy. These accumulated measures, their pervasiveness in legislation and political practice, and the public and judicial support they receive – all form the basis for our conclusion that the bar for labeling the Israeli regime as apartheid has been met.
The logic of Apartheid is akin to the logic of Zionism.... Life for the Palestinians is infinitely worse than what we ever had experienced under Apartheid.... The price they (Palestinians) have had to pay for resistance much more horrendous.Speech presented at Oak Park Public Library. Audio recordingMP3
Hafrada (Apartheid in Afrikaans) is the official Hebrew term for Israel's vision and policy towards the Palestinians of the Occupied Territories – and, it could be argued (with qualifications), within Israel itself
While official de jure apartheid of the African variety does not exist in Israel, national apartheid on the latent and informal levels ... is a characteristic feature of Israeli society.quoted in Lyon, David (2011) [2010]. "Identification, colonialism, and control: surveillant sorting in Israel/Palestine". In Zureik, Elia; Lyon, David; Abu-Laban, Yasmeen (eds.). Surveillance and Control in Israel/Palestine. London: Routledge. p. 58. doi:10.4324/9780203845967. ISBN 978-0-415-58861-4.
Amnesty's report is important and for many advocates it is affirming of what they have been stating all along is a racist regime of systemic discrimination. However, for many longstanding critics of Israel, accusations of Israeli apartheid are not new, nor is the predictable backlash against them whereby antisemitism has been weaponized by Israel and its supporters. This backlash is now been directed against Amnesty International
The Court then moves to examining whether there is also a violation of Article 3 of CERD, which prohibits racial segregation and apartheid. This, of course, is a totemic issue in terms of the competing narratives of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And here the Court, seeking internal consensus, opted for a more ambiguous approach …. but the bottom line of the Court's approach seems clear – at best Israel's actions amount 'only' to racial segregation, but they could also be apartheid. And the reason for this ambiguity is again the need to maintain consensus within the Court
this is not the right reading. Article 3 refers to racial segregation and apartheid, and a breach of Article 3 could refer to racial segregation, apartheid, or both. This is seen in the Separate Opinions, some of which considered the finding of a breach of Article 3 as a finding of apartheid; others believing the Court had not made such a finding.
Faced with widely drawn international parallels between the West Bank and the Bantustans of apartheid South Africa, senior figures in Mr Netanyahu's Likud party have begun to admit the danger.
hafrada (separation) as the Zionist form of apartheid
... practices in South Africa are not the test or benchmark for a finding of apartheid elsewhere, as the principal instrument which provides this test lies in the terms of the Apartheid Convention itself.(pdf 3.0 MiB) The report does not represent an official position of the HSRC. South African Academic Study Finds that Israel is Practicing Apartheid and Colonialism in the Occupied Palestinian Territories Archived 26 July 2010 at the Wayback Machine, May 2009.
The six rabbis... and I... discussed the word 'apartheid', which I defined as the forced segregation of two peoples living in the same land, with one of them dominating and persecuting the other. I made clear in the book's text and in my response to the rabbis that the system of apartheid in Palestine is not based on racism but the desire of a minority of Israelis for Palestinian land and the resulting suppression of protests that involve violence ... my use of 'apartheid' does not apply to circumstances within Israel.
Apartheid Israel can be defeated, just as apartheid in South Africa was defeated
When I come here and see the situation [in the Palestinian territories], I find that what is happening here is ten times worse than what I had experienced in South Africa. This is Apartheid.
The release of Amnesty International's new report on human rights in Israel and the territory it occupies shines another bright spotlight on the injustice of Israel's occupation and the illegality of deepening de facto annexation of the territory it has occupied since 1967. The ongoing denial of fundamental rights and freedoms to millions of Palestinians in occupied territory runs counter to the values on which Israel was founded and undermines its security and international standing. J Street does not endorse the findings or the recommendations of the report, nor do we use the word "apartheid" to describe the situation on the ground. At the same time, we urge Israel and its friends around the world not to use issues with the report as an excuse to avoid grappling with the day-in and day-out realities of occupation and the moral and strategic catastrophe it represents for Israelis and for Palestinians. Supporters of Israel who pour time, energy and resources into attacking anti-occupation activists and human rights organizations are failing to address the very real threat to Israel's future posed by never-ending occupation. Those who level false charges of antisemitism against such activists and experts do a further disservice to the critical fight against the very real scourge of antisemitism.
Even among Israelis, the term 'Hafrada' — separation or apartheid in Hebrew — has entered the mainstream lexicon, despite strident denials by the Jewish state that it is engaged in any such process.
12 Israeli human rights organizations have since expressed "grave concern" about attempts to associate Amnesty's report with antisemitism, and they have rejected the Commission's failure to recognize Israel's apartheid. These organizations argue that weaponizing antisemitism to silence legitimate criticism actually undermines attempts to address rising antisemitism.Republished from Geddie, Eve (13 March 2023). "EU needs to understand the realities in the West Bank". Politico. Retrieved 19 April 2024. Eve Geddie was writing as the director of Amnesty International’s European Institutions Office.
an institutionalized regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination has been established.Final published version: Lynk, Michael (12 August 2022). Report of the special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 (Report). p. 17. A/HRC/49/87.
Applying... the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and the Rome Statute, the Special Rapporteur has concluded that the political system of entrenched rule in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that endows one racial-national-ethnic group with substantial rights, benefits and privileges while intentionally subjecting another group to live behind walls and checkpoints and under a permanent military rule sans droits, sans égalité, sans dignité et sans liberté (without rights, without equality, without dignity and without freedom) satisfies the prevailing evidentiary standard for the existence of apartheid. ... an institutionalized regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination has been established.
There have been a few lines of attack on Penslar, and there are thus a few issues at hand. First, there is the notion that he called Israel a regime of apartheid. & What makes the series of events at Harvard so disheartening is not that the attack on Penslar is unique but that it transparently gives the game away: There is no set of credentials that can prevent a person who is earnestly trying to do work in this space from getting sucked into the politicization and, yes, weaponization of antisemitism. This is the way that current public debates over antisemitism tend to go, in Congress and on debate stages, on social media and between friends, within families and within organizations. But when fact and understanding and nuance of the issue are all considered secondary, what gets sacrificed isn't just an individual's career or standing or time, but comprehension of the actual issue that is antisemitism.
Comparisons between the former regime in South Africa and the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories have become relatively commonplace—not just by Palestinians and their supporters, but also among Israelis and the international community.
As Human Rights Watch noted, the first example opens the door to reflexively labeling as antisemitic human rights organizations and lawyers who argue that current Israeli government policies constitute apartheid against Palestinians
Tuesday's lengthy ANC statement accused Israel of 'crude viciousness,' comparing it to South Africa's past apartheid regime.
Any judgment on whether serious crimes under international law have occurred is a matter for judicial decision, rather than for governments or non-judicial bodies," they said. The spokesperson added: "As a friend of Israel, we have a regular dialogue on human rights. This includes encouraging the government of Israel to abide by its obligations under international law and do all it can to uphold the values of equality for all.
The international community has identified three regimes as inimical to human rights—colonialism, apartheid and foreign occupation. Israel is clearly in military occupation of the OPT. At the same time elements of the occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law. What are the legal consequences of a regime of prolonged occupation with features of colonialism and apartheid for the occupied people, the occupying Power and third States? It is suggested that this question might appropriately be put to the International Court of Justice for a further advisory opinion.
an institutionalized regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination has been established.Final published version: Lynk, Michael (12 August 2022). Report of the special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 (Report). p. 17. A/HRC/49/87.
Applying... the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and the Rome Statute, the Special Rapporteur has concluded that the political system of entrenched rule in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that endows one racial-national-ethnic group with substantial rights, benefits and privileges while intentionally subjecting another group to live behind walls and checkpoints and under a permanent military rule sans droits, sans égalité, sans dignité et sans liberté (without rights, without equality, without dignity and without freedom) satisfies the prevailing evidentiary standard for the existence of apartheid. ... an institutionalized regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination has been established.
For the purpose of the present Convention, the term 'the crime of apartheid', which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhuman acts....
A regime that uses laws, practices and organized violence to cement the supremacy of one group over another is an apartheid regime. Israeli apartheid, which promotes the supremacy of Jews over Palestinians, was not born in one day or of a single speech. It is a process that has gradually grown more institutionalized and explicit, with mechanisms introduced over time in law and practice to promote Jewish supremacy. These accumulated measures, their pervasiveness in legislation and political practice, and the public and judicial support they receive – all form the basis for our conclusion that the bar for labeling the Israeli regime as apartheid has been met.
Tuesday's lengthy ANC statement accused Israel of 'crude viciousness,' comparing it to South Africa's past apartheid regime.
The Court then moves to examining whether there is also a violation of Article 3 of CERD, which prohibits racial segregation and apartheid. This, of course, is a totemic issue in terms of the competing narratives of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And here the Court, seeking internal consensus, opted for a more ambiguous approach …. but the bottom line of the Court's approach seems clear – at best Israel's actions amount 'only' to racial segregation, but they could also be apartheid. And the reason for this ambiguity is again the need to maintain consensus within the Court
this is not the right reading. Article 3 refers to racial segregation and apartheid, and a breach of Article 3 could refer to racial segregation, apartheid, or both. This is seen in the Separate Opinions, some of which considered the finding of a breach of Article 3 as a finding of apartheid; others believing the Court had not made such a finding.
12 Israeli human rights organizations have since expressed "grave concern" about attempts to associate Amnesty's report with antisemitism, and they have rejected the Commission's failure to recognize Israel's apartheid. These organizations argue that weaponizing antisemitism to silence legitimate criticism actually undermines attempts to address rising antisemitism.Republished from Geddie, Eve (13 March 2023). "EU needs to understand the realities in the West Bank". Politico. Retrieved 19 April 2024. Eve Geddie was writing as the director of Amnesty International’s European Institutions Office.
Amnesty's report is important and for many advocates it is affirming of what they have been stating all along is a racist regime of systemic discrimination. However, for many longstanding critics of Israel, accusations of Israeli apartheid are not new, nor is the predictable backlash against them whereby antisemitism has been weaponized by Israel and its supporters. This backlash is now been directed against Amnesty International
As Human Rights Watch noted, the first example opens the door to reflexively labeling as antisemitic human rights organizations and lawyers who argue that current Israeli government policies constitute apartheid against Palestinians
The six rabbis... and I... discussed the word 'apartheid', which I defined as the forced segregation of two peoples living in the same land, with one of them dominating and persecuting the other. I made clear in the book's text and in my response to the rabbis that the system of apartheid in Palestine is not based on racism but the desire of a minority of Israelis for Palestinian land and the resulting suppression of protests that involve violence ... my use of 'apartheid' does not apply to circumstances within Israel.
Comparisons between the former regime in South Africa and the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories have become relatively commonplace—not just by Palestinians and their supporters, but also among Israelis and the international community.
Hafrada (Apartheid in Afrikaans) is the official Hebrew term for Israel's vision and policy towards the Palestinians of the Occupied Territories – and, it could be argued (with qualifications), within Israel itself
hafrada (separation) as the Zionist form of apartheid
Even among Israelis, the term 'Hafrada' — separation or apartheid in Hebrew — has entered the mainstream lexicon, despite strident denials by the Jewish state that it is engaged in any such process.
For the purpose of the present Convention, the term 'the crime of apartheid', which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practised in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhuman acts....
The international community has identified three regimes as inimical to human rights—colonialism, apartheid and foreign occupation. Israel is clearly in military occupation of the OPT. At the same time elements of the occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law. What are the legal consequences of a regime of prolonged occupation with features of colonialism and apartheid for the occupied people, the occupying Power and third States? It is suggested that this question might appropriately be put to the International Court of Justice for a further advisory opinion.
an institutionalized regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination has been established.Final published version: Lynk, Michael (12 August 2022). Report of the special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967 (Report). p. 17. A/HRC/49/87.
Applying... the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and the Rome Statute, the Special Rapporteur has concluded that the political system of entrenched rule in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that endows one racial-national-ethnic group with substantial rights, benefits and privileges while intentionally subjecting another group to live behind walls and checkpoints and under a permanent military rule sans droits, sans égalité, sans dignité et sans liberté (without rights, without equality, without dignity and without freedom) satisfies the prevailing evidentiary standard for the existence of apartheid. ... an institutionalized regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination has been established.
... practices in South Africa are not the test or benchmark for a finding of apartheid elsewhere, as the principal instrument which provides this test lies in the terms of the Apartheid Convention itself.(pdf 3.0 MiB) The report does not represent an official position of the HSRC. South African Academic Study Finds that Israel is Practicing Apartheid and Colonialism in the Occupied Palestinian Territories Archived 26 July 2010 at the Wayback Machine, May 2009.
Any judgment on whether serious crimes under international law have occurred is a matter for judicial decision, rather than for governments or non-judicial bodies," they said. The spokesperson added: "As a friend of Israel, we have a regular dialogue on human rights. This includes encouraging the government of Israel to abide by its obligations under international law and do all it can to uphold the values of equality for all.
The release of Amnesty International's new report on human rights in Israel and the territory it occupies shines another bright spotlight on the injustice of Israel's occupation and the illegality of deepening de facto annexation of the territory it has occupied since 1967. The ongoing denial of fundamental rights and freedoms to millions of Palestinians in occupied territory runs counter to the values on which Israel was founded and undermines its security and international standing. J Street does not endorse the findings or the recommendations of the report, nor do we use the word "apartheid" to describe the situation on the ground. At the same time, we urge Israel and its friends around the world not to use issues with the report as an excuse to avoid grappling with the day-in and day-out realities of occupation and the moral and strategic catastrophe it represents for Israelis and for Palestinians. Supporters of Israel who pour time, energy and resources into attacking anti-occupation activists and human rights organizations are failing to address the very real threat to Israel's future posed by never-ending occupation. Those who level false charges of antisemitism against such activists and experts do a further disservice to the critical fight against the very real scourge of antisemitism.
It is clear that public attitudes about Israel are shifting. The term "apartheid" appears to have become a common term among many Americans, especially Democrats
The logic of Apartheid is akin to the logic of Zionism.... Life for the Palestinians is infinitely worse than what we ever had experienced under Apartheid.... The price they (Palestinians) have had to pay for resistance much more horrendous.Speech presented at Oak Park Public Library. Audio recordingMP3
Apartheid Israel can be defeated, just as apartheid in South Africa was defeated
When I come here and see the situation [in the Palestinian territories], I find that what is happening here is ten times worse than what I had experienced in South Africa. This is Apartheid.
