Israeli human rights organisation B'Tselem, one of the handful Israeli organisations consistently calling for an end to the occupation of Palestinian territories, has been working since 1989 to ensure that country protects the human rights of people in those areas and complies with international law. In an interview with The Hindu, B'Tselem's executive director Hagai El-Ad talks of the toxic effect of 50 years of military rule, the viability of the two-state solution, the situation in Gaza, and the role that countries such as India can play in ending the conflict.
Last year, you addressed the UN Security Council on the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. What prompted you to speak out?
B'Tselem has been working on this issue for almost 30 years now. And the pretence for a long time has been that the occupation is temporary. At some point in time you need to start questioning that dogma. Now it is 2017 and the beginning of the 51st year of the occupation. So, I think any reasonable person, when you factor in the passage of time and the reality on the ground… if you spend even a little time in the West Bank, you will see it is a huge investment in infrastructure and the building of permanent Israeli settlements. And when you factor in the growing volume of statements by Israeli leaders saying that we need to continue controlling the territory for the foreseeable future or that there will never be a Palestinian state, the word temporary becomes something between a joke and a very obvious lie. As a human rights organisation, we are here to challenge the reality. That was what made me speak in front of the Security Council.
A few months back, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak said Israel is facing a 'slippery slope' towards apartheid, a word increasingly being used by anti-Israel activists around the world. Do you agree with Mr. Barak?
I don't know in what context former Prime Minister Barak made the comment, but we have been sitting on a 'slippery slope' and sliding down it since 1967. The basic flaw in the thinking about Israeli democracy is that for the last 50 years, we have been bullying another people. The current reality is that there are 13 million people living between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River, and Israel controls all of them. But only 8 million Israeli citizens participate in the political process. In its essence, that is not democratic. That is the major critique of Israeli democracy. But even going beyond that, the fantasy that you can have military rule over millions of people for 50 years on one side of the Green Line and have a proper democracy on the other — and that one thing is not going to have a toxic effect on another — is bogus.
Settlers say they are here to stay and that there will be no Palestinian state. In such a scenario, do you think a two-state solution is still viable?
We talk about human rights, and about justice. As an organisation, we are not committed to any specific political outcome. What we do is we will examine any agreed upon any mutually agreed upon solution and judge it based on its merit — whether it will deliver justice, equality, human rights, democracy to everyone. There are different political scenarios to accomplish that. The one scenario that is completely incompatible with those values of human rights and decency is endless occupation. Now, the "peace process" has been serving as a useful distraction for Israel for the past 20 years. It has been an endless process and there has been no peace. In the meantime, more settlements, more displacement of Palestinians and a decade of Palestinians in Gaza living under complete blockade, etc.
What is the situation in Gaza like now?
Israel treats Gaza like an enemy state it has no control over and hence no responsibility towards the two million Palestinians who live there. It is true that Israel dismantled all the settlements and there is no permanent Israeli Army presence in Gaza since the unilateral disengagement. However, Israel continues to control what gets into Gaza, what gets out, who gets in there, how much electricity and water Gaza gets, basic infrastructure and other aspects such as the population registry. It continues to control all these aspects, including people’s ability to travel out of there. The only exception is the Rafah crossing with Egypt, which is closed most of the time. And with control also comes responsibility.
The Israeli reasoning for continuing the blockade is that Hamas, a "terrorist organisation", controls Gaza and it fires rockets into its territory posing a threat to civilian life…
No one is denying Israel's right to defend itself and it is Israel's responsibility to defend its citizens. And the fact is Hamas has been firing rockets from civilian centres in Gaza against civilian towns in Israel, is illegal and a war crime that has been condemned vehemently by everyone, including B'Tselem. The question is what is the relation between that reality and the fact that two million people, including children and the elderly and people in hospitals, do not have access to basic services. A World Bank report, I think, suggested that by 2020, 'Gaza will become uninhabitable' because of the deterioration of the quality of water in Gaza and the collapse of other infrastructure. So what is the relationship between Israel’s security and holding two million people under these unbearable circumstances? That is the real question. In many ways, it can be argued that it contributes to the deterioration of the security situation.
What role can India play in ensuring an end to the status quo?
The occupation is not an internal issue though the Israeli propaganda line recently has tried to market that. This is oppression of people in a territory that has been occupied and controlled by Israel for half a century. Violations are occurring outside internationally recognised border of my country. So, obviously it is an issue of great international concern and responsibility. Israel's best friends can have a better relationship with my country, and at the same time insist that the occupation has to end and ensure that their economic policies are in no way benefiting or supporting the continued oppression of the Palestinian people. Now, this is not just B'Tselem's position. The UNSC, in its resolution 2334, calls on all member states to differentiate in their relevant dealings between Israel and the occupied territories. We think that is the minimal baseline that any decent country needs to hold in its relations with Israel.
Do you think that boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) can be effective tools in ensuring an end to the occupation?
When it comes to BDS, we do not tell private individuals how to pursue their politics. What I think needs to be said is that there is an effort in Israel to prevent even boycott of settlement goods, which de facto is the only boycott that seems to be resonating with people around the world. That is a legitimate decision, it is free speech, non-violent. You can critique it, like it, you can dislike it or take no position. But the attempts in Israel to legislate against that are ludicrous. What is disappointing is that when a petition was filed against the law some years back, the high court did not strike that law down.
Given the current political climate in the country, how hard has it been to do your job?
Unfortunately in a growing number of countries, not only Israel but also India and elsewhere, human rights activists and those who critique policies of the government are being met with demonisation and attempts to portray us as traitors instead of being met with a valid counterargument. Instead of addressing the issue, attempts are made to thrash and slander the messenger.
B'Tselem and Breaking the Silence's meeting with German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel sparked off a diplomatic row with Israel...
The decision by the Foreign Minister to go ahead with the meeting and not to cave in to blackmail by the Israeli Prime Minister was a good and appropriate expression of [standing up for] principles. It is something that should have been a no-brainer... that criticism of government policies does not equal being disloyal or unpatriotic. It is a garbage propaganda line that is being used more routinely in countries that we used to think of as proper democracies but are gravitating towards more authoritarian to proper fascist regimes.
What is the way forward to a future in which Jews and Arabs live in harmony and peace?
Among all the pessimism, a significant minority of Israelis that supports B'Tselem and the values we believe in. That support base has not been eroded. It is far from the majority, don't get me wrong. But the support is not zero. I am not exaggerating this. After all, we are sitting in a facts-based organisation. We do public opinion polling and it consistently shows 20% of the public identifies with our values. Now, looking forward, we have a commitment. We are telling the Israeli public and the world the reality of what it is to be a Palestinian in these circumstances. And we are never going to stop doing that. But by itself, it is not going to be sufficient. The only non-violent way out — our commitment to non-violence is absolute — is through international action. The international community needs to step forward and say 'No more! We do not accept another 50 years of this reality' and that there will be consequences of endless human rights violations.