WASHINGTON WATCH
This afternoon, I went for a walk and noticed that a homeowner had recently placed a sign on their front lawn. It simply read “I stand with Israel.” If this had been 400 or so days ago, I would have thought nothing of it. Back then, supporters of Israel were still reeling from the shock of the October 7th attack and felt a need to express themselves.
But it’s not December 2023. It’s 14 months into this nightmare. The decision to now place this sign on their front lawn, raises a troubling question —exactly what, in the current context, does “stand with Israel” mean?
In just the past week, US media have featured a number of well-researched reports on Israel’s efforts to secure their hold on Gaza through: the mass demolitions of homes, hospitals, schools, and infrastructure; the forced transfer of the remaining Palestinians in the north of Gaza; the fact that Israeli snipers have made a “sport” of killing Palestinians who are fleeing and keeping score of their “hits”; and the construction of military occupation bases in the far north of Gaza and the Nezarim corridor, including a “resort-like” facility to provide war-weary troops with rest and relaxation. There have also been stories on the continuing lack of medical services, food, water, sanitation, and shelter for the two million Palestinians crammed into Gaza’s south.
Added to this are developments in Israel. After a long hiatus, protests against Netanyahu’s government have continued. Some are objecting to his callous disregard for and manipulation of the fate of the remaining Israeli hostages held in Gaza. Others are protesting his ongoing effort to escape prosecution for the multiple charges of corruption for which he is currently on trial.
And then there are courageous Israeli journalists and commentators who are challenging their fellow citizens to see what they have ignored for more than a year: namely, that genocide is being committed in their name just across the border.
One of these is by the brilliant commentator B. Michael. Writing in the Israeli daily Haaretz, he walks his readers through the legal definition of the term “genocide.” Michael notes that the convention against this crime lists five actions, any one of which is sufficient to consider a state or people perpetrators of genocide. Michael goes on to demonstrate that Israel can be shown guilty of four of the five. He concludes, “Feigning innocence isn’t admissible as a defense.” Nor will claiming that it was done “in good faith, or purely for reasons of self-defense.”
And so, at this point, what exactly does “stand with Israel” mean?
The bottom line is that if someone wants to declare that they “stand with Israel” they should be free to do so, and accept that, given what is unfolding in Palestine, it will cause some to ask: “What exactly do you mean by that?” And their neighbors should be able to declare that they “stand with Palestine,” to answer questions they may be asked, and to do so without fear of retribution .
That said, those who recently posted this sign in front of their home have the right to express their views, however insensitive or repugnant others might feel them to be. Defacing their sign or inciting violence against them in response is clearly wrong. If we truly believe in democracy and the need for civil discourse, then insults, threats, or vandalism must be rejected.
But this raises another question: What reaction would result from a neighbor placing a “I stand with Palestine” sign on their lawn?
There can be no doubt that public opinion on Israel/Palestine has dramatically shifted in recent years. There is, today, greater sympathy for Palestinians than ever before and even among those who continue to support Israel, the policies of that state are increasingly being rejected. Recognizing this sea-change in opinion, pro-Israel groups and their allies in government and parts of the media have gone on the offensive in an effort to silence pro-Palestinian sentiment and even ban legitimate expressions of support for Palestinians and opposition to Israeli policies that are in violation of international and US laws. As things stand, these efforts to stifle pro-Palestinian speech still appear to have the upper hand.
A review of the reactions to recent events on campuses and the debates in Congress and state legislatures makes clear that a sign as simple as “I stand with Palestine” could be denounced as inflammatory, insensitive, and even antisemitic.
It must be acknowledged that speech on both sides has in some instances veered in unacceptable directions. Pro-Israel demonstrators have taunted Palestinians with “We will rape you,” or pro-Palestinians have chanted “Zionists don’t deserve to live.” These must be condemned.
But what is worrisome are the all-too-frequent reports that relatively benign expressions of support for Palestinian rights are censored because they have made supporters of Israel “uncomfortable.” This kind of dangerous overreach is precisely what is happening.
The bottom line is that if someone wants to declare that they “stand with Israel” they should be free to do so, and accept that, given what is unfolding in Palestine, it will cause some to ask: “What exactly do you mean by that?” And their neighbors should be able to declare that they “stand with Palestine,” to answer questions they may be asked, and to do so without fear of retribution.
Sadly, we’re not there yet.
