KEY POINTS:
The Herald editorial of Wednesday, January 7, criticised my daubing of some blood and soluble paint on the Rabin memorial in central Wellington. Why was this object chosen as a focus for protest against what is happening in Gaza?
I believe that the violent death of any human
being is a crime and against the will of God. Nourished by my faith and the social teachings of my Church, I have a commitment to non-violence and human rights. My action was based on the urgency of what is happening in the Holy Land and the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza.
There must be a ceasefire from both sides and an end to military solutions; the killing must stop. If not, more long-term hatred will be generated.
I do not agree with the firing of rockets into Israel. I believe the solution to the problems in the Holy Land must be through non-violence. I keep believing this even when peaceful demonstrations against the West Bank wall are met with teargas and rubber bullets.
I also know that the solution must involve a real and deep healing of the wounds that occurred at the birth of Israel 60 years ago. Why is the land now divided into Israeli and Palestinian territories? Why checkpoints between Jerusalem and Bethlehem?
The 1948 war left Israel with most of historical Palestine and the remaining 22 per cent became known as the Palestinian territories: East Jerusalem, West Bank, the Gaza Strip. Many Palestinians forced from their land in 1948 continue to live in refugee camps in these territories and in surrounding countries.
This land loss continued when Israeli forces occupied the Palestinian territories in 1967. Israeli settlements (all illegal under international law) began to be built there. Palestinians resisted. Then came the Oslo Accords with the famous 1993 Arafat-Rabin handshake on the White House lawn.
What was Rabin's background? Before 1948 he was part of the Palmach, attacking British infrastructure. Today the Palmach would probably be labelled "terrorists". During the 1948 war Rabin took part in the expulsion of Palestinians from Lydda and Ramleh. In 1967 he led the Israeli forces in occupying the Palestinian territories. In 1987 he ordered the "broken bones" policy for Palestinian prisoners. Israeli historians Ilan Pappe and Tanya Reinhart have documented this, as well as Noam Chomsky.
Rabin gained the image of a martyr when he was assassinated by an Israeli who feared the future of Israel had been given away. He may have had a late-life conversion to peaceful methods (I have had a few gradual conversions myself!) but it is difficult to say Rabin had "a life-long commitment to peace and stability".
The Oslo Accords had two big difficulties. The settlements continued to grow and Arafat could only function as a kind of puppet ruler. The PLO had recognised Israel but continued to lose territory. This led to disillusionment and contributed to the rise of Hamas.
The Rabin memorial also commemorates the Jewish National Fund. The JNF is dedicated to obtaining land in Palestine for Jewish settlement. After 1948 it took over land from which Palestinian families had been expelled. The JNF leased or sold that land to Jewish settlers. After 1967 the JNF began to get land for the illegal settlements in the occupied territories. The expansion of these settlements and the settler-only roads connecting them are major hindrances to a future viable Palestinian state.
So what does the Rabin memorial really honour? Rightly or wrongly, when I learned of Rabin's earlier military history and the role of the JNF I saw the memorial from the perspective that it marks Palestinian dispossession. My action intended to draw attention not just to the present conflict but to longer-term problems.
I apologise to anyone who felt that my action was anti-Jewish. As a Christian, Judaism is part of my heritage. I am formed by the ethical tradition of the Hebrew scriptures, especially prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah and Amos.
My gesture was aimed at the actions of the state of Israel, a political entity. No state can be beyond criticism in terms of human rights and international law. Perhaps I was imprudent but Israel is militarily powerful. Anglican Bishop Richard Randerson put it well in his press statement of January 6 on the Gaza situation when he said "with greater power comes greater responsibility". In this case Israel has by far the greater power.