Covering a Conference to Mobilize Support for the PLO in Jerusalem

The Invitation:

“SHAML Palestinian Refugee & Diaspora Center & The Alternative Information Center Humanitarian and Political Aspects of the Palestinian Condition

Wednesday afternoon, 8 January 2003

Ambassador Hotel, East Jerusalem

Palestinian Refugee and Diaspora Center (Shaml) and the Alternative Information Center are most pleased to invite you to attend in this meeting of international scholars researching catastrophes and human disasters around the globe and local researchers and field practitioners working in local or international agencies. The panel members will all be local or locally based workers, who will present a variety of opinions and analyses from the perspectives of Palestinian practitioners and intellectuals, Israeli and Palestinian human rights advocates and local and international humanitarian agencies.

Plan for the panel

The panel will be held in two parts.

Participants:

1. Lee O’Brien, OXFAM’s senior policy advisor
2. Palestinian Health Work Committees – Dr. Naim Abu-Teir
3. A representative of UPMRC
4. Physicians for Human Rights Israel – Ruchama Marton, President and Founder and Hadas Ziv, Director of Occupied Territories and East Jerusalem Project
5. B’tselem – Dr. Anat Bilezki, Chairperson
6. MSF Jerusalem Branch – Olivier Maizoue, Manager
7. AIDA Humanitarian Facilitator, Charlotte Dunn OXFAM Senior Policy Advisor
8. UNRWA Deputy commissioner-General – Karen Koning Abu-Zeid
9. Dr. Gadi Algazi, activist in Taayush Jewish-Arab Partnership

Panel Part 1: Analysis of the Current Situation

Head of Panel: Dr. Sari Hanafi, Director of Shaml

16:30 – Introduction by Dr. Hanafi
16:50 – 18:00 – 4 panel participants will present their views, 15 minutes each.
18:00 – 18:30 – round table discussion
18:30 – 18:45 – Break

Panel Part 2: Humanitarian Aid in broad perspective

Head of Panel: Michael Warschawski, AIC, Board member

18:45 – 19:00 – Introduction by Michael Warschawski
19:00 – 20:00 – 4 remaining panel participants will present their views
20:00 – 20:45 – Open Discussion
20:45 – 21:00 – Conclusion by Dr. Sari Hanafi
21:00 – Dinner at the hotel restaurant

Our aim in convening this panel discussion is two-fold:

• To present the current situation of the Palestinian people from humanitarian and political perspectives;
• To discuss the complex combination of political aspect/analysis/practice and the humanitarian aspect/analysis/practice.

The panel theme and problematics will be presented by Dr. Sari Hanafi, Director of Shaml: Palestinian Refugees and Diaspora Center.

Following an introduction, panel members will give a short presentation, concentrating on personal/organisational views of the current humanitarian crisis situation and his/her analysis of the current processes.

A debate will then be opened. The following are leading questions for the debate:

• How do you/your organization view the use of humanitarian discourse? We are referring here to the use of terms such as ‘human disaster’, the call for humanitarian emergency aid, the manipulation of this language by the Israeli government etc.
• How do you perceive the outcomes of humanitarian practice, whether done by small and local organizations – Israeli or Palestinian, governments, international NGOs, UN agencies? This question calls for reflection on possible or past outcomes. Can the humanitarian aid projects and involvement affect the struggle for a strong Palestinian state, market, civil society?
• How are these questions relevant to the Israeli society? This question refers of course to the political responsibilities/duties of the Israelis, but also invites a reflection on the fact that Israel and Palestine are in many aspects interconnected. What are the social/economic/political outcomes that humanitarian discourse/practice has on Israeli society?
• Do you/your organization see any tension arising due to the division of labour between humanitarian assistance and human rights advocacy? Do they use different moral discourses but have one political agenda?

Sincerely yours,

Palestinian Diaspora and Refugee Centre, Shaml, an independent NGO dedicated to Palestinian refugees and the Palestinian Diaspora, was established in 1994 by a group of concerned academics and human rights activists who felt the need to examine issues pertaining to Palestinian refugees in a comparative perspective, encompassing relevant experiences in other parts of the world.

The Alternative Information Center is a joint Palestinian-Israeli initiative centred on commonly held beliefs of equality, social justice and a world free of racism, colonialism, sexism and all forms of discrimination. The AIC is an alternative information pool for critical and progressive analyses of the Israeli-Palestinian political, social and cultural reality.

The debate will be in English

Confirmation: info@shaml.org
Tel: Shaml: 2988442, AIC: 624 11 59

Report on the “Panel on Humanitarian and Political Aspects of the Palestinian Condition at the Ambassador Hotel”

8 January 2000

Sponsored by Shaml: Palestinian Refugees and Diaspora Center and the Alternative Information Center

No official material re: participants or agenda was available. Printed material from various organizations was. Of note: An Apartheid Calendar from AIC and an AIC magazine with a senseless and outrageous article by Michael Warshawski.

Two panels convened. Each time there was an introduction, an opportunity for each panelist to speak, and then questions/discussion.

Panel 1. Moderator: Dr. Sari Hanafi, Director of Shaml. Panelists: a representative of Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees (who identified himself without mike and very low, so that name was not audible); Dr. Naim Abu-Teir, from the Palestinian Health Work Committees; UNRWA Deputy Commissioner-General Karen Koning Abu-Zayd; and Dr. Gadi Algazi, from Taayush.

Dr. Hanafi (whose English was weak) introduced the proceedings by asking questions such as “Is this a conflict or a post-conflict situation?” [interesting!] “What is the role of humanitarian organizations? Is it to be a witness?

The two Palestinians spoke first, primarily documenting the current Palestinian situation re: unemployment, poverty, etc. According to the representative of the Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees, there is a partial collapse of the Ministry of Health and NGOs are taking responsibility. Ambulances are stopped and many die at checkpoints. Not everyone has PA National Health Insurance; 65% are served by NGOs or private sector. He, to his credit, spoke about aiming for peace and hatred in the next generation. Need to find out who he is! He spoke like a professional, concerned with realities on the ground. Dr. Abu-Teir spoke as a politician, talking about need to focus on the occupation to way to provide relief. There are apartheid policies and the occupation is the only cause of the situation.

Karen Abu-Zayd was very offended by the Wall Street Journal article calling for abolition of UNRWA. She responded to claims that UNRWA breeds dependency: Pre-Intifada, only 6% of the refugees was getting direct assistance. These are “people who are independent, live their lives, have their jobs.” Now there are 13,000 in Gaza and 9,000 in the West Bank getting direct assistance – food, etc. [This is actually a low number out of millions – when terrible poverty and hunger is claimed!!] She is concerned about demolitions, which are up to 10/night. In Gaza 1,500 homes need to be rebuilt, in the W.B., 750. There has to be compensatory education because of closures, and psychological counseling. There is a security problem: 6 staff members have been killed. UNRWA can’t do its job. There is collective punishment. UNRWA stands behind their installations and staff against charges that there is involvement with terrorism. In DC (primarily) and here, there are charges that UNRWA perpetuates the refugee problem. But the problem will be solved when the political situation is resolved and they can go back. There is an attempt to decentralize UNRWA services. The question is asked sometimes is UNRWA aiding the oppressor: if it were not here would it be so bad the problem would have to be solved? There is “erosion of our principles – our privileges and immunities” (e.g., getting trucks through). Israelis are the “most difficult interlocutors” UNRWA has to work with anywhere. [This to laughter and applause.]

Gadi Elgazi, a dangerous, passionate man, addressed the political situation. He says Taayush is an “anti-colonial movement.” As he spoke he said, “I assume you here are all political activists wearing different hats.” There is a balance of forces – Israeli and international – against Palestinians. There needs to be a higher political price for the Israelis. This could be through mobilization of the masses. Not enough to talk of victimhood. Need to put Israel’s policy in awkward situation. A model of how to do this is the olive tree campaign. Even though lost on the ground, made Israel look bad. The question is how far Israel can be challenged through humanitarian agencies, which can be used to strengthen the popular struggle. Suggests youth clubs and women’s groups be used to rally popular resistance.

Discussion: Members of a workshop in Tel Aviv sponsored by Van Leer on the Catastrophe of Globalization were present, led by Adi Ophi. One member raised a question re: violence and what to be done about it. Response of Abu-Teir was that it was all the fault of occupation, daily humiliation. “If you put a hungry cat in a corner and try to kill it, it will scratch you.” Someone – unidentified – at the back of the room said that yes, we know the cause, but the question is still what we do about it. (She drew an analogy with drug dependency – whatever its cause, it needs resolution.) Answer she received was that removing the occupation is the solution – there is no accountability acknowledged by the Palestinians. Abu-Teir also spoke about needing to do a “scientific” study to see what’s going on.

Lee O’Brian commented from the floor that politicizing the humanitarian organizations is what they are always criticized for doing.

Panel 2. Moderator Michael Warshawski, of AIC. Panelists: Ruchama Marton and Hadas Aiv of Physicians for Human Rights; Dr. Anat Bilezki B’tselem; Lee O’Brian, Oxfam; Oliver Maizoue, MSF (? Medical Services).

Warshawski, during introductions, said nothing that made particular sense or seemed of consequence.

The two women, primarily Ruchama, made a horrific and shameful presentation. “We are part of the occupying society” and are “observers of Israeli violations of human rights.” Spoke at considerable length about stopping ambulances at checkpoints, medications not allowed through, etc. Said the ambulances are stopped as a power play, to humiliate Palestinian physicians.

Anat Bilezki spoke briefly (having relinquished part of her time for the lengthy report on ambulances held at checkpoints) and off the record. She said, “Politics is the be-all and end-all of humanitarian work.” B’tselem is more activist now, not just objectively gathering information. Must do political work through human rights perspective, using NGOs to make political points. Activists, humanitarians, NGOs all play roles.

Lee O’Brian, Oxfam, explained that she has lived in the territories for 16 years, spent 5 years with UNRWA. She spoke primarily about humanitarianism – in a sense that is broader than how the term is often used. She sees it not just as relief, but also referring to humanitarian law. With law, there is an attempt to reach an objective international consensus, although how it is used depends on politics.

Humanitarian law does not just bring restitution, it also confers obligations. If the Palestinian people make the point that humanitarian law says they are entitled to statehood, then they have an obligation to honor other aspects of international humanitarian law, e.g., regarding the protection of civilians, which means they stop suicide bombings.