Do Israelis object to Amnesty Internationals report finding that Israel is an Apartheid What are their arguments either against the finding or for it ?
Based on the many hysterical responses by Zionists and Israelis I witnessed, they pulled the usual diversions like falsely accusing Amnesty of being an antisemitic and terrorist organization.
Other Zionists who think they are smarter say there are “Arabic” judges and lawyers in Israel. Of course, these individuals don’t know what apartheid is.
According to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the crime of Apartheid is defined as follows:
“The crime of apartheid” means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;”
There are many inhumane acts listed under paragraph 1, but the most relevant to our case are:
- Deportation or forcible transfer of population.
- Imprisonment and severe deprivation of liberty.
- Persecution based on ethnic, religious or national origins.
- Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
It is indisputable that Israel practices these acts against Palestinians, inside and outside of the green line. It is also indisputable that as a state built on a colonial ideology that privileges one ethnic group over the rest, its actions are ultimately committed to maintain this system of supremacy.
You will notice that nowhere in this description does it say that if you have a judge from the oppressed minority then it ceases being an Apartheid system. As a matter of fact, Nelson Mandela was a successful lawyer. The counter-argument that there are “Arab” judges or policemen ceases to be convincing when you realize that the system doesn’t need to be a complete carbon copy of South Africa to be counted as Apartheid.
Mentioning that there are “Arab” members of Knesset is also not as powerful a gotcha moment as Israeli advocates believe it to be, simply because there is a precedent of an Apartheid state having parliament members of the oppressed indigenous group. That precedent is Southern Rhodesia. Despite allowing a certain number of black parliamentarians, it was still a racist entity ruled by a white minority, with the very honest declared goal of maintaining itself as a white state.
As you have surely noticed I have been referring to “Arabs” in parenthesis, this is because most Palestinians living within the green line prefer to call themselves Palestinians, not merely Arab. Naturally, this is a threat to the Israeli narrative of the non-existence of Palestinians as a people, so even as they tokenize us in an attempt to prove their egalitarianism, they seek to simultaneously erase our actual identity.
Zionists need a reality check. Israel is an Apartheid state.