The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Category: Uncategorised

Child’s Play?

Recent news from Berlin: Netanyahu visit, Grand Coalition, and threatened split in the Left


27/03/2023

I recall a circle game from my childhood; after each round another chair was removed, leaving one more child out. We called it “Going to Jerusalem.” Last week Israeli boss Netanyahu arrived FROM Jerusalem. After two days he was out of the Berlin circle – one day too early.

Since its founding the Federal Republic has supported even the worst Israeli leaders, aiming, by voicing loud regret for Nazi horror and displaying reform efforts, to win an admission ticket back into western society. Under a media blanket, however, all but the worst Nazi big shots crept back into every sphere, above all government and the economy. Age, death and rebellious young anti-fascists gradually removed most of them, but not their influence – or the total official support for every Israeli leader, even former terrorists like Menachim Begin and Yitzhak Shamir.

Such types now have total power, yet Chancellor Scholz upheld the formula and gave “Bibi” an honored welcome. Then the state visit was suddenly cut short! Was it because hundreds of thousands in Israel kept up mass protests against the demolition of democracy, even for Jewish Israelis? Or because of world-wide revulsion at the bloodshed against Palestinians, from well-aimed bullets killing Shireen Abu Akleh, a beloved woman journalist, or the torching of hundreds of Palestinian homes in the refugee camp of Huwwara by illegal Israeli settlers, while Israeli soldiers refused to intervene and then joined in, with ministerial approval?

Or because of demonstrations in Berlin, by Germans and Palestinians at the Bundestag and, at Brandenburg Gate, by angry Israeli ex-pats living in Berlin (a historic turn-around), waving Israeli flags while denouncing the new government? It is getting tougher for Bibi and his hate-driven ministers to find comfortably secure chairs anywhere. Perhaps, before long, even in Jerusalem?

But the featured game in Berlin these days was rather “Who’s King of the Mountain” or, slightly altered, “King of City Hall” (or its queen).  In an unprecedented decision, the courts canceled the totally-mismanaged September 2021 elections to the Berlin parliament (Abgeordnetenhaus) and ordered new elections, which were held on February 12th.

Since 2016, the city was run by a coalition: Social Democrats (SPD), with their Franziska Giffey as mayor, the Greens and die LINKE (The Left). Most of the media now expected only minor changes.

Then came Surprise No. 1. Those three parties, added together, again won a majority, but a far slimmer one, with the SPD suffering its worst loss in Berlin history, a measly 18.4%, far behind the CDU (“Christian” Democratic Union) at 28.2%. Too many Berliners were fed up, for both good reasons and bad ones. New Year’s Eve fireworks, with angry attacks on the police and some firemen, were immediately blamed by the “Bild” and other rags (think “Fox” or “NY Post”) on “lazy, unruly and violent immigrants.” The coalition parties were accused of “spoiling” them instead of locking them away or deporting them. And the CDU, heavily racist-tainted, joined in.

Other heartstrings – in the tender breasts of car-drivers – were struck by the Greens‘ efforts to slow auto velocity and limit car traffic, even barring four-wheelers from a downtown shopping street, to increase the number and width of bicycle lanes and stop the extension of a big highway further into the city. Blood pressures behind steering-wheels rose.

Thirdly, Berlin’s less prosperous majority was angry at the ruling trio’s failure, despite its promises, to keep rental costs from soaring, prevent evictions, and build anything near the necessary number of affordable apartments. A referendum demanding the confiscation of all apartment buildings owned by big housing giants (with adequate repayment) had been dramatically approved by over a million voters, 59%, but was sabotaged by SPD-mayor Giffey, given only lukewarm support by the Greens and really backed only by die LINKE – but even then pushed into  “mañana“ status by that party’s accommodating, status-quo wing which is dominant in Berlin. So people asked: Where is the promised genuine rent control? Who has really fought for affordable housing! Many, dismayed or disgusted, decided to sit out this repeat election!

But many did vote. And to complicate the messy situation, both SPD and Greens got 18.4% – about 280,000 each! The SPD was ahead – by only 105 votes! Then almost 500 uncounted mail-in votes were found; would they give the Greens first place and a “Green woman mayor”? Suspense was huge, but in the end the SPD was ahead by a just 53 votes, enough to save the status quo.

But the top vote-getter gets first shot at forming a government. The CDU led the field with 28.2%, giving them 52 seats (out of 159), far from a majority. With neither die LINKE (22 seats) nor the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD – 17 seats) as possible allies, their right to a first chance seemed a useless formality. But the CDU kept up its usual loud-mouth bragging.

Surprise No. 2, it paid off! In an amazing switch, Franziska Giffey, whose unpopularity as Social Democratic mayor helped cause their losses, announced her decision to dismantle the leftish-sounding trio alliance, abdicate her position and take her party into a junior partnership, giving Berlin its first CDU boss since 2001. The probable new mayor, Kai Wegner, like his party, works hand in glove with the real estate lobby, and it’s a wide-open hand. He once assured these behemoths:

“The exchange with you, our cooperation, has always offered me a great deal. As you know, I was often closer to your side than to the other side.“

Giffey had never angered that side either; Berlin seemed in for five years of right-wing government. The SPD was trading any remaining left-over principles for a second prize, half the well-rewarded cabinet chairs. The Greens and die LINKE were suddenly relegated to cold opposition seats!

But halt! In Berlin’s SPD, majority approval by the party’s 53,000 members is needed for such major decisions; there is a call for rejection in some boroughs and in the SPD’s Young Socialist organization (Jusos). Will party discipline and pressure prevail in the end? The curtain has not yet descended on this topsy-turvy puppet theater stage.

Similar confusion and controversy abound on the national level, where Social Democrats and Greens share coalition rule not with die LINKE but with the small, pushy pro-big-biz Free Democratic Party. This FDP, now threatened with political bankruptcy, is trying to win back hearts and votes by moving closer to the CDU, now in opposition but drooling at a chance to overturn apple-carts as in Berlin.

So the FDP is bucking its Green coalition partner by preserving Germany’s “no speed limit” stretches on its Autobahns, which it tries to extend more than climate-friendlier rail traffic, and further hindering, as much as possible, postponed plans to cut down on carbon-spewing coal and gas heating and close down atomic energy plants. It alienates its SPD partners, now trying to regain lost working-class support, by resisting aid to the financially deprived while resisting taxes on the obscenely wealthy; the well- worn label is again “deficit-cutting”. Chancellor Scholz is trying to please everyone but the cracks widen while the CDU aims at becoming King of the Mountain. Like in Berlin.

One theme unites German coalitions; total support for continuing the Ukraine war. Many citizens base their support on an abhorrence of killing and destruction, on sympathy for Ukrainian refugees, over a million mostly women and children who have arrived in Germany. And for those left behind.

But men like Armin Papperger, the CEO of Rheinmetall, Germany’s main producer of tanks and other big weapons, have hardly been affected by human sympathy alone. His annual pay last year stood at €4,4 million while his company, happy since 1889 at all weapons orders, raked in $28.22 billion last year. “The war in Europe has ushered in a new era for Rheinmetall,” Papperger said.

Nor would a long war require more hankies for executives at Lockheed, Raytheon, Boeing and the like, or US coal and gas producers who, after years of pressure, finally succeeded in forcing western Europe to cancel imports from Russia and build new ports for far more expensive liquefied gas from fracking sites in the USA. In the second and third quarter of 2022 alone, American oil producers made $200 billion in profits; explosively capping off such successes, according to master journalist Seymour Hersh, was the blasting of the Russia-to-Germany pipelines on the Baltic sea bottom.

German politicians and media could hardly blame this convincingly on Russia, which constructed the pipelines. And they feared the political consequences of blaming either the obvious culprit or Zelensky, Washington’s man in Kyiv, now the most-feted star in Europe, well ahead of King Charles (not to mention Macron). So they tried to just keep quiet and hope people would forget about it.

Not enough did, so a Washington-CIA-Berlin legend was hatched about “non-governmental Ukrainians” in a boat so small it could never have carried the weight of explosives and devices. So they became mum again. Or are they now trying to hatch up some more credible alibi?

But not only the city-state Berlin, teetering coalitions or exploded pipes are making news, but their effects. Low-paid working-people, single parents, pensioners, have been hit hard by soaring prices for foodstuffs, higher rent, fears about increasing prices for heating, cooking, commuting to jobs.

Many are now fighting back. On Monday, March 27th, a giant one-day warning strike is shutting down rail service, key airports, much of urban public transportation. Kindergarten teachers, garbage collectors, civil servants, university staff; some well-paid pundits are weeping over this “rehearsal for a general strike!” while Britain and France seem closer – as models for action!

Some companies (and public institutions) are hoping for public animosity because of the resulting inconveniences but, often surprisingly, there is widespread public support for the strikers by all those who feel the same pains.

Such disputes, difficulties and struggles should be of advantage to a party dedicated to better lives for all the people, with no lobby pressures or dependence on corporate donors. Sadly, however, die LINKE is also split, now mostly on questions involving the Ukraine. Its stronger group, called by some the “reformers,” stands largely in line with the main parties and media, unconditionally condemning Putin and Russia, approving weapons shipments to Zelensky, calling for victory against the aggressor and condemning all doubters. Angrily opposed to them are those who voice (or demand) unconditional support for Russia.

But many – or most (?) “doubters” condemn the Russian invasion but point to the map and the constant, aggressive push by NATO, led by Washington, to surround Russia, strangle its approaches to the world’s oceans by blocking the Baltic and the Black Sea while stepping up dangerous military and naval maneuvers along its borders, coupled with open political interference in Ukraine and thinly-veiled calls to defeat “authoritarian governments”, meaning Russia (and Cuba, N. Korea, etc.), while snuggling up to or installing some of the world‘s worst tyrants.

These “doubters” ask what the USA would do if a hostile alliance conducted atomic-armed maneuvers near San Diego, Houston and Detroit, and as an answer they recall the Cuban crisis of 1962– almost atomic war! They also recall the bombing of Belgrade “to defend the rights of oppressed Albanian-speakers in Kosovo” and ask if there was no parallel to the very bloody repression of Russian-speaking Ukrainians.

The split on these questions threatens the existence of die LINKE. When its most prominent member and best orator (or Germany’s), Sahra Wagenknecht, spoke in the Bundestag against a break in trade relations with Russia and called for peace negotiations, some prominent ”reformers” called for her expulsion. But In TV talk-shows, usually attacked four against one, she always ends up a calm, polite, smiling victor. She was the main organizer of the great peace rally of 50,000 in Berlin on Feb. 25th, which outraged the media – and opponents in her own party. But in their total rejection of a peace rally they isolated themselves.

Then, in early March, Wagenknecht stated that she would not again run as a candidate for the Bundestag but “retire from politics and work as publicist and author – unless something new turns up politically.” This hint at a possible new party, further to the left, possibly polling at 14% (and leaving die LINKE with 2%), was seen even by some of her enthusiasts as unfortunately vague, further splitting the party yet without offering any definite plan, thus with her strong voice muffled as if by a covid face mask. Her message is not uncomplicated: she charges a neglect of working class rights – and of German workers – with endless attention and bickering about divisive and academic identity and gender questions.

Most recently the two national chairpersons of die LINKE, both opposed to Wagenknecht, though not as angrily as other leaders, formulated a new policy statement for debate which, at first reading, seems to be a move toward bringing together all but the most uncompromisingly opposed party members and leaders. It is perhaps a chance to rescue the party.

Berlin must cease its campaign of harassment against Palestinians and their supporters

Speech by a Jewish Bund member at the trial of people arrested for assembling on Nakba Day 2022


25/03/2023

Editor’s introduction: On Wednesday, 23rd March, former MP Christine Buchholz was in court to challenge the €300 fine imposed on her and others for being in Hermannplatz on Nakba Day, 2022. The verdict was postponed, as the policeman who had arrested Christine said that he was unable to attend. This means that of the cases which have taken place so far, 2 people have been told that they no longer have to pay the fine, and all other cases have been postponed to a later date,

Outside the hearing, Nakba75 organised a protest which was addressed by a number of speakers. Among these speakers was a member of the Jewish Bund who was the first person to win his appeal. This is an English translation of his speech.

“I want to thank everyone for showing up for Palestinian solidarity and against German state hypocrisy. Now a few weeks after my trial, the prejudice of the German legal system is already clearly seen in its choice of who is allowed to demonstrate and who isn’t. This is evidenced again in the results of recent court cases. Although most detainees were arrested together, charged with the same “crime” and face the same evidence (that is, absolutely none), two of those detained, first, myself, a Jewish Berliner, and second, a white German, have been quickly found non-guilty.

Meanwhile, the judges have applied much greater scrutiny to the cases of Palestinian and other Arab defendees. Despite the lack of evidence, rather than dropping the charges, the courts have drawn out the cases. In a recent case, a police officer called as a witness admitted to having received the order to “detain people with unusual clothing”. What does “usual” clothing look like?

When even the police witness could not identify defendants as having demonstrated, the German courts were not satisfied. In my case, I was let free within a few minutes without any police testimony. It should follow that if two of us arrested in the same kettle were found not guilty, everyone else similarly charged should also be found innocent.

I want to also point at that at no time did the police or anyone else find any evidence of antisemitism among those charged with demonstrating.

Once again, the Jewish Bund demands that the Berlin state attorney drop all charges. The city must cease its campaign of harassment against Palestinians and their supporters, including Nakba Day bans, and focus instead on the long-ignored problem of state complicity in and inaction against real racist and antisemitic groups.

Finally, I do want to thank the police and Berlin courts, as its openly racist policing and legal processes has brought together new comrades.”

Explosive movement to defend pensions in France – An indefinite general strike is needed

Demonstrations against Macron are getting bigger, and police violence in increasing, National union leaders must act


24/03/2023

Thursday the 23rd of March was the ninth day of action called in opposition to Macron’s plan to add two years to everyone’s working life. Millions of demonstrators protested in hundreds of towns, more than in previous weeks, and with far more young people visible than before. Many were demonstrating for the first time, enraged by Macron forcing the bill through without a vote in parliament.

Half the country’s public transport and schools were closed; several universities and hundreds of high schools were blockaded. Major tourist sites such as the Eiffel Tower and the Palace of Versailles were on strike. The public 24 hour news radio France-info was playing rock music Thursday morning as its journalists had walked out. Staff at Le Monde, the most respected of the national daily newspapers, had also joined the strike. “We have to throw all our forces into the battle”, radical Left leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon declared, “People will not surrender, Mr. President”.

Ongoing strikes against the pension reforms continued into a second week among refuse collectors in at least 15 cities, and 10,000 tons of rubbish piled up in the streets of Paris. Continuing strikes by dockers, energy workers, airport staff and others show no signs of slowing down, and blockades of motorways, fuel depots, bus garages, wholesale distribution centres, tax centres, power stations, rubbish incinerators, ports and railway lines have been organized around the country. Energy workers, under the label of “Robin Hoods”, have taken over electricity distribution in some areas, and are organizing power cuts for Macronist town halls or regional police headquarters, and free electricity for hospitals and similar institutions.

On Wednesday night, the posh audience at the first evening of a contemporary dance show in the prestigious Théâtre du Châtelet in Paris had their leisure interrupted by theatre union demonstrators waving banners and singing songs (some of the audience left in disgust). Thursday morning, columns of farmers’ tractors were blocking main roads in some regions, while a group of 300 actors and personalities from culture and entertainment published an open letter asking Macron to withdraw the law.

Every evening this week there have been nighttime demonstrations in a score of cities, with violent police chasing thousands of young demonstrators, and rubbish bins being burned in the streets. Thursday night the doors of the town hall in Bordeaux and parts of a police station in Lorient were burned. A teaching assistant had her thumb blown off by a police grenade at a demonstration in Rouen.

It is impossible to list all the different strikes and protests, but important to note that the general strike we need has not yet arrived.

Macron forced his pensions bill through by decree on the 16th of March, avoiding putting it to a parliamentary vote which he would have lost. He then survived a no confidence motion in parliament by nine votes, which would have overthrown the government and its Prime Minister, Elizabeth Borne. After all this, Macron addressed the nation in a major lunchtime interview on Wednesday the 22nd. He warned his listeners of the dangers of “sedition” and tried to compare the young protestors burning rubbish bins in the streets of Paris this week to Trump’s far right putschist thugs who attacked the capitol on the 6th of January 2021! He insisted that his reform was necessary to save our pension system.

The least one can say is that he convinced practically no one. Opinion polls showed that 61% of the population thought his interview had provoked more anger. 7% felt it would help to calm things down, and 27% thought it would change nothing. Even the mainstream press were highly critical. “It will be hard to find a way out of the situation now” wrote one major editorial. Laurent Berger, leader of the least combative of the major union confederations (the one which, four years ago, had supported Macron’s previous failed attempt to slash pensions) accused Macron of lying and declared that the movement must continue.

Police violence is on the rise and the government has even been trying to requisition oil refinery workers to force them to work, which has provoked more anger and led other groups to join the strikes. So the movement shows no sign of calming down, but at the same time the national union leaders who have been fixing the regular days of action are still refusing to call for an indefinite general strike. Given the present level of anger, and the fact that 90% of employed people are opposed to the pension reform, this should be the obvious option. 

Foreseeing the future is not easy. Macron now technically has the right to sign his bill into law next week. In normal circumstances, it is far more difficult to organize opposition to a law which has already been put into effect. But these are not normal circumstances … and this is France ! In 2006, a law imposing worse conditions for those under 21 years old on work contracts and instituting a two year trial period for young people in jobs was voted and signed into law, before a huge social explosion sent then Prime Minister Juppé running for cover, and forced President Chirac to throw his law in the rubbish bin.

Macron no longer seems to have a plan beyond police repression and blaming the Left for the “terrible chaos in our streets”. Three million people demonstrated Thursday, and Thursday night 172 were arrested by the police. Not exactly the apocalypse!

We need to put as much pressure as possible on national union leaders to call an indefinite general strike, and soon. They do not want to do this, because they see the world through the eyes of professional negotiators. But the general strike is necessary, and no other body has the prestige and authority to make it happen. There is still everything to play for.

The next day of action is set for Tuesday the 28th, and must be used to build broader action still.

How should we respond to the new Israeli protest movement?

Should the Left intervene on demonstrations to “save Israeli democracy”?


22/03/2023

Israel’s new ruling coalition, headed by Benjamin Netanyahu, has provoked a worldwide moral panic. His Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, proudly calls himself a “homophobe, racist, fascist”. The new government is proposing a so-called “override clause”, which will make itself immune to any decisions taken by the High Court of Justice.

The Washington Post reports that in 2005, new Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir “led his neighbors on a reign of terror through Palestinian villages — torching homes, mosques, cars and olive groves.” Ben-Gvir’s election victory was accompanied by a new wave of pogroms by armed settlers, who were (even more) emboldened by the new right wing leadership.

The government has also been met with demonstrations of an unprecedented scale within 1948 occupied Palestine itself (writers note: to avoid confusion, the rest of this article will refer to the country as “Israel”. I hope to return to the discussion about what we should call the State in a different article). Half a million people – 7% of the Israeli population – demonstrated throughout the country including 200,000 in Tel Aviv. Demonstrators say that they are against a possible dictatorship. At the same time, the demos are bedecked with Israeli flags and addressed by leading military figures.

A small number of protests have invited Palestinian speakers – under very limited conditions. As activist Yoav Haifawi reported from the relatively liberal city of Haifa: “On February 18, the designated Arab speaker, Reem Hazzan, didn’t show up. It was soon shared on social media and later published in Haaretz that the organisers were not happy with the contents of the speech that she intended to deliver … She was told to submit an amended text, or she would not be allowed to speak. … The organisers were speaking to her, a representative of the Arab public, from a position of power. They duplicated inside the protest movement the same undemocratic attitudes that characterise the Israeli state. She consulted her comrades and decided not to submit any new text. That night there was no Arab speaker in the Haifa demonstration.”

Last week in Berlin, we were confronted with similar protests, when Netanyahu announced that he would be visiting Berlin. Israelis opposed to Netanyahu called a demonstration for “Jewish communities and other friends of Israel” (my emphasis) under the title “Saving Israeli Democracy”.  Some Israeli anti-Zionists argued for intervening in these protests. Others (including most if not all Palestinians) refused to attend a demonstration where Palestinians are clearly unwelcome. This article tries to explain what happened and why.

The Jewish Anti-Zionist response

By chance, shortly after Netanyahu’s visit was announced, Jüdisch-Israelischer Dissens Leipzig (JID) held an online meeting about the new Israeli government. Palestinians were invited to the meeting, and explicitly encouraged to make contributions, but as far as I can tell, most people attending were Israeli anti-Zionists.

Although JID is an Israeli group, it is one of the few organisations on the German Left which explicitly supports the Palestinian struggle.  The two speakers at the event – Yossi Bartal and Michael Sappir have both written articles for theleftberlin.com. Both speakers were clear that the current Israeli state, which systematically discriminates against Palestinians, is not a democracy and not worth saving, and that the demonstration was aimed at restoring the status quo. Nonetheless, they argued for an intervention, for building a block inside the demo, and pointing out the hypocrisy of a demonstration which called for democracy while excluding Palestinians.

As Yossi argued, the small anti-Zionist Jewish Left was making similar interventions  in Israel. This is true, to an extent, although it is not always wise to import tactics from Israel to Germany, home of both the largest Palestinian diaspora in Europe, and where the dominant narrative systematically excludes Palestinians. In addition, the Israeli anti-Zionist Left may be tiny, but it is also divided on whether to intervene in the demos against Netanyahu. Some, like the Israeli Palestinian One Democratic State Group said that they did not want to participate in “a protest movement intended to preserve a racist colonial regime.”

Intervening meant standing inside a sea of Israeli flags, while being forbidden from carrying a Palestinian flag. It ran a clear risk of merely legimitising and normalising a demonstration which was unambiguously supporting Zionist oppression. 

What happened in Berlin?

In the end, a number of demonstrations took place in Berlin on Thursday, 16th March. There were two demonstrations called by Palestinian organisations which took place 100 metres away from each other outside the Bundestag. These soon merged to form one single demo of around 200 people. The Israeli Jewish anti-Zionists called for participation in the Palestinian demos, saying that their intervention on the Zionist demo was not an alternative to actions called by Palestinians, which were happening at a different time. 

Having said this, there is a difference between intention and effect. Although the “interveners” called for people to attend both the Palestinian demo and their intervention at the Israeli demo, it was clear that the German media would concentrate on the “intra-Israeli” debate which fits the narrative of “good” and “bad” Zionists. An opportunity to exclusively call people to attend the Palestinian demo was missed. 

After the Palestinian protest, we walked towards the U-Bahn. Police told us to not go to the nearest station – as this would require us to go past the “Save Israeli Democracy” protest. If we insisted on walking past, they told us to remove our Kuffiyahs because, I quote: “if the demonstrators saw people wearing Palestinian scarves, they might be ‘provoked'”.

Let me just remind you that the other demo was not supporting Netanyahu – it was supposed to be for democracy. But merely walking past it with a symbol of Palestinian clothing was deemed to be “provocative.” Similarly, when Israeli Jewish activists who had been taking part in the Palestinian demonstration tried to attend the intervention at Pariser Platz, police tried to prevent them getting through. Two people standing opposite the demonstration also held up Palestinian flags. They were surrounded by police and told that they must take down their flags, or they would be removed them from the square. 

But maybe this was just about the police? Surely the organisers of a demonstration for democracy would welcome anyone who opposed Netanyahu’s government? Well, not really. A video which later appeared on Twitter shows one of the demo organisers asking someone to take away his Palestine flag because “this will damage everything that we are trying to do” and that “we want to create a dialogue.” Liberals who enthusiastically supported the Israeli demo on social media must answer two questions – what exactly were the demo organisers trying to do, and who were they seeking a dialogue with?

Once more, the demonstration was covered in Israeli flags, which would make it difficult for most Palestinians to attend. For Palestinians, the Israeli flag is much more than a piece of cloth. It is a symbol of their expulsion and oppression and stands in contradiction to Palestinian freedom and self-determination. It expects the occupied to accept the supremacy of the occupier. Waving the flag reminds Palestinians of their unequal status in Israel and their continuing dispossession and oppression. Not for the first time in liberal Israeli politics, Palestinians were seen as less worthy of talking to than supporters of the occupation.

In the end, about 50 Jewish anti-Zionists did organise an anti-occupation block inside the Israeli rally on Pariser Platz. People in this block held placards in Hebrew with the slogans “There is no democracy with occupation”, “Occupation corrupts”, and “Legal Reform = Legalising Apartheid”. They reported little harassment, as long as they did not carry Palestinian flags. It is unclear whether they persuaded any of the people attending the demo to consider Palestinian rights.

Conclusion: How can Palestine be freed? And by whom?

In considering our strategy, we must begin with an assessment of who our main audience is – who do we think has the power to change society in Israel and Palestine? History shows that the main opposition to colonialism never comes from within the colonisers themselves. No serious anti-colonialists would centre the fight against the Raj in India on the British occupiers, or expect the fight for Algerian liberation to be led by French Pieds Noirs.

Independent Palestinian German researcher and writer Anna-Esther Younes argues: “Although all liberation movements have been led by those who were oppressed and enslaved – it seems to only matter or become a public issue when white people (or Israelis) – predominantly men – speak about it. Palestinians have been saying for a long time that you can’t have a democracy while practising settler colonialism and apartheid,  but their opinions and theorizations are usually erased in public. It wasn’t white allies who liberated South Africa. White people in SA lived with Apartheid, not under it – much like those Ashkenazim in Israel today, who can be militarist and anti-Palestinian, yet fight for ‘their’ rights to liberty and freedom.”

If I understand the strategy of intervening in the Zionist demos correctly, it is that Israel is in such a situation of flux (with interest rates rising 8 times in 10 months), that is is possible to win small but significant numbers of Israelis to a pro-Palestinian position. I remember hearing this argument before – during the social protests of 2011. These protests took some inspiration from the Occupy movement and even borrowed a chant based on the Arab Spring: “The people demand social justice”. At the high point, in August and September, hundreds of thousands of people protested throughout Israel. There was a renewed wave of protest 2 years later, when thousands took part in 30 demonstrations in a “Day of Rage” throughout Israel.

This movement never seriously addressed the rights of Palestinians – despite the attempts of some anti-Zionists to intervene. As early as August 2011, protests were called off after Israel launched an air strike on Gaza. The whole movement collapsed after it could not survive the call for national unity during the prolonged assault on Gaza in 2014.

A small number of individual Israelis have played a courageous part in the fight for Palestinian freedom. But Israeli society as a whole has and will only play a marginal role in the liberation of Palestine. This means that demonstrations, which openly reject or exclude the participation of Palestinians and their supporters, cannot be our focus.

Two years ago, on the anniversary of the Nakba, an unprecedented 15,000 demonstrated in Berlin for Palestinian rights. Last year, all demonstrations around the anniversary were banned, and people who appeared anywhere near the site of demonstration sites were arrested and fined over €300 each.  In particular, the police picked out anyone who looked Palestinian and wore the “colours of the water melon” (red, white, black and green, which are also the colours of the Palestinian flag). Their trials are still going on.

The level of repression has, to an extent, demoralised a pro-Palestine movement in Berlin which was starting to revitalise itself. We now have 2 months until the 75th anniversary of the Nakba to build demonstrations, which – in contrast to those who seemingly want to “save Israeli democracy” – state clearly that there can be no democracy based on the expropriation and oppression of Palestinians.

Palestinian voices have been excluded too long from this debate, so I’ll conclude with some words by Palestinian activists in Germany. Journalist Hebh Jamal comments: “Palestinians protested when Gaza was bombed, when over 200 were killed in 2021 and over 50 just last summer. We protested when Shireen Abu Akleh was murdered- and we have been protested for decades now. The demos that took place in Berlin, by the liberal Zionist bloc, is selective outrage and I’m so exhausted by the hypocrisy. There is no protecting democracy when a crucial part of the state’s function is to brutalise, segregate and occupy a people. What type of democracy are you actually fighting for? The irony…”

Palestinian activist Ramsy Kilani believes that strategy is key: “Protests against Netanyahu, which were organised at short notice, have shown the potential for unification, but also possible problems and areas where we don’t all agree. Future Palestine solidarity in Germany requires us to develop our understanding of which orientation our movement needs.”

The fight for Palestinian Liberation is being led by Palestinians, as it should be. People who want to support them should pay heed to their important strategic discussions if we are going to build a movement here which can contribute towards the end of occupation, in Palestine and worldwide.

Revolt against pensions attack – Macron losing his grip

Left MPs call for more Street Protests and Strikes continue after Macron forces through his Pensions Bill. John Mullen reports from France


21/03/2023

On Monday 20th March, Macron’s government escaped being overthrown by the French parliament by seven votes, after he had forced through by decree the attack on pensions which has caused a mass uprising here. Macron’s government is under so much pressure that most of his own MPs stayed away from parliament during the debate on the motion of no confidence!

His bill can now be signed into law, in theory. And under normal circumstances, activists have tremendous difficulty mobilizing people against laws once they have been passed. But these are not normal circumstances, and the revolt continues to deepen. In the parliament, as the vote was announced, dozens of radical left MPs held up placards reading “See you on the streets!”.

Ongoing strikes by refuse collectors against the law have spread to new towns. All France’s oil refineries, which were being blockaded, have now stopped production (and it takes a week to start them up again). 1500 petrol stations are already short of fuel. Many thousands of transport workers and dockers are still on strike. 30% of flights were cancelled at two major airports on Monday. The staff at the Opera in Lyon closed down all shows for the weekend. Dozens more strikes continue in different sectors.

Motorways were being joyfully blockaded in scores of  places, including Reims and Rennes. TV stations had tremendous difficulty finding drivers in traffic jams to condemn the movement, so hated is this pensions bill. Bus depots and nuclear power stations, docks and universities are also blockaded. Groups of Yellow Vests have occupied the roundabouts they protested at four years back. It is impossible to list all the protests, although they are often not yet generalized – most universities and high schools are at work, and most trains and buses are running. 

Once the pensions bill was passed last Friday by decree, without a parliamentary vote, a new opinion poll showed that 68% of the entire population are “angry”, while only seven per cent are “satisfied”. Among blue-collar workers and low level office workers, 80% are angry (only 59% of management and senior technical staff are). Even 25% of those who generally vote Macron are angry (18% are satisfied, 41% are indifferent)! 24% of those who generally vote for Macron support the ongoing strikes and blockades, as do 88% of those who generally vote for the party of radical left leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon, and 68% of those who generally vote for the far right. Even a couple of Macron’s own members of parliament are calling on him to back down.

With this level of public support, the main question has to be that of leadership. The national leaders of the eight union confederations, in a rare show of unity, have been regularly calling for days of strikes and demonstrations. There is another day of action on Thursday 23rd March, which will be crucially important. But the national leaders are not calling for an unlimited general strike, although the potential is obvious. And sorely needed strike funds are generally left to local union branches, whereas a national appeal by union leaders would raise millions of euros in no time at all. In addition, national leaders discouraged teachers from striking this week during the national baccalauréat exams. They are thus missing the opportunity to call for the exams to be postponed as they were for Covid a couple of years back. The momentum we need to win will not come from above.

As soon as it became clear on Monday evening that Macron’s government had survived by the skin of its teeth (under huge pressure from the movement, 19 right wing MPs voted for the no confidence motion), spontaneous  demonstrations broke out across the country – in Paris, Rennes, Toulouse, Strasbourg, Nancy, Amiens, Dijon, Nantes, and many smaller towns. In several places, demonstrators made good use of the piles of rubbish bins piled up due to the refuse collection strike. In Paris, demonstrators played cat and mouse with violent police forces, while singing the songs popular on recent demonstrations, but also a song about Louis XVI being decapitated and the risks Macron might suffer the same fate!

After a couple of weeks’ silence and hoping it would all blow over, Macron has decided to appear on national television tomorrow lunchtime in a major interview. Let’s hope that he inflames the situation even more and his government gets thrown out very soon.