Board & Mission Statement
Why IAM?
About Us
Articles by IAM Associates
Ben-Gurion University
Hebrew University
University of Haifa
Tel Aviv University
Other Institutions
Boycott Calls Against Israel
Israelis in Non-Israeli Universities
Anti-Israel Petitions Supported by Israeli Academics
General Articles
Anti-Israel Conferences
Anti-Israel Academic Resolutions
Lectures Interrupted
Activists Profiles
Readers Forum
On the Brighter Side
How can I complain?
Contact Us / Subscribe
Tel Aviv University
[TAU] Adi Ophir: "Ethnic cleansing would spell the end of the occupation", Palestine Centers annual conference, Washington


 November 6, 2007
Mechanics of “Politicide:” Palestinians since 1967

The Palestine Center
Friday, November 1, 2007
Speaker: Professor Adi Ophir, Cohn Institute for the History & Philosophy of Science & Ideas, Tel Aviv University
Mrs. Tal Arbel, Harvard University, Boston
Professor John ethQuigley, Professor in Law, Ohio State University

Summary by Mary Seekins

The Palestine Center’s annual conference was entitled “the ‘Politicide’ of the Palestinian People.” Baruch Kimmerling’s book Politicide: Ariel Sharon’s War against the Palestinians, and his definition of ‘politicide’ “a process that has, as its ultimate goal, the dissolution of the
Palestinian people’s existence as a legitimate…political…entity,” was the theme of the conference. In the first panel Dr. Adi Ophir focused on control through space, Mrs. Tal Arbel focused on control at the
checkpoints, and Dr. John Quigley focused on manipulation of law in order to keep control.

Dr. Adi Ophir said the two ways Israel maintains control in the occupied territories are submission and separation. Ophir explained that submission and separation are working in opposite directions; submission requires constant contact, best illustrated by the checkpoints, whereas separation requires a lack of contact. This is why, he argued, submission and separation are in constant flux to balance each other out. When new lines of separation are drawn a new form of submission is needed, and visa versa. This is why, Ophir argued, there are two possible outcomes; ethnic cleansing, or a political resolution. Ethnic cleansing would spell the end of the occupation, and the end of the need for both separation and submission. A political resolution, on the other hand, would have to end submission to create two states and eliminated the need for separation.

Tal Arbel followed with her discussion of the Israeli occupation’s rule by checkpoints, which focused on the technology that the Israelis use to control the movement of the Palestinian people. The Israelis do not rely solely on the different types of checkpoints – roadblocks, earth mounds, road gate and trenches – but, Arbel argued, also the placement of the checkpoints. In most cases the checkpoints are set up to surround a village or town, she said, in order to cut off the people from other towns.

International law states that an occupation cannot harm a population and must be temporary. Dr. John Quigley said this makes all the practices the other panelists discussed illegal. However, Quigley explained, the Israelis have also used international law to legitimize the occupation. In the 1967 war the Israelis took the land of the West Bank and Gaza from the Jordanians and the Egyptians, respectively, who were holding this
territory unlawfully, after they took in the 1948 war. Furthermore, he explained, Israel argues the settlements in the West Bank are also legal, because they do not displace people; it is only after their establishment that people are harmed. Based on this, Quigley’s final argument was that the violations are so belligerent that, unfortunately, there are no applicable legal practices to combat the Israeli occupation.




Back to "Tel Aviv University"Send Response
Top Page
    Developed by Sitebank & Powered by Blueweb Internet Services
    Visitors: 243837919Send to FriendAdd To FavoritesMake It HomepagePrint version