City council rejects Rafah sister city, dialogue

author : Phan Nguyen topic : Israel Lobby | Olympia City Council | Olympia-Rafah Sister City Project | Palestine | Rachel Corrie | Rafah

by Phan Nguyen

On Tuesday, April 17, the Olympia City Council opened a public hearing on the proposal by the Olympia-Rafah Sister City Project (ORSCP) to formalize a sister city relationship with the Palestinian city of Rafah. The public communications period had begun with a racist diatribe against a supposed Asian threat, in reference to the recent Virginia Tech shootings. It followed with several racist diatribes against a supposed Palestinian/Arab/Muslim threat, and it ended with the City Council pandering to this supposed threat and denying formal sister city status with Rafah.

50 people spoke in favor of the sister city proposal, while 24 spoke against. The city council voted 4-2 against the proposal, with TJ Johnson and Laura Ware voting in favor. Joe Hyer was absent, and all others voted against.Thus it was ironic that those who spoke in support outnumbered the opposition 2 to 1, but that the proposal was shot down by the city council 2 to 1.

Racism at the City Council meeting

The first speaker during the public communications period was local resident Jim Reeve, better known in the downtown community as "Moses," whose diatribe warned of an "Oriental" threat coming from an Asian or Korean Communist invasion, referencing the ethnicity of the Virginia Tech gunman. Although the City Council allowed Moses to speak, Councilmember Laura Ware turned her back to him in protest, and Councilmember Doug Mah left the room, both of whom recognized that the racist content of Moses' rant was unacceptable.

Moses is a downtown staple and a regular speaker at the City Council meetings. His rants are seldom coherent and are easily dismissed. However, he was followed by several speakers who utilized the same fear tactics and racist rhetoric in order to delegitimize the Rafah sister city proposal.

The opponents of the proposal did not need to resort to the most explicit epithets, such as "raghead" or "sand nigger" to get their point across. It was enough to play on the same one-dimensional stereotypes that enabled the Bush administration to wage war on Iraq.

Several terms were repeated by the opponents throughout the meeting: terrorism, violence, Hamas. These terms were useful because they fit the common western racist stereotype of Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims, and could be used without qualification. Rather than provide specific objections to the sister city proposal, the issue could be clouded with imagery of post-9/11 and "War on Terror" era threats.

Thus speakers in opposition hoped to shoot down the proposal by making unqualified statements that referred to Palestinians as "bloodthirsty" and having "no shared values" with the people of Olympia. During the public hearing, the word "terrorism" and its variants were invoked with possibly more frequency than in a State of the Union speech.

Consequently, opponents of the sister city had little to say about Rafah. Or else, everything they said sounded the same: Rafah, which has a population of 145,000, is a city "associated with terrorism," "full of terrorists," "a terrorist-dominated society," a "terrorist city" with "a terrorist government", a "gateway to terrorism," a "city ruled by the old guard terrorists PLO and the new guard Iranian sponsored terrorists Hamas" in a "country [sic] . . . still overwhelmingly killing people in a democratic society", "a violent country, a violent city," a "city steeped in violent behavior."

Prior to the hearing, letters addressed to the City Council were just as replete with misinformation and evoked racist and xenophobic fears. There were claims that Rafah is "run by Hamas," which "sides openly with al Qaeda," that visitors from Rafah were potential terrorists and could "endanger the lives of our citizens and our soldiers stationed in Fort Lewis and McChord [Air Force Base]." Delegates from Rafah would come to Olympia to "spew . . . venomous hatred" and lend "encouragement to Neo-Nazis, skinheads and Klanners." Rafah was a "city filled w/ (and run by) radical Muslims, i.e. terrorists whose chief goal in life is to kill all the Jews and destroy Israel." "Rafah does not reflect Olympia's values." "Rafah does not reflect our views and is the home of Hamas." Palestinians are taught to hate "Jews and Christians, particularly those of Israel and the United States" They do not "want peace with Israel." The parents of Rachel Corrie had previously been "kidnapped and held for ransom." The sister city proposal was a "publicity stunt" by an organization that had already established a relationship between Rafah and "Madison, Alabama [sic]." These claims, in writing, came from the same people who spoke on April 17, and the claims were all false.

At the City Council meeting, two non-Jewish speakers uttered the phrase, "never again," thus comparing the prospect of a Palestinian sister city with the Jewish Holocaust, while one Jewish speaker likened Rafah to Nazi Germany. Two speakers claimed that Palestinians wanted to "drive the Jews into the sea," which is an old Israeli propaganda line, while another person absurdly accused Arabs of committing the Armenian genocide.

Some speakers sought to connect the violent stereotypes of Palestinians with ORSCP itself, and attempted to delegitimize ORSCP by portraying it as some sort of militant group. In the Olympian's online comments section, Matthew Litwin, a member of the Olympia Planning Commission, rhetorically compared ORSCP to the National Rifle Association. At the City Council meeting, Litwin attempted to shock the audience by revealing that the ORSCP website contained inflammatory blog entries "with titles such as 'Illustrating Occupation' and 'Israel's Increased Isolation.'" Litwin did not explain why he was offended by these titles. The entry entitled "Illustrating Occupation" was a series of pastel drawings created by Palestinians that literally illustrated life under what is internationally recognized as occupation. The artwork included images such as a peace dove breaking free from metal bars and barbed wire, and portraits of strong Palestinian women. Meanwhile, the article entitled "Israel's Increased Isolation" was written by a prominent Jewish commentator, M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum, who writes as a Zionist concerned with Israel's survival. Rosenberg's article was also printed in mainstream Israeli publications. These were the most extreme entries that Litwin was able to cite.

Litwin also attempted to discredit ORSCP through guilt by association, claiming that the "leadership of ORSCP overlaps closely with that of the International Solidarity Movement," which is patently false. In the Olympian's comments section, Litwin elaborated. "Those who run and fund ORSCP are also those who run and fund ISM, which supports armed resistance against Israel, including its unarmed citizens." At the City Council hearing, Litwin claimed to be quoting from ISM's charter, which ISM does not have. More likely he was selectively quoting ISM's online FAQ. The FAQ clearly states that ISM, which operates under a policy of nonviolence, "does not support or condone any acts of terrorism," something that Litwin deliberately avoided mentioning. Regardless, ORSCP and ISM are separate entities that do not share leadership or funding.

On the Olympian's online comments section, Litwin claimed official status would make ORSCP an arm of the city government, which is disingenuous, as no one assumes that the organization that maintains Olympia's sister city relationship with Kato City, the Olympia-Yashiro Sister City Association, is an arm of the city government.

Also attempting to discredit ORSCP was Rabbi Seth Goldstein of Temple Beth Hatfiloh, who quoted an excerpt from ORSCP's bylaws, about "demonstrat[ing] solidarity in a common struggle for a just and prompt peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." Goldstein somehow intepreted this to mean that the City Council and the people of Olympia would be forced to "stand in solidarity with the struggle of the Palestinian people in whatever form that stuggle takes," which is not what the bylaws state.

The divisiveness argument

One of the most frequently evoked arguments against the sister city proposal was its supposed divisiveness. It was this "divisiveness" that convinced the City Council members to reject the proposal. In fact, the supposedly divisive nature was mentioned so frequently at the City Council meeting that it was often left unqualified, thus leading to a circular argument: "I disagree with the proposal; therefore it is divisive. It is divisive; therefore I disagree with the proposal."

Divisiveness itself should be granted little weight, as it does not address the quality of an argument. Rather than directly arguing with an issue, one is merely dimissing the issue on the basis that it is potentially arguable and simply for the sake that not everyone agrees. Politicians frequently accuse their opponents of being divisive in order to demonize their opponents and also to frame themselves as being above the petty arguments. Thus George Bush campaigned under the role of the "uniter, not the divider."

That is also why the divisiveness stance was so popular among the opponents of the sister city proposal, who had so little to criticize about the specific actions that would be conducted under a sister city.

The divisiveness argument is a rhetorical tool to dismiss the opposition without addressing the opposition's points. It also fails to account for the possibility that one side disagrees simply because that side is wrong. Thus arguments against the sister city proposal based on misinformation and racial stereotypes were valid enough to qualify as divisive.

Additionally, the nature of the divisiveness was never explained. If the divisiveness was split along the lines of the Palestine -- Israel conflict, then one would assume that the proponents of the sister city would object to an Israeli sister city, which was not the case. In fact, several proponents of the Rafah sister city welcomed a proposal for an Israeli sister city. Thus the divisiveness came solely from the parties opposed to the Rafah sister city and not from the proponents.

Amidst the rhetoric of "divisiveness," what the opposing City Councilmembers failed to consider was the greater diversity of the people in support of the proposal. In a letter to the City Council, Thurston County PUD Commissioner Alan Corwin had implied that ORSCP had not made an effort "to include a cross section of people in Olympia" and that they "represent[ed] a narrow constituency." In fact, ORSCP had secured a large number of endorsements within the community, and supporters who spoke had come from diverse backgrounds, Jewish, Muslim, several Christian denominations, and ethnic backgrounds, and even represented a broader age group. Despite Corwin's claims, the 50 supporting speakers were much more diverse than the 24 who opposed the project.

In March, Corwin had stated that he would "mobilize the Jewish community and others" to oppose the sister city proposal. However, by the time of the public hearing, there were approximately 13 or 14 Jews who spoke against the proposal, compared to 9 Jews who spoke in favor -- not a significant difference. It could be said, then, that the "Jewish community" was itself divided on the issue.

Who opposed the proposal?

Of the 24 who spoke in opposition, the majority, about 13 or 14, were opposed because it conflicted with their individual Jewish identity. Three seemed to be Christian Zionists who opposed the proposal because they believe it is their religious duty to defend Israel. Among the Christian Zionists was a "prayer board" member of Daniel's House of Prayer and the fundamentalist Westwood Baptist Church, which hosts a "Watchmen for Israel" program. There was also a woman who presented herself as a "Bible-believing Christian who deeply loves and supports the Jewish people."

Three or four opponents were non-Jewish right wingers, such as Dan Cathers, chairman of the Thurston County Republicans. Three days before the City Council meeting, Cathers sent an email to fellow area Republicans to come and oppose the linkage with a city "so closely aligned with terrorism," suggesting that the Olympia City Council might "embrace the terrorists of Hamas." His call produced very little turnout.

Another right winger who spoke in opposition was Tumwater resident Jeff Brigham, who is known to the local progressive community for staging small counterprotests at many demonstrations, such as the Ehren Watada rallies and the Thriftway boycott, usually with a sign that says "God bless Israeli bulldozers," in reference to Rachel Corrie's killing. "God bless the bulldozer that ran over her and God bless the driver for the good work he did!" Brigham once wrote. (Ironically, the sign evokes the reprehensible tactics of Fred Phelps, whose followers attend funerals of US soldiers with signs that say "God bless IEDs.") In fact Brigham produced one of the strangest non sequiturs during the City Council meeting when, instead of explaining his opposition to the sister city proposal, he simply listed off several Israeli women who were killed by Palestinians and who were united by sharing a first name, "Rachel."

Also representing the extreme right was Terry Schrader from Centralia, a volunteer with the xenophobic vigilante group, the Minutemen. He was present with his partner, Mimi Silver, who wore a "Tzahal" (Israeli military) T-shirt. Both of them share xenophobic fears that the United States is "becoming a third world nation" due to a mass influx of "illegals."

An Israeli sister city?

Many opposing speakers suggested a relationship with an Israeli sister city to "balance" the Palestinian sister city relationship. Dan Cathers encouraged ORSCP "to work with many of the people that have already said tonight they would be willing to help find an appropriate Israeli city and form a trilateral sister city arrangement." What he failed to notice was that no one actually volunteered to work on forming an Israeli sister city. The closest thing to a volunteer was Evergreen and St. Martins faculty Sherri Shulman, who said she was "very willing to work on finding a compatible city in the West Bank or in Gaza as well as one in Israel," implying that she personally would not accept a sister city with Rafah, even in a trilateral relationship.

Although ORSCP has publicly stated that it would support an Israeli sister city and is willing to share information on establishing such a relationship, no one expressed a willingness to actually make it a reality. And since the Olympia City Council rejected the Rafah proposal, none of the proponents for an Israeli sister city have followed up or taken the initiative. This would indicate that the argument for an Israeli sister city was merely rhetorical, another tool used to indirectly reject the Rafah sister city proposal. Once it served its purpose, the tool was dropped. As long as no Israeli sister city is pursued, the Rafah sister city has no chance of receiving greater approval from the City Council, and the Rafah sister city project is completely at the mercy of its opponents.

Making an Israeli sister city a condition for having a Palestinian sister city is itself chauvinistic, if not downright racist, as it implies that Israel owns the Palestinians, and that the Palestinians are not allowed to express themselves without Israeli approval. Hence this type of ownership becomes an extension of Israel's physical occupation of the Palestinians.

An extension of the occupation

All expressions of Palestinian humanity in the west have to be approved by people claiming to represent the Israeli side or claiming to be the "Jewish community," for the sake of "balance." This includes not only political and historical expressions, but also cultural. The following are examples of how Palestinian narratives and experiences are regulated in the name of "balance" or "Jewish sensitivities."

In 2004, an art exhibit by Palestinian-American Emily Jacir was scheduled to appear at Wichita State University's Ulrich Museum in Wichita, Kansas. The exhibit, entitled "Where We Come From," documented the artist fulfilling the wishes of Palestinians who were unable to return home or to visit their loved ones. The wishes ranged from "Go to Haifa play soccer with the first Palestinian boy you see," to, "Go to . . . Jerusalem and pay my phone bill," to, "Visit my mother, hug and kiss her." One Wichita rabbi denounced the work as "outrageously inflammatory . . . a blatant anti-Semitic attempt to breed hatred." The Jewish Federation of Kansas demanded that they be allowed to place their own poster and literature outside the gallery in order to "balance" out the exhibit. The museum director refused, so the Federation appealed to the University administration, who approved it without even looking at the proposed literature. Proponents of artistic expression criticized the administration's willingness to modify the art exhibit at the expense of the artist, and the administration eventually reversed their decision. However, protesters distributed leaflets outside the gallery denouncing the exhibit as "a hate filled, inflammatory, anti-Israel display." (excerpts from the exhibit are available online: http://www.universes-in-universe.de/islam/eng/2003/04/jacir )

Also in 2004, an art exhibition entitled "Made in Palestine" faced similar controversy in New York, when a state assemblyman, Ryan Karber, called on Westchester County officials to cancel the exhibit, claiming that the artwork was "distasteful and divisive" and were "offensive to me as a Jew, as an American, and as a civilized human being." Unsurprisingly, Karber had not yet seen the exhibit. Karber's objections were joined by another state legislator and two county legislators, with support from local Jewish groups. Palestinian-American Remi Kanazi, writing about the controversy over the exhibit, noted, "Israel is not the subject of these works; Palestinian experience is." One of the artists in the exhibit, Palestinian-American Samia Halaby, stated, "People allow the mass media to fill their head with a discourse that is not their own experience. Lacking knowledge of Palestine and of Palestinian experience, they assume that the propaganda that fills the airways and their heads is reality. They see what Israel has created and publicizes -- Palestinians who are poor people wearing rags, suffering malnutrition, and throwing stones. They do not see our history and do not know who we are." Elsewhere, Halaby noted, "It's very, very, hard for a person who's not paying extraordinary attention to know that there is a very ancient society and culture among Palestinians that is both interesting and enriching."

In 2005, a Montreal library received complaints over an exhibit of photographs by Iranian-Canadian photojournalist Zahra Kazemi, who had been tortured to death by Iranian police in 2003. Out of 23 photos that depicted her travels to Iran, Afghanistan, and Palestine, the library, responding to complaints that the exhibit was "anti-Israel," removed five photographs that depicted scenes of Palestinians. The captions accompanying the photos stated that Kazemi "illustrated the daily life of Palestinians and the problems they faced as they sought to preserve their land and their identity." When Kazemi's son demanded that the library display all the photos or display none of them, the library chose the latter. Montreal's Jewish Alliance Against the Occupation criticized the library's censorship and stated, "A library, of all places, is a place where all opinions, different opinions, are aired." Ironically, Kazemi was killed after allegedly taking photos unacceptable by the Iranian government.

At Brandeis University in May 2006, an exhibit of art created by Palestinian children and organized by a Jewish Israeli student at Brandeis was removed without her knowledge, following several complaints that it was "one-sided."

In 2004, a Swedish art installation seeking to examine the rationale of Palestinian suicide bombers, and created by two artists, one of whom was a Jew raised in Israel, was vandalized by the Israeli ambassador to Sweden, an act that was supported by then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. The Los Angeles -- based Simon Wiesenthal Center then initiated a campaign to bombard the Swedish prime minister's office with email to remove the art installation, incorrectly claiming that it glorified a "Palestinian homicide bomber."

There are two sides to the Palestinian story: the Palestinian side and the non-Palestinian (i.e., the Israeli, or, in some contexts, the "Jewish") side. In the United States, the non-Palestinian side has precedence and defines the Palestinian narrative. Many of the opponents to the sister city proposal used arguments that were provided to them by the Israeli government. Thus Rafah is a "gateway to terror," as one person explained it at the City Council hearing, because that is how Israel defined it in May 1994, in order to justify the military invasion dubbed "Operation Rainbow," which demolished 166 homes, killed 44 Palestinians (overwhelmingly civilian), and destroyed half the city's roads. In that time period, all Israeli military and governmental spokespersons coordinated their message by stating that "Rafah is the gateway to terror." The purpose of the military operation was ostensibly to destroy weapons-smuggling tunnels, but the actual pattern of destruction indicated that the real purpose was to create a larger Palestinian-free "buffer zone" between Rafah and Egypt.

All we need to know about Rafah comes from Israel's narrative: there are tunnels underneath. Weapons are smuggled. Rockets are fired. Terrorism. Violence. Hatred toward Jews. It serves Israel's purposes to control both sides of the story.

This definition of Rafah is even physical, as the former Israeli settlement of Morag was strategically built between the two Palestinian cities of Rafah and Khan Younis to disrupt the Palestinian social fabric (Ariel Sharon referred to the strategic placement of settlements such as Morag as "Jewish 'fingers'"). Northwest of Rafah, the Gush Katif settlement bloc restricted access to the Mediterranean coast. Southwest of Rafah, Israel's "buffer zone" between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, known as the "Philadelphi Corridor," was widened by destroying the neighborhoods closest to the zone.

Rafah has always been defined by Israel.

By accepting the divisiveness argument, the City Council legitimized the racist stereotypes offered by the opponents of the Rafah sister city. The City Council's role as leaders is not to avoid divisive subjects. It didn't deter them from passing the quite divisive sidewalk ordinance. But in this case, they opted for the safer decision of maintaining the status quo, which means maintaining the one-dimensional portrayal of Palestinians, of Arabs and Muslims. The opponents to the sister city proposal expressed their desire to remain ignorant, to be allowed to feel safe in their fear of the Other, and to not have to reach out and accept the humanity of a people that they've learned to reject.

I am reminded of the Olympia Artswalk in spring 2006, when Fida Qishta visited Olympia as a delegate from Rafah. Crossing the street downtown, a couple of young men noticed Fida's headscarf and shouted "Terrorist!" at her as they walked by. Many opponents of the Rafah sister city have claimed that the people of Rafah do not deserve to have a connection with Olympia, but perhaps the reverse is more accurate.