Reflections on Day 294 of genocide
After one of the deadliest weeks of the US/Israel genocide in Gaza, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stood in front of the US Congress and immediately received a standing ovation.
How can one make sense of such sheer brutality?
This week, I will make the case in my local church community that the most pertinent frame to make sense of the carnage is through the lens of Settler Colonialism. The Brown University Choices program distinguishes between Administrative (as in the case of the French in Vietnam or Britain in India) and Settler (as in the case of the United States or Australia) Colonies. What distinguishes setter colonial projects is the intention to eliminate the native inhabitants and “settle” the land. In the words of Rev. Dr. Mitri Raheb, it is about control of “demography and geography.” In the United States, the demography ‘problem’ was solved through a determined campaign of extermination resulting in the murder of 90% of the indigenous inhabitants. For those of us who live on stolen land, this context shapes everything we love, know and do. Therefore it is critical that we develop sharp eyed understandings so that we can peruse justice. The settler colonial frame prevents justice from being wrapped up in shallow solutions. The original sin, that is to say the injustice that persists is geographic and demographic. So pursuit of justice must also deal with questions of geography and demography.
While many people are comfortable naming the US as a settler colony (perhaps in part because the demography question has already been ‘solved’ via ethnic cleansing), I am expecting that there will be questions about whether or not Israel fits this definitions. One objection to the settler colonial frame being applied to Israel is the argument that Jewish people are the actual indigenous people to the land. I will address this concern in three parts.
Image description: Postcard booklet published by J. Bendow (Yaâakov Ben Dov) of “The Jewish Colonies in Palestine”. Circa 1910-1920. Source: Public auction site. Sourced via Project 48.
First, the Zionist movement (ie the political and social movement that creates and sustains the state of Israel) considered itself a settler colonial movement. Facing religious and ethnic persecution in Europe, Zionist leaders like Theodore Hertzel desired their own settler colony. Their colonial aspirations matched in a cruel way the anti-semitic intentions of the European colonial powers. The creation of a Jewish state would allow Europe to expel jewish people. In choosing where to create this jewish state Hertzel considered Agentina, but chose Palestine because its religious significance would help get others onboard with the colonial project. The creation of a Jewish state in Palestine would also “form a portion of a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism.” (Hertzl 1896. Pg 96) As is the case today Israel considers itself a outpost of the Western colonial project against the Orientalist “other.”
When Israel acts to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, nuclear weapons that could destroy Israel and threaten every American city, every city that you come from, weâre not only protecting ourselves. Weâre protecting you.
Second, the zionists who founded the state of Israel were from Europe yet used the Bible as a tool for their colonization of Palestine. Christians are especially susceptible for this bait and switch (the process of calling the colonizer indigenous) due to the state of Israel using biblical language to connect to themes of election and the Dividic covenant. As noted previously, conflating the zionist project with western Christian antisemitic views serves the settler project. Furthermore, archeological evidence challenges christians who use the bible as a historical rather than theological document. Israeli and Christian zionist leaders frequently cite old testament texts to justify ethnic cleansing. They are particularly fond of comparing Palestinians to the Amalekites. Yet, current archeological and biblical scholarship casts questions on whether or not the massacres of the old testament even took place. The bible is not a history textbook. It is a theological document collecting oral and written tradition.
Historian Nur Masala writes in The Bible and Zionism:
The portrayal of the Israelites’ origins in terms of a conflict between the ancient Hebrews and Canaanites is not justification for assuming that such a conflict ever took place in history… Canaanites and Israelites/Hebrews never existed as opposing peoples fighting over ancient Palestine. Although the Canaanites and Hebrews (as well the Philistines and Amorites) may all play the role of âpeoplesâ in the Bibleâs narrative, they were not ethnic designations of the Bronze or early Iron Age.
Biblical traditions have little or no historical worth because… they were not conceived as history even though they contain historical elements, since they are a reservoir of collective memory. The biblical narratives represent a set of epic cycles which have all the trimmings of violent conquests written long after the events by a population dominated by Greeks and Romans and driven by the need to legitimize and differentiate themselves from the Greco-Roman elite. (Masala 2007. 274-275.)
I would hope that this historical correction would be welcome in Christian spaces who emphasize the “overarching narrative of Scripture as a narrative about God” in contrast to fundamentalists historical reading of the Bible who insert modern understandings of Race, Nationalism and Ethnicity into their theology. Yet, for those of us who are born and raised in the United States (or Israel or Australia) it will be hard to unlearn the settler theology that justifies our society.
Finally, the facts on the ground demonstrate Israel’s settler colonial intentions. Since the foundation of Israel in 1948, it has actively recruited Jewish people from around the world to move into Israel while expelling those who live on the land (both inside and outside of the 1948 UN partition borders). Israel in law rules that the state is by and for Jewish people. During the current genocide Israel conducted the largest land grab in three decades in the West Bank. The aggressive expansion and establishment of literal “settlements” in the West Bank with utter disregard for human life or international law points directly to its settler colonial nature.
While the settler colonial frame is helpful to make sense of what is happening, we must be careful not to turn the unfolding catastrophe into an academic discussion.
We repent by dehumanising the dead in Gaza by counting them as numbers, but not as people who had dreams and aspirations. (Last week’s Sabeel Wave of Prayer)
In this light, the work of Mondoweiss, Electronic Intifada and others who are telling the stories of Palestinian resistance and resilience in the face of settler colonialism are so important. This is not to idealize or idolize a ‘perfect victim’ – gendered discrimination in Palestinian Christian Theology communities and Fatah’s security collaboration with the occupation demonstrate the folly of such racial / ethic essentialism – but instead to raise serious questions that might prompt further solidarity with all oppressed peoples.