Staff Writer

Human Rights organisation Amnesty International on Tuesday declared Israel’s practices of “oppression and domination” against Palestinians as constituting apartheid. The 278-page report, which took around 4 years to compile, and significantly labelled Israel’s practices in both the West Bank and Gaza, as well as inside Israel, as racially discriminant. Israel responded in its now normal manner, by labelling Amnesty International ‘anti-Semitic’ and calling for the withdrawal of the report. The Palestinian Authority, conversely, applauded the report, arguing that Israeli crimes should be prosecuted at the International Criminal Court. Amnesty’s report comes after both B’Tselem and Human Rights Watch last year issued reports labelling Israel’s practices apartheid.

Speaking to Radio Islam International, Dr Azzam Tamimi, a Palestinian academic and activist, argued that this decision was significant as Amnesty was previously ultra-cautious in accurately labelling Israeli actions. He said, “this report by Amnesty International represents a historic turning point, because for so many years, for decades, Amnesty has been so cautious in speaking about the conflict in Palestine, and for that, many Palestinians used to criticize it.”

Dr Tamimi also noted the UN’s compromised nature, especially in relation to its Security Council. He further noted the UN’s complicity in enabling this apartheid, by recognising Israel.

In relation to the report’s impact, he argued that it was significant, especially since more and more of the world’s citizens are recognising Israel’s apartheid practices, but that, as was the case historically, powerful states try to stunt such attempts. Dr Tamimi said, “Well, this is not unique. We’ve seen this in previous colonial projects, including the one that was in South Africa. It took the world a while to decide to take action against such racial segregation…  I remember as a young man, that the apartheid regime in south Africa used to be supported by major powers in the world, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and so many others.”

Last, he argued that the Muslim world was very weak in confronting the occupation, and in fact states like Saudi Arabia and the UAE sought to partner with Israel as a means of securing support for their crackdowns on domestic descent. However, he noted that their leaders did not represent the people, who remained supportive of the Palestinian cause.