At the upcoming Student General Meeting, the student body will be demanding the University of Sydney divests, discloses and cuts ties with Israeli institutions and weapons companies. Students Against War (SAW) are also putting forward a motion calling on students to affirm the right of Palestinians to armed resistance, and to endorse the demand for one, secular, democratic state across all of Palestine as this is the only solution that can bring peace. If successful, these motions will be the first of their kind in Australia to be passed by any official body.
The meeting comes after the International Court of Justice has ruled what Palestinians have been saying for decades: Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal, a form of apartheid, and must cease.
Prime Minister Albanese and USyd Vice Chancellor Mark Scott know that through their ties to Israel they are complicit in genocide, yet Albanese continues to supply crucial parts of the F35 fighter jets to Israel, which rain one tonne bombs on Gaza civilians. Further, Usyd continues to partner with weapons companies that profit from the genocide such as Lockheed Martin and Thales, and refuses to end exchange programs with Israeli universities that aid in maintaining apartheid in Palestine.
The more outrageous and indefensible Israel’s behaviour becomes, the more desperately those with blood on their hands will try and find ways to demonise and divide the movement.
USyd’s new draconian Campus Access Policy must be seen as an attempt to quash the right of students to fight for Palestine and to hide their ties to genocide, as well as any other issue deemed too controversial by University management — effectively claiming that speaking up about Israel’s genocide is a danger to students’ safety.
SAW’s motion to the SGM seeks to smash the idea that supporting a one-state solution and Palestinians right to armed resistance is antisemitic. A movement that attempts to avoid these questions will not win, and our opponents know it. We must confront these racist smears head-on and unequivocally stand with the right of Palestinian’s to armed resistance and support full liberation from the river to the sea.
On the Right to Armed Resistance
We have witnessed in Western media a resurgence of colonial narratives, which on the one hand proclaim colonisers only utilise violence as a means of preserving peace, yet on the other condemn an oppressed people who turn to armed resistance by insinuating they do so out of a vicious nature. Such racist and Islamophobic prejudice excuses Israeli massacres as defence, and equates calls for Palestinian liberation as antisemitism or advocating for genocide.
However Israel’s colonialism is, as per Frantz Fanon, “violence in its natural state,” and as such begets a violent resistance. For Israel is a society founded on, governed, and maintained by military brutality, organised force and apartheid.
When faced with land annexations and ethnic cleansing at the hands of a billion dollar army with advanced weaponry; when Gaza has been subjected to a land, air and sea blockade since 2007; when throwing stones has long since been rendered more barbaric and more savage than invading tanks and bombs — how is it reasonable to liken the violence of the oppressed with that of the oppressor? How can we condemn Palestine, yet defend and place Israel above the law, when even peaceful acts of protest are deemed threatening? When, for example, during the Great March of Return in 2018 peaceful demonstrators were met with IDF gunfire, murdering 266, and injuring thousands?
Palestine deserves the same legitimacy and support afforded to other armed revolutionaries such as Algeria and South Africa for their acts in defence against dehumanisation, discrimination, and slaughter. Indeed, the Palestinian liberation movement has never stooped to the atrocities to which the Israeli occupation has. Further, a UN General Assembly resolution (Resolution 35/35) from 1980 affirmed Palestine’s legal right to armed struggle, as they seek liberation against foreign domination.
Yet this right has been specifically ignored by the University of Sydney in attempts to justify their ongoing partnerships with Israeli institutions and weapons companies. Therefore it falls to we the students to unequivocally stand with Palestine in resisting a brutal occupation, and force our university to acknowledge their complicity in genocide.
On the One-State Solution
The demand for one secular, democratic state can be traced to 1969, when the Palestinian Liberation Organisation declared their objective “to establish a free and democratic society in Palestine for all Palestinians whether they are Muslims, Christians or Jews”.
The PLO would later betray the Palestinian cause and take part in the Oslo Accords in 1993, where they supported the call for a “two-state solution,” an act denounced by Palestinian academic Edward Said as “an instrument of Palestinian surrender.”
The two state solution is an impossibility.
The Israeli parliament voted in July for a resolution (68-9) that declared “Israel firmly opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state” even if part of a negotiated settlement with Israel.
Albanese condemned former Labor senator Fatima Payman for using the chant “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” in a speech where she called for Australia to cut ties with Israel as it allegedly undermines a “two-state solution.”
In an interview with former Liberal treasurer Josh Freydenburg – who wrongly equates criticism of Israel with antisemitism – Albanese agreed that the chant is an “extremely violent act.”
When Albanese, President Biden, and other state leaders claim they support a two-state solution, they are simply sanitising their support for Israel’s ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing, genocide and expansionist settler-colonialism.
In 2007 a statement calling for one democratic secular state was issued by a range of figures, including Omar Barghouti, the co-founder of the Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement.
A Gallup poll published last October revealed that the percentage of Palestinians who supported a two-state solution had fallen from 59% in 2012 to 24%. As Palestinian Australian Macquarie University academic Randa Abdel-Fattah said, “I want one state where every human being is treated equally. What’s so radical about that?”
Jewish people have every right to continue to live in Palestine. But there is no justification for maintaining a Jewish supremacist state that systematically discriminates against Palestinians. A single democratic state — along with the right of Palestinians to return — would be consistent with indigenous Palestinians’ right to self-determination and would mean Muslims, Jews and Christians could live side by side, as they did before the Zionist settler-colonial project.
Build the Student Intifada
We need at least 200 students to join us at the SGM on August 7 if we are to make our motions the official policy of the SRC.
A mass meeting of students in and of itself will not force Usyd, or our government, to cut ties with Israel —- but it will be a powerful tool for projecting voices and building the power that can force change.
Do not let your absence to the SGM be the vote we need to ensure our demands are met.
In response, a university spokesperson said “We recognise many in our community are deeply distressed by the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and its reverberations around the world and in Australia. Our focus is on ensuring our whole community can feel included and is able to participate safely in campus life – and on safeguarding vital academic freedom and freedom of speech, and the effective operations of our University into the future.
Since the conflict broke out, the University has been very clear that we condemn violence, terrorism and any breach of human rights and we utterly reject any suggestion the University has any involvement in this conflict,” they continued.
“We have committed to convening a working group to provide feedback on our investment policies to ensure they reflect our commitment to human rights — and have also explained we do not intend to restrict academic partnerships or institutional relationships with any country or industry. Our researchers have the skills and expertise needed to contribute to national, regional and global security, and the academic freedom to choose to work on projects that comply with relevant laws and government guidelines and our own policies and codes of conduct.”
Regarding the Campus Access Policy, the spokesperson said “We believe our new Campus Access Policy strikes an appropriate balance – protecting freedom of speech and academic freedom, while ensuring our campuses are safe and welcoming for all our students and staff.
The policy does not limit the right of staff to engage in lawful protected industrial action, or prevent people from handing out leaflets. We are not banning protests, or even requiring approval – we’re simply asking for 72 hours notice so we can plan accordingly. We ask permission for some things, such as megaphones, to help be sure they will not be used in ways that disrupt our core activities, intimidate people or threaten their health. There is no need to ask permission to put posters up in designated areas, but if someone wants to put up signage in other places we need to be able to ensure that it is safe and will not cause damage.
We’ll continue to listen to our community and will review the policy by the end of the year to assess how it’s going, and monitor its operation and consider any feedback until then.”
