It took an Oscar winner's ordeal for the west to see the truth of settler violence. This is how to stop it
The attackers who arrived in Susya were neither Cossacks nor Klansmen but Jewish-Israeli settlers accompanied by soldiers. Indeed, when the attacks commenced, three Palestinians were seized by the Israeli military, detained, and then subjected to police interrogation. Such violent raids are far from unique in West Bank, especially in the areas of South Hebron Hills, Masafer Yatta and the Jordan river valley. Since the start of this year, the Centre for Jewish Non Violence has documented more than 40 violent settler attacks in the village of Susya alone.
Most go unnoticed by the rest of the world. But this time was different. One of the Palestinian victims was the award-winning director Hamdan Ballal, whose film, No Other Land, which covers the destruction of Palestinian communities in the occupied West Bank, won best documentary at the recent Academy Awards. For hours, the military didn't officially disclose his whereabouts, and attempts to locate him failed. When the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) finally issued a statement, they absurdly labelled him and his fellow villagers terrorists.
This facade of justice, when law is nothing but an empty shell, is typical of how the Israeli occupation works. Under its veneer of legality, the most brutal savagery is legitimised and the role of criminal and victim inverted. In the past three years I have submitted numerous complaints to the Israeli Ministry of Defence and Israel's attorney general about settler violence. Nothing has ever happened. My experience is only one of many that indicates how the Israeli legal system makes a farce of justice and allows settlers to terrorise Palestinian communities with impunity.
After the attack on Gaza began in 2023, the reign of terror in the West Bank has only intensified. According to B'Tselem (the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories), settlers have forced at least 18 Palestinian communities – more than 1,000 people – to flee their homes since October 2023. The UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has found that settler violence, intimidation and harassment have displaced at least 300 Palestinian households, including hundreds of children.
Benjamin Netanyahu's government hasn't just stood by passively and allowed this to happen. It has actively allocated funding and weaponry to illegal settlers. Last June, the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data initiative (Acled) found that armed settlers, some of whom have formed their own quasi-military forces, had received a 'considerable amount' of weapons and munitions, including thousands of pistols, M-16 semi-automatic rifles and machine guns from the Israeli military, while regional councils had coordinated with the IDF and the national security ministry to buy hundreds of additional rifles. As that report put it: 'the lines between settlers and the military are increasingly blurring', and 'the difference between civilian aggressors and the Israeli state apparatus is fading even further'.
While civilian security squads are supposed to act only in self-defence, the truth remains that Israel is unwilling to tackle those vicious gangs, and that senior government ministers advocate in their favour. Only last week, Israel's security cabinet approved a plan to recognise 13 Jewish settlements in the West Bank as independent. 'We continue to lead a revolution of normalisation and regulation in the settlements. Instead of hiding and apologising – we raise the flag, build and settle,' said the Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.
The atrocity that happened in Susya is only one example of the countless injustices committed under this criminal occupation. It shouldn't take an Oscar winner for international audiences to notice these acts of violence. The Palestinian people deserve safety and liberation from the occupation, and sovereignty and independence. The international community must play its part in pursuing this. In recent months, a number of governments have issued sanctions against Israeli settlers. This is a good start, but these sanctions must be far stronger if they are to have an effect.
The sanctions should include established illegal settler municipalities. Those imposed by the UK, for example, only target three illegal settler outposts and four organisations that have supported the settlers. The established municipalities, such as Shomron regional council, which oversees 35 settlements that are home to an estimated 47,200 people, are the driving force behind violent attempts to take control of more Palestinian territories. Personal sanctions against government ministers who block counter-terrorist measures against violent settler groups are also essential. The UK can play a leading role in coordinating this response, particularly given the moral depravity of Donald Trump's administration. As Washington DC cancels sanctions against violent settlers, London could present the world with a different and more righteous path.
When I arrived in Susya on Tuesday after the attack, I knew exactly what I wanted to tell its people. I said that we want to live together, Arabs and Jews, as brothers and sisters. That we are not the enemy of one another, as we struggle together for freedom. A mere day after a gang of criminal Israeli settlers terrorised this village, its villagers welcomed me, an Israeli member of the Knesset, and my message for peace. This proves that the real conflict is not between nations, but between those who seek justice and those who vow bloodshed. The government of Israel has chosen the path of bloodshed, ethnic cleansing and war. It is up to all of us – and to you – to choose a different path.
Dr Ofer Cassif is a member of the Knesset, representing the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality (Hadash) since 2019
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
24 minutes ago
- NBC News
Columbia agrees to pay $200 million to restore funding cut by Trump administration
Columbia University will pay $200 million to the federal government to restore the majority of funding that was cut by the Trump administration over allegations it violated anti-discrimination laws. "This agreement marks an important step forward after a period of sustained federal scrutiny and institutional uncertainty," acting university President Claire Shipman said in a statement. The Trump administration in March said it was canceling $400 million in grants to the school, accusing it of 'inaction in the face of persistent harassment of Jewish students.' Columbia then agreed to a list of demands by the Trump administration, which some critics saw as a capitulation by the private university. Columbia said in the Wednesday statement that under the agreement 'a vast majority of the federal grants which were terminated or paused in March 2025 — will be reinstated and Columbia's access to billions of dollars in current and future grants will be restored.' 'This includes the reinstatement of the majority of grants previously terminated by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Health and Human Services, renewal of non-competitive grants, the release of overdue payments on active, non-terminated grants, and Columbia's restored eligibility to apply for new federal research funding in the ordinary course,' the university said. Columbia and other universities have been targeted by the Trump administration over student protests over the war in Gaza, which some Republicans have said were antisemitic. "While Columbia does not admit to wrongdoing with this resolution agreement, the institution's leaders have recognized, repeatedly, that Jewish students and faculty have experienced painful, unacceptable incidents, and that reform was and is needed," the university said in Wednesday's statement. Columbia said the agreement will establish a "a jointly selected independent monitor who will assess the implementation of the resolution." The $200 million, termed a settlement by the university, will be paid to the government over three years. It will also pay $21 million to settle investigations by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the university said. Student protests over the war in Gaza, which Israel launched after the surprise terrorist attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023, took place on college campuses across the U.S., including at Columbia. President Donald Trump campaigned on attacking those protests, and since taking office his administration has sought to deport some students who took part in pro-Palestinian demonstrations by accusing them of sympathizing with Hamas.
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
The mixed legacy of Zbigniew Brzezinski, strategist of the Cold War
In the autumn of 1938, within nine weeks of each other, two boys arrived in New York, fleeing the gathering storm: a 15-year-old Jewish German and a ten-year-old Catholic from Poland. Both would repay the mortal debt they owed by dedicating their lives to the Land of the Free. The older boy was, of course, Henry Kissinger, later Grand High Poobah to Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. The younger was Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter's national security adviser from 1977 to 1981 and the subject of a magisterial biography bythe Financial Times'sWashingtonsupremo, Edward Luce. From the first, Zbigniew Brzezinski (pronounced 'ZbigNieff BreshinSki', as Carter helpfully informed his team) sat in Kissinger's shadow, always a step or two behind the great Bavarian. Their first encounter was at Harvard in 1950 when Zbig's first-year lecturer handed the reins to his protégé, described by Zbig as a 'youngish, somewhat rotund… scholar with a strong German accent'. The Pole disliked the sub's penchant for 'Germanic philosophers'. 'Not my meat,' he recalled. 'I rather impolitely rose and left.' The two circled one another for decades. Alternately respectful, cordial, even playful, they also briefed against each other with the spite only arrogant, erudite rivals can exhibit. To Kissinger, Zbig was a 'total whore who has been on every side of every argument'. Brzezinski saw in his senior 'an unprincipled politician, and a political chameleon who only cares about staying visible in US public life and returning to power'. As Harry S. Truman once said: 'If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.' That Kissinger is more remembered is partly due to his being an 'Olympic gold medal-winning flatterer', according to Luce. 'Even with me he would say things I knew to be patently untrue about how he always read my column first thing every morning.' For his part, Zbig favoured abrasive argument. He would 'specialise in decapitating people he thought were fools'. And he chose to leave the greater part of his story to be told by Luce, who has had unrestricted access to a voluminous corpus of diaries, letters and papers. The result of this bequest is a landmark study unlikely to be equalled. This is a high-definition account of one of the great – and most neglected – postwar statesmen and strategists, who helped to shape the end of the Soviet Union. From 1950 on, when he was a mere Masters student, Zbig could see that the simmering nationalisms within the USSR were its Achilles' heel. As a proud Pole, he knew only too well that non-Russian peoples in the Soviet Union retained deep national feelings that would not tolerate Moscow's imperialism indefinitely. His rivals and colleagues, Kissinger included, pursued détente, thinking the Reds would inevitably catch up and overtake the US. But Zbig saw clearly how the massive Soviet hulk was vulnerable to degeneration. His 'systematic bent of mind' pushed Carter to weaponise human rights against the USSR, normalise relations with the Chinese – leading to the opening of listening posts on the Sino-Russian border – and to provide support to Afghan rebel groups following the 1979 Soviet invasion, leaving the Russians bogged down in an unwinnable war. But nowhere was his historic calling more apparent than in Polish affairs. Zbig saw the profound potential of Lech Walesa's Solidarity trade union and used American might to protect and nurture it. In this he was aided by a countryman, one Karol Jozef Wojtyla (aka Pope John Paul II), who became a lifelong ally (Brzezinski had 'P' for 'Pope' added to his White House phone). So it was that in 1980, with the Soviets poised to invade Poland, the two powerful Poles conspired to defend the homeland: Zbig by having Carter issue public and private threats to Leonid Brezhnev; John Paul II by quietly beseeching Solidarity to avoid any action that might give the Soviets an excuse to advance. Years later, the CIA director Robert Gates would conclude that it had been the 'fragile seeds' sowed by Brzezinski that had done for the USSR. If Zbig was responsible for Carter's greatest foreign policy legacy, he was also central to its greatest failure. Having mistaken the Iranian Ayatollah for a 'non-violent Shiite version of Mohandas Gandhi', he advocated successfully for the US to admit the ailing and displaced Shah. It was a decision which precipitated the storming of the US embassy in Tehran and an awful hostage crisis which ultimately destroyed the credibility of Carter's administration. That there have been such very long tails to the Carter presidency's calculations and miscalculations – in eastern Europe, Iran and Afghanistan – speaks loudly of a time when big brains played big dice on the Cold War Risk board of the world. Luce's exceptional study vividly revives the memory, strategies, tactics and foibles of one of the greatest players of that lethal game.
Spectator
2 hours ago
- Spectator
Recognising Palestine isn't a path to peace
The children of Gaza are enduring horrendous suffering. The control of aid has been restricted. Innocent lives have been set at nothing. Ruthlessness well beyond the terms of realpolitik has put hundreds of thousands at risk. The people responsible deserve global condemnation. But instead it seems they are to be rewarded. It is Hamas which is responsible for the suffering in Gaza. The terrorist organisation has, for years, used its thugs to control international development assistance to enrich its leaders and subdue the population. Its murderous – indeed, genocidal – intent was made manifest on 7 October 2023 when it unleashed an assault on innocent Israelis which resulted in the biggest single loss of Jewish life since the Holocaust. In many cases, Hamas fighters sexually assaulted their victims and gleefully celebrated their deaths. The organisation's leadership exulted in the slaughter and declared that if they could, they would kill and kill again until they had eliminated the Zionist entity. Since that attack, and the Israeli response, Hamas has demonstrated disdain not only for Jewish lives, but also Palestinian ones. By placing command posts in hospitals, putting children deliberately in harm's way and continuing to use food aid as a weapon against its own people, Hamas has shown they are not noble liberators but barbaric murderers. And the West's response to this butcher's bill? To give Hamas the political victory of recognising a Palestinian state. This week the chair of parliament's foreign affairs select committee, Emily Thornberry, was the latest MP to call for British recognition of a Palestinian state. She reflects the views of dozens on the Labour benches – and, it is feared, even the instincts of the Prime Minister himself. Later this month, France and Saudi Arabia will co-chair a conference that aims to obtain recognition of a Palestinian state. Last year, Ireland, Norway and Spain joined more than 140 other members of the United Nations in formally recognising Palestine's statehood. According to Thornberry, it is 'just a question of when' Keir Starmer does so. Before the Prime Minister contemplates any such step, he might do well to study the7 October Parliamentary Commission Report compiled by the UK-Israel All-Party Parliamentary Group chaired by Lord Roberts of Belgravia. To read it is to be reminded of who will cheer loudest if Hamas's atrocities are rewarded with diplomatic recognition. The people responsible for the indiscriminate massacre of 378 Israelis at the Nova musical festival, shot down as they were fleeing for their lives, will be jubilant once more. The terrorists who carried out the gang-rape and mutilation of female victims, filmed for the perpetrators' twisted glory, will rejoice again. The men who shot an unborn child in her mother's womb and murdered a 92-year-old Holocaust survivor before taking 250 men, women and children hostage will have new cause for celebration. The answer to such evil should not be the granting of global respectability but a determination to prevent such atrocities from happening again. That is what Israel, almost alone, is seeking to achieve. Its military campaign is based on the far-from-unreasonable desire to liberate the hostages and permanently eliminate the death cult of Hamas. For its troubles, it enjoys not sympathy and support but a wilfully blind campaign of condemnation. Recent reporting of Israel's continued distribution of food aid to Gaza has ignored the reality of aid distribution in the past, when Hamas would confiscate the support offered by the international community and use it to reward compliance and punish internal opponents. It is to the shame of some aid groups, and certainly of the United Nations' organisation UNRWA, that they made themselves the accomplices to this oppression. The reason Hamas has sought to disrupt, often violently, Israel's aid distribution is because it has been robbed of a tool of political control and a source of illicit finance. Israel's defence forces have made errors in this conflict, sometimes grievous ones. But there is a world of difference between the citizen army of a rule-bound democracy fighting a counter-insurgency campaign while seeking to rescue hostages in urban settings and a terror group that regards every innocent life lost as another propaganda win. Israel's actions in setting back Iran's nuclear weapons programme and obliterating Hezbollah's military structures have made the world safer. It has dismantled much, but not all, of the Hamas command structure. If it can further reduce the ability of Hamas to ever again conduct operations like 7 October, it will have also helped prepare the ground for a more sustainable future for the whole Middle East. A path to genuine peace relies not on the knee-jerk recognition of Palestine, but on the extension of the Abraham Accords. Saudi Arabian recognition of Israel and a broader partnership between pragmatic Arab states and Jerusalem would lay the ground for a future Palestinian state, guaranteed and supported by its Arab neighbours. If the leaders of the West truly want the best future for the Palestinian people, they will want Hamas defeated not garlanded. Choose the latter, and Islamists everywhere will know that in our hearts we are not prepared to defend democracy against barbarity.
