Finkelstein clarifies his position

[blake 3:17]

There's been a lot of confusion the past few months about where Norm Finkelstein stood on a number of issues relating to Israel/Palestine and the international solidarity movement in defense of Palestinian rights. This interview comes from Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East. http://www.cjpme.org/

CJPME Interview with Dr. Norman Finkelstein (July, 2012)

As Israel continues to expand its colonization of the West
Bank, belief in the viability of the “two-state solution” within the Palestinian Solidarity movement is beginning to wane. Despite ominous developments under Israel’s Netanyahu government, Dr. Norman Finkelstein remains a
compelling proponent of the two-state solution. CJPME
interviewed Dr. Finkelstein in order to clarify the reasons why he continues to argue in support of the two-state solution for Israel-Palestine.

In addition to clarifying Dr. Finkelstein’s arguments for
the two-state solution, CJPME also wanted to better understand certain comments that Dr. Finkelstein made in
a video released on YouTube in February.

Rumours have circulated for years that Dr. Finkelstein does not support
the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign launched against Israel in 2005. On this point and others, CJPME felt it was important that Dr. Finkelstein have a chance to clarify his stance.

For decades, Dr. Finkelstein has been an important voice arguing in favour of a just resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict based on international law.

An American Jew and son of Holocaust survivors, Dr. Finkelstein did his Ph.D. thesis at Princeton University on Zionism. Dr. Finkelstein’s credibility as an advocate of Palestinian human rights is unassailable, and he has faced off against many of the strongest and most strident voices in the pro-Israel lobby in America. His many books on the Arab-Israeli conflict have been read by hundreds of thousands, and have encouraged countless individuals to get involved in the struggle for Palestinian human rights.

The interview centered around five points, as follows:

Dr. Finkelstein’s support for the two-state solution .................................................. ..................... 1
Dr. Finkelstein’s concerns about proposals for a one-state solution ................................................ 2
Dr. Finkelstein’s support for the “right of return” of Palestinian refugees....................................... 3
Dr. Finkelstein’s support for the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions of Israel) movement........ 4
Dr. Finkelstein’s comments that certain elements of the Solidarity Movement function like a cult ... 5

Interview here: http://www.cjpme.org/DisplayDocument.aspx?DocumentID=2306&SaveMode=0

[genstrike]

Meh, his position is still rather problematic on a lot of points.

I don't think it is our business to insist on a one-state or two-state solution, and I don't think the solidarity movement should get hung up on this question. I think a rights-based approach to the problem is better than trying to dictate to Palestinians and Israelis what the solution is. It's like when I do strike support - I grab a sign and join workers in solidarity,

And, it is hard to argue that a just two-state solution is possible, after Israel has spent the last 45 years doing everything in its power to make it impossible. Ironically, it is only now that the two-state solution is impossible that Zionist organizations are so insistent on it; if you called for a two-state solution in the '70s, you'd be called an anti-semite.

And, it seems odd that he is trying so hard to base his arguments on international law, and then basically writes off "Israeli apartheid" - a phrase which is rooted in international law and probably the most comprehensive term for what's going on that there is.

And, the timing of Finkelstein's famous interview could hardly have been worse.

Also, CJPME's politics can be highly problematic as well, and myself and many other activists have found them impossible to work with. They are essentially the liberal-NGO wing of the movement.

[Yochanan]

If we are solidarity activists, it's our business to advocate for improving the situation there among our own societies. Currently the only proposal for reaching a one (or no) state solution is through a two state settlement, which still seems achievable. That's Finkelstein's point, he's not saying a two state solution is best because he thinks so (he doesn't, though incidentally it does still have more support amongst Palestinians than the 1SS), he's saying its all we can hope to acheive right now. And acheiving that right now is important, as it will alleviate peoples' suffering, and pave the way for a more just solution.

'Apartheid' is a phrase anchored in international law, and its unclear as to what degree Israel fits the definition - in the OPT it certainly does, and the situation is worse than South Africa in some ways, but in '48 Palestine (or Israel proper) I don't believe it meets the criteria.

Out of interest, how do you find CJPME problematic politically? They more or less adhere to what you've just said, they use the word apartheid, dont specifically advocate for either 2SS or 1SS, support BDS strongly, and are always going on about rights.