Symposium on Unbroken Bond: Tracing the Ties Between African and Palestinian Anti-Colonial Struggles – Wale ni sisi: Na sisi ni wale: (Re)viewing the Palestinian Struggle from an African Anti-colonial and Anti-imperialist Lens

Wale ni sisi: Na sisi ni wale: This Swahili phrase means “They are us: and we are them.” It has been borrowed from Katama Mkangi, ‘Walenisi’ (1995).

[Dr. David Ngira is an African who lives in Kenya. The views are his own and do not represent those of any organization or entity.]

Introduction

The Global North’s imperialism has significantly shaped the development of international law, including international human rights law. While the substantive content of international law seems to resonate with realities in the Global South and is, indeed, somewhat applicable to the protection of citizens in these countries, Western interventionism and control of international law enforcement agencies, such as the UN Security Council, have politicised human rights. This situation supports the critiques of scholars like Makau Mutua, who view international law as an instrument for colonisation, domination, and control.

It is within this context that the Palestinian struggle is located. The failure by the international legal regime both to actualise Palestinian rights and protect them from Apartheid and genocide has revisited these age-old questions and challenged the Western premise that international law and human rights are value-neutral and universal. Pronouncements and statements by institutions meant to safeguard and protect human rights and international law such as ICJ, ICC, UNGA, and UNSC have failed to protect the human rights of Palestinians. At this point, perhaps the question we should ask is who is the ‘human’ in human rights? 

Given the complicity of the international community and specifically the West in the ongoing atrocities in Gaza, it is safe to argue that to Western governments, the ‘human’ in human rights is not the Palestinian. This explains why these governments can support mass atrocities in Gaza while retaining a purported commitment to human rights. Palestine has been dehumanised to achieve geopolitical and imperial interests. On one hand, the West accelerates the sale of weapons to Israel while, on the other, it sends food aid to Palestine to achieve domestic political goals. Warnings about genocide, war crimes, apartheid, and forced starvation have only been met by additional weapons for the exacerbation fo the suffering in Palestine. That Israel, with the support of Western governments can even threaten the very foundation of international legal order creates an urgency in reforming it.  

In this context, the Palestinian cause has resonated with countries and Individuals in the Global South and they have used the emerging contradictions to highlight the inequality in the international system. For instance, on what basis does the US support ICC interventions in war crimes and other atrocities in Africa but oppose the same mandate when it comes to Israeli atrocities in Palestine? The answer lies in the way in which Western politicians construct subjects and objects of international law. To them, citizens of the Global South (or in Edward Said’s language, the Orient) should be voiceless, faceless, and timid subjects of international law with no agency. The Global North positions itself as the stick-wielding enforcer of international law, arrogating to itself the right to determine how, when, and over whom it should be enforced. This explains why their main concern was the likening of Hamas officials with Israeli officials in the ICC application for arrests warrants, and not the international crimes that underpin the same warrants. Once again, we ask, as Mignolo did, who is the ‘human’ in human rights?  

Palestine has therefore become the public face of the Global South’s resistance to the Global North’s hegemony over the international system. Incidentally, Israel has become the public face of this hegemony. This division has largely shaped the reaction to the unfolding genocide and resulted into the ongoing calls for reforms of the international system.

Reflections on the Imperialist Agenda: Some Analysis of the Tentacles 

Western hegemony in global geopolitics is a reality that many post-colonial societies struggle with. This hegemony is manifested in Euro-American control of global financial institutions and institutions of global governance such as the UN and the WTO. Further to this control lies its appendages such as G7, EU, NATO, OECD, and other multilateral spaces. These spaces have acted as avenues for Western countries with specific geopolitical agenda to canvas and recruit allies. Allies and interests then get formalised through international mechanisms. 

A case in point is the Covid 19 pandemic during which Global North countries conspired to reject patent waiver to facilitate Covid 19 technology transfer to the Global South at WTO citing a danger to innovation in their countries. The vaccine apartheid that characterised Western vaccine nationalism further characterised the racialised nature of this global order. Similar approaches have been evident in the Climate Change Conference of State Parties, UN Tax Convention negotiations, as well as at various UN human rights bodies. The common denominator in all these negotiations is the desire to not only retain but also strengthen the current inequitable and unjust global system of governance. This system continues to impoverish and dehumanise the Global South while elevating narrow geopolitical and imperialist Western interests above multilateral global interests that would serve all human beings. 

The epitome of this Global North intransigence has been the opposition to radical reforms at the UN, specifically reforming (or disbanding) of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) whose dysfunctions, due to rivalry of Global North superpowers, continue to undermine global peace and security. Palestinians have, yet again, become another casualty of this intransigence. Concomitant to this has been the Global North’s open resistance against the reform of global financial architecture, which has seen growing debt distress in the Global South.

Palestine has become a platform through which global imperialism is being fought. The very establishment of Israel through UNGA Resolution 181 was anchored on Western control of the UN system generally and the UNSC specifically. Despite the fact that its foundation was anchored on international law, the preceeding actions of the Israeli state (including open disregard for dozens of UN resolutions, appropriation of Palestinian lands, apartheid and elevation of ethno-religious identity as a national ethos) violate international law. However, although such actions were condemned and sanctioned when committed by Apartheid South Africa, Iraq, Russia, and Iran, they were rewarded in the case of Israel. In fact, the West used these events to position Israel as a Middle Eastern ally, a bulwark against autocracy, a Western pillar in the war against ‘‘terror’’, and the only democracy in the Middle East with the ‘right to defend itself’. 

In this regard, Western economic investment, military support and financial aid to Israel increased while Western defence of Israel from critics in the international arena not only increased rapidly but also became more brazen. Western governments, media, and politicians that hardly agree on anything are on the same page when it comes to Israeli atrocities in Gaza. Suddenly boycotts, divestment, and sanctions that the West imposed and celebrated against other states that violated human rights and international law such as Iran, Russia, Eritrea, North Korea, and Apartheid South Africa are resented when imposed or pronounced against Israel. In Western eyes, Israel has to be protected from ‘‘terrorists’’, ‘‘savages’,’ and even international law.

It must be pointed out that the UK, and the US, the core of Israel defence in international platforms, were the last supporters of Apartheid South Africa, a support they gave despite stiff opposition from African countries. Incidentally, it was during those years that the West purported to impose sanctions on countries that were accused of tolerating or undertaking ethnic cleansing, human rights violations, or violations of international law. Western sanctions, that were construed in terms of human rights protection, thus became tools of enforcing Western hegemonic and imperialist agenda. It must be remembered that the use of the language of terror to justify the killing of civilians as is happening in Palestine traces its roots to European response to independence movements in Africa. In fact, Kenya’s Mau Mau and South Africa’s ANC share several similarities, key among them the fact that they were both labelled by the colonial regimes as terrorist entities. Just like it is used against Palestinians today, violence against Africans was re-characterised as a civilisational project.

Democracy, especially Western democracy, has seen itself as a civilising agent, employed by the West to ‘other’ Palestinians, justifying violence against them. This is not new. Democracy and international law were deployed by the West in Africa to justify coups against governments that were seen to be aligned to the Soviets or too intransigent to toe the Western line and push their geopolitical agenda. Whereas Africa was emerging from an era in which colonisation was an instrument of ‘civilisation,’ it was giving  way to the use of ‘democracy’ and economic exploitation as the new weapons for domination. Additionally, Palestinians had the uncomfortable privilege of being subjected to a systematic Western-led and Israeli implemented agenda of orientalism, domination, and dehumanisation. Palestine has become the public face of global injustice through what is increasingly being considered as anti-Palestinian racism (a subset of institutional global racism against the Global South that is manifested in the international economy, climate change, law and global governance). The Palestinian, just like the African, was constructed as an oriental object without agency under international law or in the determination of their destiny. Just like African countries were deemed represented in global affairs by their colonial masters, Palestinian representation in global affairs has been resisted and bastardised by the West either directly or through Israel. This simply increased their statelessness and voicelessness in international affairs, including in situations over which the subject of discussion is the future of Palestine itself. 

Just as colonial masters spoke for Africans in global affairs (including at the formation of the UN), Palestinian interests are, in many instances, considered to be represented by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, or Jordan. It is therefore not uncommon for a Middle Eastern country to use Palestine as a bargaining chip with the West. The humanity, destiny, life, and aspirations of Palestinians have been reduced to the ‘Palestinian Question’ over which everyone else has a say, except the Palestinians. 

Some Historical Context of the Nexus Between African and Palestinian Struggles 

Following the post World War II upheavals, the political decolonisation of Africa—that peaked in the 1960s and 1970s—was characterised by the increasing entrenchment of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, which mirrored the colonial atrocities committed by European colonial regimes in Africa. These included systematic racial discrimination, land alienation, and imposition of Israeli sovereign leadership over what the international community considered to be land meant for a Palestinian state. Ever since this period, Palestine has struggled to free itself from this occupation, a struggle that underpins the ongoing genocide in Gaza. In what way does the Palestinian struggle mirror the African struggle against colonialism and imperialism? 

African countries and Palestine have used similar strategies to oppose colonialism and Western hegemony. The first strategy involves caucuses. African countries have done this through the African Group at the UNGA, UNSC, WTO, and other global agencies. Through this mechanism, they have successfully pushed back against Western domination at the WTO and advanced an African agenda. This is most prominent in Climate Change mitigation and adaption negotiations, as well as in Covid 19 Vaccine acquisition. 

Palestine has used similar strategies to exercise agency despite the strains from the West and Israel. First, it has aligned itself with the African Group by, for instance, obtaining observer status at the African Union. This connection has reified and popularised the Palestinian cause in Africa as many African countries see themselves as having a shared anti-colonial and anti racist struggle with Palestine. This explains why nearly all African countries not only recognise a Palestinian State but generally vote for Palestinian resolutions at the UN. The opposition to and eventual suspension of the short-lived and contentious Israeli’s observer status at the AU further speaks to this reality. This alignment has also seen Palestine join the Arab League and the Organization for Islamic Cooperation. 

Increasing Palestinian membership in international organisations is, however, resented by Israel and many Western countries because of the mistaken belief that increasing acceptance of Palestinian agency in international affairs would diminish the status of Israel. This notwithstanding, Palestine has obtained increasing support from the Western public and a number of governments such as Spain and Ireland.

Second, both African countries and Palestine have often embraced a principle of strategic neutrality and sometimes ambiguity as regards to the rivalry between major Western powers. Dating back to the cold war period, some African countries such as Kenya embraced both the West and the East and, in the process, benefited from both. This strategic ambivalence has helped Palestine cement its position in international affairs. Accordingly, Palestine has been able to engage both China and Russia on one side and the West on the other in their pursuit of statehood and the end to the current genocide. 

The third strategy has weaved its way through the UNGA and international spaces. It must be noted that attempts to reform the UN through the UNSC has often failed mainly because the West has been able to use their veto power to protect their interests and undermine alternative interests. These interests have included the continued subjugation of Palestine by Israel and the continued domination of Africa and the Global South generally by the Global North. Accordingly, African countries have often opted to use the General Assembly, G77, and the avenues offered by specialised agencies like WHO Assembly, UNESCO, WTO, WIPO and similar fora to push through their agenda. Incidentally it is through these spaces that the Palestinian cause has received much acceptance, including in the recent UNGA resolution on UN membership.  Being that African countries have been able to coalesce around a decolonial agenda, they have largely supported the increasing agency visibility and voices of Palestine. In such spaces, Nelson Mandela famously stated: ‘Our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of Palestine.’ 

Concluding Remarks

Palestine and Africa share a common history of a struggle against oppression and colonisation. In this regard, they also share a common destiny: the Western imperial enterprise that underpins Palestinian oppression also underpins Western domination and exploitation of Africa and the Global South generally. It Is therefore in the interest of the Global South to support Palestine. Palestine is not just the last bulwark against the success of colonial occupation and domination, it Is also the last opportunity to resist the same.

And so, I proclaim that the Palestinian struggle is an African struggle because WALENISI.

Photo attribution: “My name is Palestine” by EL Seed is licenced under CC BY-SA 3.0