Over the first four days of Israel-Hamas prisoner exchange, Israel arrests 133 Palestinians while releasing 150.
…
But the worry for Palestinian prisoners does not end after their release. The majority of those freed are usually rearrested by Israeli forces in the days, weeks, months and years after their release.
Dozens of those who were arrested in a 2011 Israel-Hamas prisoner exchange were rearrested and had their sentences reinstated.
…
Many of the women and children released during the truce have testified to the abuse they experienced in Israeli prisons.
Several videos have also emerged in recent weeks of Israeli soldiers beating, stepping on, abusing and humiliating detained Palestinians who have been blindfolded, cuffed and stripped either partially or entirely. Many social media users said the scenes brought back memories of the torture tactics used by United States forces in Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison in 2003.
Removed by mod
What that other person said, but also being charged under Israeli law doesn’t prove much about a Palestinian’s innocence or guiltiness. The word Apartheid is an understatement of what’s going on in Palestine.
deleted by creator
Yeah, to use the term apartheid is not accurate to explain the atrocity. Don’t overplay ‘apartheid’, it’s not the accurate term. We need a stronger term here; could be zionistheid or Israelitheid.
I’ve heard the term “Nakba” suggested as a name for the brand new crime against humanity Israel created.
You think you’re defending Israel but you’re actually doing a much worse service to it. If Israel is guilty of apartheid, which I think it is, it has a clear path to redemption. If however the Israeli crimes are sui generis, then we end up with a whole new class of crime against humanity called “the crime Israel is doing to the Palestinians”, for which the international order has no precedent for how to redeem. And that’s a huge danger for Israel because it opens up the space of possible reactions, much much more widely than apartheid.
The crime Israel is doing to Palestinians (I’ve seen Nakba suggested as a name, so I’ll use it for brevity) extends beyond Apartheid. The Nakba’s intent is to take apart Palestinians’ ability to exist as a political collective by dividing them and implementing varying levels of Apartheid and violence against them, up to and including genocide. This goes beyond South African Apartheid, whose goal was for black people to serve white people. The Nakba is meant to destroy Palestinians as an entity capable of having political will. This is why they’re currently divided into Israeli citizens, East Jerusalemites, Gazans and West Bankers, with the goal of eventually ethnically cleansing the latter two (along with East Jerusalemites on a larger timescale).
The Nakba includes Apartheid as one of its components, but it’s not Apartheid.
I just imagine a world where Arabs didn’t try to kill jews moving to the region in the lead up to WWII. I wonder if that would have changed anything in terms of now.
In my experience most people who say it’s not an apartheid haven’t really studied the history of Apartheid South Africa.
There are many features that resemble it, such as the tiered rights system, shifting people into designated areas with a system of checkpoints and barriers, creating resource scarcity, etc.
Even the rhetoric about God giving the land to the ruling ethnic group (who in both cases had ancestors subjected to concentration camps) is a similar narrative.
It’s no coincidence that present-day South Africa has been one of the loudest voices calling for UN intervention in Gaza.
Israeal literally has separate citizenships for arabs - specific an Israeli Arab Citizenship - and for jews - who have an Israeli Jew Citizenship - and in that country rights which in any other country in the world would be associated with nationality (i.e. Israeli) are in fact associated with citizenship and they’re different for Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews, with the former having less rights.
In fact one of the limitations that Israeli Arab citizens have which Israeli Jew citizens do not is that they can be blocked from living in certain places and also they can be kicked out of their homes much more easilly (which is being used to kick them out of their homes in Old Jerusalem) so they most definitelly do not “live anywhere in Israel”.
It is not just de facto Appartheid, it’s de jure (by Law) Apparheid and a pretty extreme one at that.
So the thing is: While the treatment of Palestinians in Israel proper does also constitute an Apartheid according to several organizations, I’m talking about the West Bank and Gaza here. Israel simply split Palestinians into different groups and subjects them to different levels of Apartheid. Palestinian Israelis are simply the people who were allowed oh so graciously by Israel to get the least bad level.
Also, your use of “mistreatment” is a massive understatement. Many people in high government positions in Israel want to ethnically cleanse Gaza.
See: https://thewire.in/world/israeli-government-population-transfer-gaza-strip