Language has historically been and remains another front of the Zionist movement’s assault. From the policing of chants to the weaponization of antisemitism to the monopolization of ‘genocide,’ we have witnessed lexical machinery. In that vein, we offer our reflections and on language.
Occupied Palestinian Territories | International humanitarian law prescribes this as the legally accurate term; the term names Israel’s ongoing occupation. However, it also inevitably erases the existence of a Palestine; it construes Palestine as a string of disparate territories, versus one whole land or state, as existed prior to 1967 (or 1948). It lends credence to the false construction of borders, to the erasure of “Palestine” from our maps, to the lack of formal recognition of Palestine’s statehood.
[modern-day] Israel (historical Palestine) | Writers Against the War on Gaza’s (WAWOG) style guide renames “Israel as the “Zionist entity”; the modern-day state of Israel, established in 1948 through the ethnic cleansing and exile of Palestinians in the Nakba, is neither legitimate nor permanent, in the face of calls for a free Palestine and the dismantling of the Israeli apartheid state. Naming ‘Israel’ erases Palestine and Palestinians, erases the violence of the Nakba, erases history—that of Western (and Arab) states’ complicity, the Balfour Declaration, the U.N. Partition Resolution. Modern-day so-called Israel is effectively historical Palestine, land whose history we honor. This renaming and reclaiming is nefarious and pervasive—from the state of Israel to Palestinian cities and now-Israeli settlements (i.e. Susiya as Susya, Al Naqab as the Negev, Al Khalil as Hebron).
Terrorist | “Terrorist” is the word that Western governments use to malign political actors that threaten western hegemony. It is difficult to construct a standard and objective definition of terrorism that does not rely on the whims of Western governments. In fact, despite numerous attempts over many decades, the international community has failed to reach consensus on a comprehensive legal definition of terrorism. If we describe terrorism as “the use of violence against non-combatants to achieve political or ideological aims,” then this definition would designate the U.S. military and the state of Israel as terrorist entities. One may argue that only non-state actors can be terrorist organizations. But why is that the case?What is it about statehood that immunizes rampant and indiscriminate bombing, rape, and torture from the description of “terrorism?” When is the word used as a shield to legitimize unspeakable violence, and when is it used as a sword to malign legitimate resistance movements?
Hamas | Hamas is one of several political groups committed to the liberation of Palestine from Israeli occupation and colonization. While Hamas is often depicted in the West as just a militant group, it also has a sophisticated political infrastructure concerned with governance, movement building, and development of a welfare state in Palestine. As a political entity, Hamas won a majority of seats in the 2006 legislative council elections. In response, Israel and its Western allies attempted a coup to overthrow Hamas leadership and blockaded Gaza by land, air, and sea. This coup failed, but the siege continues, despite the fact that this blockade violates a range of international laws, including the doctrine against collective punishment. Although U.S. leadership insists that Hamas is a terrorist organization, it is not recognized as such by the majority of other countries. It is important to note that the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 gives Palestinian resistance groups the legal right to armed resistance in pursuit of self-determination as a population that is illegally and belligerently occupied. In addition to being a political entity, Hamas represents an ideology of resilience and resistance in the face of brutal and relentless oppression. Considering the broader context of the region, it is important to note that Hamas is one component of the greater Resistance Axis in actively challenging Western imperialism and hegemony in the Middle East. Other members of the Axis include Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iran – actors that have been similarly, uncannily, and systematically maligned within the confines of Western discourse.
International law | Palestinians (in Palestine) are forced to occupy a liminal space as ruled upon within the bounds of international human rights law, but with no real power or recourse or justice therein; see previous entry. Despite a preponderance of evidence illustrating the realities of genocide, the court lingers fecklessly around notions of ‘plausibility.’
Ceasefire | This is the beginning of our demands—the prerequisite hither to. It is not our demand. A ceasefire is transient, and brings and achieves little. Furthermore, a ceasefire has never really existed in Palestine. 2023 was the deadliest year for Palestinian children in the West Bank before October 7.
Democracy | A “democracy” is theoretically a system of governance that represents all members of a state, usually through elected representatives. Israel is often described as the “only democracy in the Middle East.” This description is false, as it overlooks that many other countries in the Middle East hold elections, including Iraq, Lebanon, Kuwait, and Iran. Furthermore, Israel cannot be a representative state when its government legally discriminates against its Palestinian citizens classifying them as second-class and does not represent millions of Palestinians living under Israeli military occupation and control in the West Bank and Gaza. Palestinians can be arrested and incarcerated without charge or trial, and if they are awarded a trial, it is held in military court instead of civilian court. We urge you to consider how western aggression in the Middle East – including toppling democratically elected leaders, bombing civilians and strangling nations with sanctions for decades – help foster the “democratic values” that the west claims to value in Israel.
Death | We cannot convey or communicate the inadequacy of this term at this point, 300+ days into Israel’s genocide and at the very least 40,000-plus lives taken. The Lancet explains how a more realistic estimate of people killed is approximately 200,000. When images of dismembered bodies and children with their heads hollowed out do not resonate with the masses, numbers certainly do not. These numbers ring hollow to most. “Death” also invokes a passiveness echoed by our Western media. We must name the act (i.e. killed, not died), name the entity bearing the responsibility (i.e. Israel killed), specify the violence (i.e. Israel killed in a targeted airstrike). “Death” can take myriad forms or causes, and the word does not begin to do justice to how lives have been ended, taken, stolen.
Violence | The term ‘violence’ is always used to describe attacks against Western interests, never attacks by the West and its allies. ‘Violence threatens to grip the region’ means Israeli military outposts, US military bases, or cargo ships headed to Israel are threatened. The IOF, on the other hand, is said to conduct raids, carry out arrests, execute strikes, kill and maim endless scores of civilians, all with no mention of violence. This perversely inverted discursive reality is entirely consistent with Europe’s colonial legacy where any action an oppressed people take that deviates from complete submissiveness and speaks back to a savage, bloody subjugation demanding justice and dignity is cast as ‘primitive violence.’
Unprecedented | “It pisses off the majority of people in the Western world… especially those who consider themselves to have great liberal or liberated minds, that they had not seen this coming because they had refused to see it coming.” Fady Joudah aptly points out on a ‘Jewish Currents’ podcast. The use of this term is disingenuous, careless, and misguided; what we are witnessing, in fact, is the exact opposite. Generations have borne witness to years of historical precedent. 2008, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2021, 2022. (1948, 1967.) This term has become a political platitude, obfuscation, deference that dismisses the gravity of the situation by failing to properly contextualize and situate what is happening. It obscures history and defies reality. It strips agency and responsibility. It invites capitulation and complicity. But then again, what good does precedent do, when decades of legal and historical precedent still preclude the recognition of a genocide?
Israel-Hamas war | Using ‘Hamas’ to name one of the supposed belligerents, as well as ‘war’ to describe military activity on the ground since October 7, are inaccurate to where this label is manipulation. First, Hamas is but a fraction of the groups that make up the Palestinian resistance. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, and Palestinian civilians throwing stones at tanks—to name a few—represent a large ideological and geographic expanse. Sweeping this scope and diversity under the rug makes things easier for those who already weaponize Western fear of Hamas’ Islamic character to cry ‘Islamic terror’ at all Palestinian resistance. Further, use of just ‘Hamas’ makes the Palestinian front appear smaller, more isolated, and easier to defeat than is the reality. This lends plausibility to Zionist leaders’ stated goal of “total victory.” Such plausibility invites uninformed media consumers to make excuses for the slaughter of Palestinians that apparently takes place in the process. Next, use of “war” in this context conditions readers to an idea that the Zionist entity and Palestinian factions are independent belligerents on relatively equal standing. However, these “two sides” have vastly different statuses before international law, to an extent that renders “war” inapplicable if we’re to speak in good faith. According to several international legal precedents but most famously U.N. General Assembly Resolution 37/43 (1982), people under illegal occupation have a right to resist that occupation including by use of arms in the name of self-determination. ‘War’ does not encompass such activity. At once, the Zionist army has carried out one of the most destructive military crusades in history, with continuously reaffirmed genocidal intent and in a manner that has, in fact, abandoned all “rules of war.” Civilians—and in particular journalists, medical workers, and aid workers—are targets of this assault. In this sense, “war” distorts the reading public’s understanding of the frameworks within which the two sides are operating. We do not adopt the language “Israel-Hamas war.” We consider “war on Gaza” to be correct framing when talking about the Zionist assault on the Gaza strip specifically.
Hostages | Since October 7, we have been hearing, almost daily, about the two hundred or so Israeli hostages, of which around a hundred have already been released. Little discussed is that Israel itself has long practised a kind of ‘administrative detention’ that is no different from hostage-taking. Palestinians are routinely kidnapped from their homes by the Israeli military and held with no charges or trial; as of March, Israel is holding more than 3,500 Palestinians under this clause. The majority of Palestinians currently held without charge or trial have been detained between six months and one year. There have long been reports of torture and sexual abuse of those detained. Still, in the last few months, we have seen concrete evidence and even video footage of Israeli soldiers raping a Palestinian detainee, all under the veneer of legal procedure and process. When will we hear calls for Israel to release the hostages? “Hostages” do not and cannot exist solely when Western powers choose to acknowledge their humanity.
AIPAC: The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is an organization whose purpose is to ensure U.S. politicians at every level of government embrace Zionist foreign policies, particularly those supported by current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It works towards this goal by pouring enormous amounts of money into American political campaigns and by lobbying politicians. AIPAC is the single largest source of donations by registered Republicans to Democratic party primaries. The majority of politicians that they campaign against are people of color and, this summer, AIPAC poured so much money into the campaigns against Black, pro-Palestinian House members Cori Bush and Jamal Bowman that these races became the most expensive House races in U.S. history. Increasingly, AIPAC targets local-level politicians who they perceive as insufficiently zionist. There is a growing movement led by Palestinian and anti-zionist Jewish organizations to pressure politicians to reject AIPAC donations. It is important to note too that, while AIPAC’s influence is significant, the emphasis it receives in American discourse can obscure the many other unsavory reasons for the United States’ support of Zionism.
For an introductory primer / glossary on terms used on and around Palestine, here’s one from Makan.