The importance of holding politicians accountable on Palestine

I supported Jamaal Bowman when he ran against staunch Zionist Elliot Engel, donating what I could afford to his campaign because he told me on a phone call that he was firm in his solidarity with Palestinian liberation.  But those words turned out to be hollow, and now the U.S. left, particularly the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), of which Bowman is a member, is deeply divided on the matter of how the party should have reacted to his betrayal of Palestinians.

The ascendance of “The Squad,” whom we imagined would navigate political life based on moral principles rather than self-interest, was exciting for those of us who’ve dedicated our lives to social justice struggles, despite whatever antipathy we might feel toward electoral politics.  Although we understand that politicians too often waver and backpedal—because the system is such that keeping one’s job is predicated on playing a dirty game of betraying the weak and wretched to appease the powerful—activists must still be called to hold elected officials accountable for their transgressions.

The reality, however, is that leftist individuals and organizations often give a pass to politicians who align themselves with Israel against Palestine.  They justify this by invoking the extraordinary pressures from Zionist forces, and thus the need to “compromise” (read: throw Palestinians under the bus) to ensure the strategic reelection of a politician who is a little less awful than others.   

This is particularly true when the politician is Black or otherwise belonging to a community of struggle, because it is difficult for us to fathom how such individuals could become promulgators of oppression and empire.  We saw this most acutely with the nation’s first Black president.  Even after Barack Obama presided over a brutal campaign of drone killings and the calamitous invasion and destruction of Libya, the left continued to believe in him, sure that his clear war crimes were anomalies.  Palestinians, too, were not immune to this logic.  Despite Obama’s unwavering support of Israel, including billions of public dollars, along with political cover for repeated war crimes, many Palestinians were sure that he would be free to express his true moral self during a less constrained second term. So, we voted for him again, despite his abysmal record.  Of course, Obama carried on with empire—as he said he would—becoming a president who launched military strikes and raids that devastated at least seven Arab or Muslim-majority countries:  Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan.

Jamaal Bowman aligns with Israel

While Jamaal Bowman promised to fight for the working class, for the oppressed and colonized, it didn’t take long into his first term in Congress to betray Palestinians—equating the Boycott Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) campaign with the “eradication of Israel,” going on a J Street-sponsored propaganda trip to Israel, meeting with war criminal Naftali Bennett, speaking at a J Street conference, voting to send ungodly billions of tax dollars to Israel (a betrayal also of the working class), and more.  In a recent interview on Democracy Now, Amy Goodman asked him to comment on his support for another $1 billion to Israel for their Iron Dome.  Rather than respond to the point, Bowman criticized DSA chapters for holding him accountable publicly rather than trying to work directly and quietly with his office (at 46:50 in this recording).  However, that isn’t entirely true.  Many did indeed try to dissuade him, for example, from speaking at the J Street conference, even after he had taken the trip to Israel.  He refused and continued with J Street.  He also refused behind the scenes requests and pleas to co-sponsor Betty McCollum’s H.R. 751 “#Standwiththe6” bill, which calls on the Biden administration to condemn Israel’s designation of six prominent Palestinian human rights and civil society groups as terrorist organizations.  Given his support of Israel, Bowman’s rejection of this minimal affirmation of Palestinian human rights defenders makes it clear that Bowman has aligned himself with Israeli settler-colonial apartheid.  Unfortunately, this just makes him a typical U.S. congressperson.

The controversy is not about Bowman’s actions

Accordingly, the controversy did not arise over Bowman’s actions, but over DSA’s reaction to him as their most prominent member. Following Bowman’s trip to Israel, the Madison, Wisconsin chapter of DSA published an open letter calling for the unconditional expulsion of Jamaal Bowman from the party. Several local chapters around the country joined the call, and the DSA Working Group on Palestine issued a statement calling for the same.  In a top-down leadership move, the national body chose to maintain Jamaal Bowman’s standing in the organization:  No rebuke. No expulsion. No temporary suspension. No conditional membership.  Nothing. Not a single consequence for his profound moral failure and for violating a fundamental tenet of the organization’s own political platform, which explicitly states that they “Stand in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle against apartheid, colonialism, and military occupation, and for equality, human rights, and self-determination, including the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.”

Wait. Be Patient. Because, strategy.

One of the arguments against censuring Bowman is that he’s better than his Zionist predecessor.  Implicit in this position is that Palestinians should be grateful because it could be worse.  This is not the first time we’ve been called to accept crumbs because it’s better than nothing.  Another argument is that he’s a good man who needs time to learn.  We’re asked to accept humiliation in the hope that things might be better if we just wait for people like Bowman to find their way.  Many Palestinians, including those in leadership positions, accept this logic and defend the indefensible because they know and fear it could be worse.  I am not without sympathy for their position, because we all live in a constant state of psychic injury, going from one trauma to the next, at times unsure which steps will bring us closer to justice.  I am also not without sympathy for Jamaal Bowman, whom I want to believe would prefer to do the right thing, but whom I suspect has surrounded himself with liberal Zionists to advise him, or who simply feels he must prioritize re-election no matter the cost.  Ultimately, however, those of us who are fighting for our families, our ancestors, and our children to live unmolested by Israel’s barbarity must consistently insist on the full menu of human rights, upholding Palestinian dignity and humanity above all.  

Palestinian history is replete with compromises in the name of tactics and strategy, the most infamous contemporary example being the Oslo Accords.  We repeatedly believe that those in power will move toward us eventually. In time. If we can just be patient, supportive of the less terrible politician.

One is reminded of Dr King’s powerful response to such calls for patience in the name of pragmatism.  Or Nelson Mandela’s equally resolute response to the “pragmatic” offers to release him from prison.  History, especially Palestinian history, shows us clearly that trading principles and dignity for a slightly better practical position is the greatest threat to social justice movements. 

Standing on unbending principles is what truly inspires popular moral imagination, while compromising with power is what weakens us.  We should never concede the sacrifices our families make every day in Palestine for political convenience in the U.S.  We can applaud, thank, and support politicians who take moral stands with us, but that cannot blind us to the moment when they align with and support racist colonizers engaged in the ongoing process of removing and replacing us with foreign colonizers in our ancestral homeland.

DSA’s choice

DSA embraced BDS and Palestinian liberation because its membership demanded it.  No one outside of the organization forced them to do so.  But now, as a powerful member of DSA, Bowman’s actions have created a challenge to the organization to demonstrate what that solidarity means.  An organization cannot pretend to stand with the oppressed while simultaneously turning a blind eye to a member helping fuel the colonial military engine used to maintain that oppression. It sends a message that solidarity with Palestinians is valid only until it is inconvenient.  And for Palestinians to let this pass quietly sends a signal that we will accept such trivialization of what is an existential struggle for survival against Israeli settler colonialism.  For this reason, many of us have called on DSA to reckon with itself and live by their own stated principles.  It is my sincere hope that DSA will choose principle over political expediency.  And by extension, I hope the same for Congressman Bowman.  

Correction: The article has been updated to indicate that Rep. Bowman has not co-sponsored H.R. 751, not H.R. 4391 as originally stated.