It is time for the rebirth of the Arab human rights movement under the bombing of Gaza Opinions

The Women for Justice Foundation, one of the Egyptian Diaspora institutions, held its first consultation session, earlier this month, under the title: “A dialogue series on the impact of the war in Gaza on democracy and human rights in Egypt and the region.” The meeting was attended by 15 participants; They varied between workers and directors of human rights organizations, and researchers in the field of democracy and human rights. It is expected that these episodes will move to the Arab regional level. In preparation for its expansion among those concerned with these issues at the international level.

This remarkable initiative came as an attempt to salvage what could be salvaged from human rights issues, the remains of which were scattered and mixed with the remains of every Palestinian child, man and woman who were martyred under Israeli bombing that did not adhere to the rules of international humanitarian law, and was supported by some Western governments.

Democracy and human rights saw a significant decline before the war. Freedom House’s recent Freedom in the World report found that 80% of the world’s population does not live in a free environment. Expanding geopolitical conflicts, civil wars, democratic backsliding in major democracies, rising authoritarianism, xenophobia, increasing political violence, growing discrimination against minorities, and the rise of right-wing populism… all test the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the principles and values ​​it enshrines.

The war on the Palestinians came to highlight these trends, and add to them: double standards, genocide, crimes against humanity, and the systematic targeting of journalists and hospitals…etc. Which makes the world an unsafe place to live in, and a hotbed of chaos.

The attendees at the first consultative seminar recognized these challenges and proposed dealing with them from two approaches: theoretical and practical.

Reclaiming the moment of creation 1948: The universality of human rights

Although the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was born in the wake of the horrors of World War II; It embodied the common language of humanity. At its origin, it was described as combining the wisdom of Eastern and Western civilizations. A number of jurists and experts – representing diverse cultural formations – contributed to its formulation. There are now more than 70 treaties in force to protect it at both the global and regional levels, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains at the heart of this complex structure of rules, institutions and protection mechanisms.

The declaration marked a profound development in world politics. He declared that individuals – not just sovereign states – were the bearers of “inalienable” rights, and how any government would treat its own populations would any longer be a matter of legitimate international scrutiny.

Human rights and democracy were one of the main normative foundations of the rules-based international liberal order in the second post-war period (1939-1945). The national liberation movements from colonialism that rose at the same time also benefited from it, but unfortunately it was occupied in the post-Cold War period – the early 1990s – by the West, led by the United States, and was exploited to achieve Western interests.

If human rights issues are part of states’ interests; It is expected to be paralyzed, as shown by the inability of the United Nations to issue a Security Council resolution to stop the war in Gaza. What is most harmful to the human rights system is its selective promotion outside Western countries. This exposes her to accusations of hypocrisy and double standards. The system was also influenced by the idea of ​​“American exceptionalism,” which extended to its protégé, Israel.

This exception assumes that the United States has a lot to teach the world, but it can learn little from it, and thus it is subject to its internal legal and constitutional rules only, and is not committed to what is outside it. This ultimately results in evasion of rules and laws, as we are witnessing in the war against the Palestinians now.

The human rights movement in the region relies heavily on foreign funding and support; Much of which comes from Western government programs, this sometimes undermines the efforts of national human rights movements in the region that have normalized their relations with Western governments.

The workshop participants recommended that an effort should be made at both the theoretical and intellectual levels to emphasize the universality of the values ​​of democracy and human rights, even if Western governments do not adhere to them. They added: “It is not in our interest to portray the issue as a cultural or civilizational war, or to abandon the reference to human rights, because we will be facing a state of chaos.” The attendees also stressed: the necessity of reintroducing international legal principles related to the illegality of the Israeli occupation and settlement, as well as the right to resist occupation and the right to self-determination, which are foundations recognized in international law, but under Israeli pressure they fall on deaf ears in Western circles.

Participants noted the ongoing movement now to link anti-Semitism with Zionism; So they proposed three recommendations:

1. He placed the rising anti-Arabism in the West after the war at the heart of anti-Semitism; Because they share the same ethnic root.
2. Evoking the ideas and arguments of anti-Zionist Jewish thinkers, such as Ellen Pappe and other new Jewish historians.
3. The necessity of deepening the Arab and Islamic discourse that distinguishes between Jews and Zionism. On October 7, it is useful to distinguish between the Palestinians’ right to armed resistance and the violations that took place against civilians.

The transgressions that took place on October 7 called on the resistance to disavow them and refuse to attribute them to them – as Nasrallah, Secretary General of Hezbollah stated in his speech – Friday, November 3, or to withdraw from them – as in the issue of killing a hostage for every massacre carried out by Israel, or recharacterization of civilians. Detainees as guests.

There has been an escalation – albeit still confusion – of basing the resistance discourse on opposition to Zionism, the occupation, and violations against prisoners and civilians, not on hostility to the Jews. We are facing a development that must be captured, built upon, and discussed, with the belief that the violations committed by the various parties feed each other and provide justification for the stronger party to commit more violations.

We have learned from our heritage: “And let no people’s hatred compel you not to be just,” and this requires of us: “Be just, for that is closer to piety.”

From people to people… new business strategies

Although the Arab human rights movement arose in the 1980s on its own initiative – and essentially in accordance with the requirements of the Arab reality, which witnessed ferocious violations and major abuses – the main momentum was in the 1990s. Therefore, it was not devoid of international influence, which at that time was witnessing the rise of the rules of the international liberal order.

The human rights movement in the region relies heavily on foreign funding and support; Much of which comes from Western government programs. This sometimes undermines the efforts of national human rights movements in the region that have normalized their relations with Western governments as the most effective means of exerting pressure on Arab authorities to improve the human rights situation. This does not mean that it has become a hostage of Western support.

It also adopted several action strategies – independent of international support – including raising the level of awareness among citizens, seeking to establish alliances with like-minded policy makers in parliaments, activating international mechanisms, especially those made available by the United Nations, and resorting to international litigation mechanisms such as the Court. International criminal law, dialogue with ruling regimes…etc.

Disengaging from Western governments requires reviewing the theory of change adopted by Arab human rights organizations. Those attending the consultative session referred to a number of proposals in this regard, most notably:

1. Directing advocacy and networking efforts to other sectors such as civil society, popular movements, and minority parties outside government alliances, in addition to governments whose positions in this war have not changed, such as: Norway, Spain, Belgium, and others; This is to gain more allies.
2. International humanitarian law and international mechanisms of action, although they are in question today, should not be abandoned; They are spaces of freedom that exist to seek allies in our collective struggle for justice.
3. Distinction in our perception of different actors and their internal diversities. This distinction is a first step to understanding the disparities, and to begin building detailed maps of the different actors. In the same context, attention should be paid to the roles of non-state actors who are playing a growing role in the current moment of international transformation.
4. Searching for unconventional allies outside official Western circles. Possible list includes: civil society organizations, grassroots movements in the West, left-leaning student unions, non-Zionist Jews (Jews for Peace for example), LGBTQ communities, environmental activists, indigenous advocacy groups, and the Black Lives Matter movement “, unlike the Arab and Muslim communities and our allies in the countries of the South.
5. Investing in linking the movement and human rights discourse with a popular, mass incubator that protects it from regime fluctuations.
6. As for independence; The total reliance on foreign funding for the human rights community puts it in a real dilemma, especially since some Western governments are now reviewing it to grant it according to their position on condemning what happened on October 7.
   There is a need to work on multiple sources of funding, and to think about alternative and sustainable forms, such as: self-financing, local funding, or increasing the number of volunteers at the expense of professionals.
7. The necessity of investing in the organizational formation of Arab and Muslim communities in influential Western capitals; This is to facilitate coordination and mobilization to allow influence on the decision maker.

The true nature of human rights is tied to the struggle of ordinary people against the abuse of power, power and wealth, and this calls for thinking about them from the bottom up rather than from the top down – whoever is at the top: governments, the liberal international order or businessmen; So that it is not misused by the powerful against ordinary people.

Israeli brutality, supported by some Western governments, is an opportunity to reinvent human rights from within the region and on its own initiative, and to liberate itself from the colonialism of the concept. It is an invention that is open to the world; Because he realizes his universality, not his westernity, and rebuilds his alliances in a new land, and from a new material that is not based on the powerful; But it is based on popular movements that sided with the concept of justice in its broad meanings.

This catastrophe allowed us to rediscover the effectiveness of Generation Z, which was born at the end of the last century and the beginning of this century, and it is an opportunity for the Arab human rights movement to rejuvenate itself through openness, including and summoning the voices of this generation, which reinforces the idea of ​​alternatives and innovation in mechanisms and their reviews.

Finally; This openness – to the world, new alliances, and the participation of new generations – will have no meaning without the rooting of the entire movement in its local soil, through popular movements that support, support and pressure the human being who enjoys inalienable rights.