Palestine and political repression in Argentina

AAnderson Bean and brian bean: In response to the massive international internationally against the ongoing genocide in Gaza perpetuated by the Zionist entity, there has been a wave of tremendous repression and McCarthyite attacks here in the U.S., including against the student encampments. In Europe, there has been harsh restrictions on protests, along with the banning of the keffiyeh and Palestinian flags in France, Germany and elsewhere. Can you talk about the charges being issued against you in the context of the global movement, its advance, and reaction?

Alejandro Bodart: In Argentina, there is an organization called DAIA, known as a prominent Zionist entity that has been campaigning for many years to equate Zionism with Judaism. Their aim is to label anyone who criticizes Zionism as being antisemitic, thereby subjecting them to existing anti-discrimination laws. They base this on a definition from the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance), an international Zionist institution that has urged various governments to adopt this definition. As a result, any criticism of Zionism is treated as if it were a declaration against the Jewish people. This is the basis for the accusations against me—they accuse me of being antisemitic because I criticize Zionism.

I am the first in a series of attacks against other individuals. Recently, a highly respected journalist in Argentina criticized a speech marking the 30th anniversary of the attack on the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA). The president of AMIA, a prominent Zionist figure, used the occasion to accuse all critics of the state of Israel of being antisemitic and criticized human rights organizations, left-wing groups, and the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo.1The Mothers of Plaza de Mayo is a human rights organization in Argentina that was founded in 1977 by a group of mothers whose children had “disappeared” during the Argentine military dictatorship from 1976 to 1983. Their aim is to demand the return of their children who had been abducted by the state, seek justice for human rights abuses, and hold the government accountable for the disappearances. In response to the journalist’s critique, DAIA accused him of terrorism, despite his significant standing in the media.

Another example is the day before yesterday DAIA accused Felipe Solá—the former governor of Buenos Aires province—of terrorism by Israel after he criticized the situation in Gaza on a radio program. This organization, the political arm of Zionism here, is increasingly targeting anyone who speaks out against what is happening in Palestine. Specifically, they focused on two of my tweets to build a case against me. They found a prosecutor who is government-aligned and very pro-Zionist, and used him to pursue the case. They even investigated me for 10 years, compiling all my statements on the Palestinian issue into the case.

This is a highly political case. Legally, although the city of Buenos Aires’ legislature has adhered to the IHRA definition equating Zionism with Judaism, and many other legislatures have approved it, the National Congress has not passed this declaration. Nonetheless, they use this adherence to justify their case against me. This legally challenges a constitutional right: the right to an opinion, especially since I am a political leader and publications director. The initial judge dismissed the accusation, ruled in my favor, and acknowledged my right to express an opinion. However, the prosecution appealed, and the Court, by a 2-to-1 vote, decided to take me to trial.

On August 12, 13, and 14, I will face a weeklong trial with witnesses. My cause has garnered significant solidarity because it is understood that if I lose, it will set a precedent that could affect everyone who criticizes the genocidal actions of Israel. Nevertheless, we are not scared of the trial.

In fact, there was an option to shorten the trial through a declaration that we call in Argentina probation, although I am unsure what it is called elsewhere. We have rejected the probation option that would shorten the trial because we want to go to trial. We intend to see the case through to the end without negotiations, despite the potential consequences, as we believe it is important to show that we are not afraid. There are two more instances for appeal: first to the criminal court and then to the Supreme Court, as the case involves a constitutional right—the right to express an opinion. We are committed to going all the way, regardless of the outcome, because we believe this will eventually be overturned.

I believe my case is a landmark trial in the country. If it goes poorly, it could set a precedent for other trials against various individuals, as many of us are involved. The fact that they targeted a political leader from a significant organization like ours highlights the case’s importance.

Legally, I think DAIA will lose because the trial infringes on a constitutional right, which holds more weight than the IHRA declaration. To suppress free expression here, they would need to amend the constitution, not just implement this declaration. That’s why we plan to take it to the Supreme Court.

We’ve mounted a strong campaign, which includes a major mobilization at the court on the 12th and a petition with countless signatures set to be released on Sunday. We’ve received so many signatures that we ran out of pages and funds to accommodate them all.

Understanding the trial’s significance as a landmark case, we’ve put forth a robust effort. I am confident we will overturn the decision, perhaps not in this instance, but eventually. I also believe this government lacks a promising future in the country. Despite its support from certain bourgeois sectors and imperialism, it has touched on very sensitive issues in a country that has endured genocide. Therefore, I believe the situation will eventually be reversed.

People who speak out against genocide should not be the ones judged but it should be those committing crimes and genocide in Gaza, along with their apologists, including institutions like these Zionist organizations.

AB & bb: What is the max punishment you could receive and what in Argentine law allows for the issuance of criminal charges?

A.Bo.: The case involves a possible sentence of two years. Due to Argentinian legislative law, the sentence being less than three years means that it might be served under conditional release. However, if you were to criticize the state of Israel again, then the sentence could become effective. Essentially, this silences you from criticizing something that we are obligated to continue criticizing.

Also, you can end up with a criminal record for ten years, which can lead to travel restrictions and alternative sentences, such as community service at DAIA. We are determined to reject any such alternative sentences.

Last year, there was a case involving a person, a kid who made a critique on social media. The Israeli embassy requested his imprisonment, and he was detained without trial. Since he wasn’t affiliated with any organization and was just an independent individual, he was held for nine months until we managed to secure his release. Shortly after his release, he committed suicide. We aim to fight the broader objective of these charges, which is to silence voices and instill fear. They want to make the point that if a political leader is condemned for this, it sends a strong signal to the general public about the consequences of speaking out.

AB & bb: Argentina is a place where the revolutionary left has some relative strength with organizations like the MST and the electoral Workers Left Front (FIT-U) formation. Can you talk about what the movement for solidarity with Palestinian liberation looks like in Argentina in this context?

A.Bo.: In Argentina, the main representation of the Left is the Workers’ Left Front. It is the leading leftist force with parliamentary representation at all levels, including the national Parliament, legislatures, and councils across almost the entire country.

Therefore, it is a significant force and clearly anti-Zionist, sharing a strong consensus on the need to confront these issues. Social organizations and human rights groups also support this position. There is a widespread awareness and sensitivity towards the genocide being perpetrated by the state of Israel.

The awareness and sensitivity is strong because of Argentina’s own history of genocide which fosters a deep empathy about the current atrocities committed by Israel. Despite this, our mobilization efforts lagged behind those in the United States and Europe. This coincided with the arrival of Milei, a pro-Zionist government, which also introduced a brutal plan that forces on the Left a significant focus on opposing new laws. Consequently, there were two general strikes and mass mobilizations against the government, making it difficult to coordinate additional efforts. Nonetheless, we have organized several activities and events to address these issues.

There has been significant solidarity, and I believe this is a global phenomenon where Israel’s true nature has been exposed. One major achievement in recent times is that the Palestinian cause has gained mass support, which is a significant setback for Zionism, as this level of widespread backing has never happened before.

AB & bb: In Argentina, you also face the right-wing presidency of Javier Milei. What has that meant for the struggle for solidarity in Palestine and do the attacks on you figure into a more general attack on the Left? Why do you think you specifically are being targeted?

A.Bo.: Milei’s government is deeply connected to Zionism and the interests of the United States. He admires Donald Trump and has traveled to Israel, demonstrating his complicity in acts of genocide. This is evident in actions such as the case being brought against me, which wouldn’t have any traction without this broader context.

This issue is part of a larger assault on democratic rights. There has been a significant erosion of democratic freedoms here, to the point where we believe the political regime cannot be defined as a liberal democracy anymore. Liberal democracy is in crisis, and elements of authoritarianism are emerging.

We believe that while it isn’t a dictatorship, the government is authoritarian in its attempts to restrict rights. For instance, they issued a protocol outside of Parliament, which has no legal standing, that prohibits demonstrations—banning protests.I am involved in another case related to this, stemming from the first demonstration we held against the government on December 20, ten days after it took office. This large protest ended up violating the protocol, and I now face legal action for participating in it.

There is a clear attack on the Left and on social organizations because we possess significant influence that extends beyond electoral power. We also have a strong presence in the streets, in popular neighborhoods, factories, among workers, youth, and even against the union bureaucracy and those who attempt to suppress struggles.

This has led to major attacks on us, including legal cases against our comrades and issues related to the protocols. Additionally, there has been another attack in the form of cutting off all social aid to people linked with us. Those organized with the Left in social movements, who played a crucial role due to the structural unemployment dating back to the 90s, have been particularly targeted. During the Reagan era, Menem’s policies in Argentina led to this long-standing issue. Currently, half the population lacks formal employment and faces job insecurity. The Left has organized a network of soup kitchens that provide many families with a meal, but all this support has been cut off.

The government is indifferent to the plight of these sectors, leaving them without access to necessities. In this country, nine out of ten children face hunger. These are staggering figures given the current situation. The government aims to dismantle the organization that we in the Left and social movements have built. They recognize us as a significant barrier, which is why we face constant attacks. The Zionist attacks against me are a component of that. However, we are determined to resist. It will not be easy for them to dismantle our organization while we continue to resist.

AB & bb: The initiator of the charges against you comes from a group called DAIA (Delegation of Argentine Israeli Association) and the charges themselves are connected with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism that cynically regards any criticism of the undemocratic nature of the Israeli ethnostate as being antisemitic. Can you talk about who DAIA is and what it represents and about the weaponization of antisemitism being used to attack the cause to end the genocide and win Palestinian liberation internationally.

A.Bo.: There are two significant organizations here. There is an anti-Zionist alliance and several Zionist organizations. The representation of the state of Israel is through three institutions: AMIA, DAIA, and the embassy. The embassy typically does not act directly, except in specific cases like the one I mentioned earlier.

AMIA, the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association, is a social organization. DAIA, on the other hand, acts politically in defense of the interests of Zionists and the state of Israel. DAIA is responsible for filing complaints and handling legal matters, whereas AMIA generally deals with broader political issues. DAIA is clearly a Zionist organization, defending Zionism to the extent that it blurs the distinction between Zionism and the Jewish people. Criticizing Zionism is portrayed as criticizing the Jewish people.

This is perpetuated along with the IHRA definition, which they have managed to push through in various places, including getting it voted on in the capital.

As I previously mentioned, they took it to the national congress, but were unable to get it passed there. Therefore, the definition does not have national-level endorsement. Unlike the United States, which is more federal, our system is more centralized.. In the national Parliament, they failed to pass it.

However, because they have managed to pass it in some local legislatures, such as in Buenos Aires,  the city’s criminal justice system is initiating cases based on the local adoption. This has also happened in other provincial legislatures. In some states, they have implemented it. In Córdoba, the second-largest city in the country, they have also managed to pass it. Some interior universities have adopted it, though not the more progressive university here. In the universities where it has been adopted, there are attempts to censor students, sometimes even threatening to remove them from their courses.

We have faced many battles in various places over this issue. I believe this is a global trend, and they will attempt to pass the definition wherever possible, especially with the rise of the extreme right, which is becoming more influential. This trend is driven by a deep-seated Islamophobia and a tendency to identify with Israel and support American interests.

Initially, the definition might not have aimed to persecute but had a more internal focus. However, as Zionism has faced increasing global scrutiny due to its actions in Gaza, the definition has been used more aggressively. The Palestinian issue has gained broader attention beyond the small circles that used to discuss it, as more people have become aware of the situation in Gaza.

The brutality of Netanyahu, who is clearly a fascist, and his statements and actions have broken barriers, bringing the Palestinian issue into widespread discussion and leading to mobilizations. In response, they are trying to clamp down and silence voices. These laws create fear, making people hesitant to openly criticize Israel on social media or television, knowing it could result in a criminal case or even imprisonment. The goal is to intimidate and silence opposition so they can continue their actions without resistance.

However, I believe it will be very difficult for them to succeed in this effort. While they may pass these laws and initiate many legal cases, they will not be able to silence the people. The situation is too brutal, and there is growing resistance to Israel’s actions. Many countries have also broken relations with Israel, showing a unified opposition.

The increase in resistance to Israel’s actions is not a sign of their strength but of their weakness. Feeling vulnerable, they resort to such measures to try to stop the opposition. Here, at least, the DAIA is showing desperation by trying to prosecute cases that increasingly expose their actions.

A prominent journalist here was labeled a terrorist for criticizing the AMIA president’s speech, which accused the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo and others of being terrorists. Despite being Jewish, he was told he is not Jewish because of his harsh criticisms. Similarly, two days ago, DAIA criticized  me for being anti-Zionist. A regime-friendly governor even joined in.

I believe they are upset because Zionism is losing the political battle. This loss is driving them to become more violent. Netanyahu himself faces increasing opposition, even internally, and struggles to stay in power if the war stops. Their actions are defensive, not offensive, although they have serious consequences.

For instance, if I am found guilty and make a statement against Netanyahu or Zionism the next day, I could end up in prison. We must defend ourselves against these actions. There is significant solidarity in my case because people understand it is a test case; if it passes, many more will face court battles. But ultimately, their actions are defensive, not offensive.

AB & bb: What do you think it will take to defend yourself, and the movement more broadly in order to push back and expand and deepen the international movement for solidarity to stop the genocide and win liberation for Palestine?

A.Bo.: I believe that we must not give up on mobilization; it is crucial. For me, the key to everything lies in mobilization. It is very challenging for the Palestinian people to stop the aggression they face without international solidarity. We need support from the people in the region, even though their governments often negotiate with Israel. This has contributed to the consolidation of the state of Israel over the past seventy-six years. The Arab bourgeoisie has played a significant role in this by accepting the existence of Israel, an enclave established through external imposition and ethnic cleansing. This cleansing did not start with Gaza but has been ongoing for seventy-six years.

Mobilization in central countries has been particularly impactful and is deepening. The efforts in the United States are especially significant, similar in importance to the student mobilizations during the Vietnam War, given the global influence of the U.S. The current mobilization may be experiencing a different phase, but it is essential for it to continue.

The massive mobilization in London has also had political consequences, forcing the government to take actions they otherwise wouldn’t have. For example, the policies have practically cost the Democrats the presidency, compelling leaders to distance themselves from certain stances. I believe this mobilization contributed significantly to the defeat of the conservatives in London.

In Spain, a regime party and the government have been compelled to publicly denounce the genocide. The mobilization has had a significant impact, prompting even imperialist institutions like the UN to make statements through various rapporteurs acknowledging the genocide. These are significant blows.

So far, this pressure hasn’t changed the situation drastically because Netanyahu’s government needs to keep pushing forward to survive. If they stop, they fall, so they are continuing despite increasing isolation. Eventually, this isolation will lead to their downfall, opening new perspectives.

Therefore, it’s crucial to keep up the mobilization efforts. Our commitment here is not just to focus on defensive actions like the trials. My trial, although defensive, has also galvanized the cause. If it turns out well, it would be another significant blow and could further encourage mobilization without fear.

Historically, I am optimistic about the Palestinian cause. Similar to South Africa, where people ignored the issues for many years, I believe there will eventually be a widespread acknowledgment and shift in perspective.

In this case, the brutality will also eventually be reversed. As a socialist, I believe that debates about strategies are very important, especially regarding the future of Palestine. We, the revolutionary Left, must engage in these debates. For example, the two-state solution has led to the current situation. It was always an illusion that caused great demoralization and has been a setback for the Palestinian cause because it involved accepting the existence of the Israeli state.

I mentioned in a talk yesterday that living next to a serial killer and expecting to coexist peacefully is unrealistic; the serial killer will eventually harm you, which is what is happening now. I believe the only viable solution is a single state led by Palestinians. This brings up many challenges, such as how refugees will return, which will require significant revolutionary changes.

The solution for the Palestinian people isn’t just a local change but a broader revolution in the Middle East that overthrows the ruling oligarchies in these countries. This issue persists because neighboring Arab countries often ignore what is happening. Even Iran, which appears to be an ally, has the power to act but often resorts to mere declarations. Egypt, for instance, hasn’t even opened its borders for humanitarian aid.

I believe a significant revolution is needed, one that must have a socialist character throughout the Middle East to bring real change.

The only way forward for the Palestinian people and to reclaim the region and its interests is through this solution. Today, the state of Israel operates in the interests of the United States, primarily to control oil resources, essentially serving as a large, artificial base for U.S. power.

That’s why it’s crucial to organize against the actions in Gaza now. The immediate need is clear with the high number of casualties and the brutality that should shock anyone with any sensitivity. However, we must continue fighting until a definitive solution is achieved.

Featured image credit: International Socialist League; modified by Tempest.