One of a number of Palestine struggle supporters appeared in court again on Wednesday and, though the case was postponed for hearing until 26 February, was successful in having one of the conditions of his bail, his daily curfew, removed.
Jack Brasil raises a clenched fist outside the Dublin Court on Wednesday. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
Palestine struggle supporters sat in Dublin’s Central Criminal Court with Jack Brasil, New Zealander of Irish descent, through many other case applications until his own was dealt with, before accompanying him out of the intimidating building.
Another of the bail-related restrictions, that Brasil not present stationary in the Dublin 1 or 2 areas (i.e in the Dublin City centre) remains, at least for the moment. This restriction has also been imposed on a number of other Palestine solidarity activists in a clear restriction of their civil rights.
As in many other Western states, Palestine solidarity activists have been charged with offences under Ireland’s criminal code but, when released on bail, remain under restrictions for months at a time after their arrest, interfering with their normal routines.
It also hampers or even prevents their participation in solidarity activities.
Palestine struggle supporters outside the Dublin court on Wednesday after Jack Brasil had the curfew removed from the conditions of bail. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
To date it seems that none of the Irish civil rights NGOs have challenged the State on the wide-scale use of those undemocratic bail restrictions from participation in lawful solidarity protests on people who are, even according to the criminal code, innocent, unless convicted in a court of law.
During the 2014-2015 mass-popular protests against the imposition of a third water tax in preparation for the privatisation of water supply in the Irish state, similar restrictions were imposed on protesters. Two however refused to accept the conditions and were jailed.
Protests outside Mountjoy Jail followed and, under the threat of hunger strike by the detained, they were released and the restrictions removed. It may be that this option will need to be explored by Palestine supporters if charged in Ireland in the future.
(Article originally written for the Political Prisoners Collective Asociación Arrakala)
Gearóid Ó Loingsigh January 19 2025 (Reading time: 6 mins.)
NB: Edited by RB from original article for formatting purposes
Who and what is a political prisoner is controversial, though it shouldn’t be. Once upon a time we all knew or recognised a political prisoner. It was obvious, evident.
But two centuries of legislative changes, the work of the press and more than one NGO seeking to please its master i.e. those who finance it, has disfigured the political prisoner and its corollary outside, the rebel, the dissident, the activist.
Before trying to vindicate the figure of the political prisoner we should be clear that the prison itself has not been a constant in history.
There have always been places of reclusion, but they were transitory, provisional, where the prisoner was held whilst they awaited their sentence, be it execution, or exile, the confiscation of assets or in the case to debtors’ prison, the payment of the debt or the taxes owed.
The idea of a prison as somewhere you serve a term of a number of years as a prisoner according to the gravity of the crime is novel. It is about 250 years old.
The seriousness of the crime and the proportionality of the sentence are not obvious. In many jurisdictions a bank robbery is more serious than the rape of a woman.
Historically, crimes against property were more severely punished than crimes against the person. There are exceptions to that but in general, in all judicial systems crimes against property are more severely punished.
Of course, murder usually carries a stiff sentence, but countries with long sentences or even life sentences usually consider such sentences for crimes against property and other crimes. In the USA that possibility exists in various states.
In a number of countries the crimes punishable by death include, blasphemy, adultery, prostitution, spying, bribery, corruption, drug trafficking, homosexuality.
Political crimes are also severely punished with harsh sentences and the death penalty, depending on the country. Such punishment for political crimes only disappeared where it was abolished for all crimes.
Political crimes
Margaret Thatcher the British prime minister (1979-1990) once declared that there was no political crime, only criminal offences. She said in relation to IRA and INLA militants in prison in Ireland that political murder, political attacks nor any political violence existed.
With this she aimed to ignore not just the long history of such crimes in national laws in many countries but also International Humanitarian Law.
The preamble to the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes rebellion as the last legitimate resort in the face of human rights abuses.
“Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind… if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.”[1]
The Geneva Conventions, the basis of IHL in common article 3 to the four conventions reads “In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions…”[2]
And goes on to explain the provisions that apply. With this the Geneva Conventions acknowledge the existence of organised and armed rebellion against a state as something more than criminality. Otherwise, it wouldn’t attempt to govern the behaviour of the parties to the conflict.
Though it is worth pointing out that the IHL never clearly defined what was an internal armed conflict nor a war of national liberation. However, it is clear that it can’t be reduced to mere violence.
There are those that raise high the figure of Prisoner of Conscience, not just as the highest expression of a political prisoner but as the only one. According to Amnesty International such a prisoner is in jail for their ideas without having used or advocated violence.
It is an absurd definition. For years they praised Mandela as a prisoner of conscience, but Nelson Mandela led an organisation with an armed wing and ended up in jail for conspiracy to overthrow the state. He was no pacifist.
The definition Amnesty uses can be summarised as They who opine but do not act are political prisoners, those who think but do not apply their thinking are political prisoners.
This excludes great figures from Colombian history such as Policarpa or José Antonio Galán who were executed following their capture. According to this definition José Martí was a political prisoner when he wrote, but a criminal when he returned to Cuba to free it.
But this is not correct, a political prisoner may be a person who never even raised a rock, not to mention a rifle. They may even be pacifists. It is not necessarily a person linked to armed groups, though neither does it exclude them.
There are various types of political prisoners in Colombia.
· There are the militants of guerrilla groups, the majority of them in prison for armed actions, though there are those who played a political role in such groups, what the courts refer to as ideologues.
· There are also those who are victims of frame ups, the majority of them militants of one or other unarmed Left group, social organisation, trade union etc. The state imprisons them through frame-ups in order to limit their political work.
· Then there are those who are prisoners for things related to their political activity i.e. people who in the midst of protests, strikes, occupations of buildings break some law and are arrested, such as those who carry out pickets that are not permitted.
Amongst this group there are also the youths of the Frontline of the National Strike. Yes, throwing a stone is a crime in and of itself but these youths threw stones in response to state violence during the protests.
But, what distinguishes political prisoner from a common prisoner? Brandishing weapons or throwing stones is done by lots of people from narcos to drunks on a Saturday night. Pablo Escobar attacked the state with weapons and car bombs, but he was never a political prisoner.
He was always a criminal.
The first point is the political prisoner is captured in the struggle for a better world.
They seek changes in society that benefit a broad section of the population when their struggle is national in character or large group when the struggle is local or in the neighbourhood with specific demands.
So, a right-wing paramilitary could never be a political prisoner because they seek the status quo, or even a worsening of the conditions of the people.
A political prisoner acts altruistically, seeking no personal benefit though they may end up benefiting from the changes they seek for peasants, youths or neighbours because they are from that community.
But they never seek personal benefit for themselves but rather for society or a particular group in society. Once again neither the paramilitaries, nor the narcos or the Uribistas could ever be political prisoners because what they seek is always for their own personal benefit or small powerful group.
So a guerrilla may be a political prisoner, as may be the youths from the National Strike and similar protests. The environmentalist that blocks the entry of a mining company’s machinery is also one, even if they commit a crime such as damaging or destroying the company’s installations.
In 1976 eighty intellectuals and figures from the world of culture met in Algiers and proclaimed the Algiers Declaration – Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples. The document is entirely political and does not have the force of law but was and continues to be a moral reference point.
In Article 28 it states:
Any people whose fundamental rights are seriously disregarded has the right to enforce them, specially by political or trade union struggle and even, in the last resort by the use the force.[3]
Political prisoners are those who comply with this article.
Though the methods used, whether they are violent or pacific may have some influence, they do not determine who are political prisoners.
Of course, in the case of guerrillas, a war crime may wrest credibility from their status as a political prisoner, but in general the use or not of violence is not what determines who is a political prisoner.
It is the demands and the selfless commitment of the militant to the cause that defines whether they are political prisoners or not. Those who deny this are the ones who benefit from the capitalist system.
Their denial is nothing more than publicity and public relations for Julio Mario Santodomingo, Juan Manuel Santos, Gustavo Petro and the large NGOs. Colombia is full of political prisoners and those who deny this also deny the reality of capitalism in the country.
There were also others: the Guildford Four, Maguire Seven and Judith Ward, all innocent and all convicted in separate cases, mostly in 1974, in the same year that the Prevention of Terrorism Act was passed to silence the Irish community.
Yet others continue being framed, including the Craigavon Two.
There were also others: the Guildford Four, Maguire Seven and Judith Ward, all innocent and all convicted in separate cases, mostly in 1974, in the same year that the Prevention of Terrorism Act was passed to silence the Irish community.
Paddy Hill in 2017 outside the Dublin court where the Jobstown case was being tried (Photo sourced: Internet)
The agitation for civil rights for the community of Catholic background in the British colony of the Six Counties in Ireland began in the last years of the 1960s and very soon people in Britain were marching in solidarity with those facing violent colonial repression in the Six Counties.
The Irish were the most numerous and longest-established migrant community in Britain and had become active in many social, trade union and political circles with the potential to educate and strongly affect the host community.1 This was a problem for the British ruling class.
The jailing of so many people, in many cases obviously innocent, hundreds of arrests, thousands of detentions and interrogations with desertion by much of the British liberal and Left sector terrorised the Irish community so that many stepped away from solidarity campaigning.
That repression muted the Irish community’s solidarity actions until the 1981 Hunger Strikes brought them out again in thousands.
After his release in March 1991 Paddy Hill founded Mojo to campaign for framed innocent people and supported the campaign to free the Graigavon Two, another case that bears many of the hallmarks of a frame-up for political reasons, as famous barrister Michael Mansfield2 commented:
“There is nothing more particular about it (the Craigavon Two case) than in all the other miscarriages and the same features appear in all these things.”3
PSNI Constable Steven Carroll was shot dead by an AK47 bullet on 9th March 2009 in Craigavon, Armagh while responding to a fake crime call, the “dissident” group the Continuity IRA claiming responsibility.4 The arrests of John Paul Wooton and Brendan McConville followed.
Political cases in the Six Counties almost invariably are tried by the no-jury Diplock Court and the judge there refused both men bail. This might seem normal except that they did not go to trial until three years later – and kept in jail throughout the period.
Shortly before the eventual trial a man approached the PSNI saying he had seen McConville near the scene and on the evening of the killing of the Constable. This man was the only witness for the PSNI Prosecution but his partner, with him on the evening in question, refused to confirm his tale.
The night was raining and dark and the eyesight of the alleged witness was exposed as weak by the Defence. The coat he alleged McConville to be wearing was a different type, length and colour to that which the Prosecution was alleging McConville had been wearing on the night in question.
This ‘witness’ was also described by his father as having ‘a Walter Mitty character’ and the PSNI admitted paying him as an informant. An AK47 was recovered near the scene of the killing and the one fingerprint recovered from it did not match those of either Wooton or McConville.
Craigavon Two
Brendan McConville and Paul Wooton, taken in 2017. (Photo sourced: Petition for the release of the Craigavon Two)
There was no evidence against either man of having even handled the weapon never mind fired it, no evidence placing either at the scene apart from the dubious testimony placing one of them nearby. Incredibly, it might seem, nevertheless they were found guilty on 12th May 2012.
McConville was sentenced to 25 years and Wooton to ten. Their appeal two years after conviction in May 2014 was unsuccessful and in fact the Prosecution used it to add another four years to Wooton’s sentence.
Paddy Hill of the Birmgham Six and Gerry Conlon of the Guildford Four, both sadly deceased, both innocent but served long years in jail, both supported the campaign of the Craigavon Two. (Photo sourced: Internet)
Paddy Hill was not the only former framed prisoner to support the campaign to free the Craigavon Two. Gerry Conlon was asked to examine the case and became a convinced and dedicated campaigner for the men, speaking out about it as late as a week before his untimely death.5
Paddy Hill and the rest of the Birmingham Six were framed by the British system and served 18 years in jail. In May this year McConville and Wooton will have reached their 16th in jail. For how much longer will they and their close ones be tortured?
End.
Footnotes
1The Irish diaspora in Britain had provided the British working class with its anthem (The Red Flag), its classic novel (The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists) and two leaders of its first mass movement, the Chartists (Fergus O’ Connor and Bronterre O’Brien) and had also formed a strng section of the First International Workingmen’s Association led by Marx and Engels. In 1974 people of Irish background were estimated to form up to 10% of the population of some British cities.
2Mansfield led the appeal cases of the Birmingham Six and of the Guildford Four.
FEW CAN SEE – Censoring the Conflict was screened last week (Wednesday 4th night) in the Irish Film Institute to a moderately-sized audience, followed by questions of film-maker Frank Sweeney and Betty Purcell by Ruairí McCann from Belfast.
Sweeney took a look at state censorship during the three decades’ war in Ireland which was effected through the introduction of Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, the sacking of the entire RTÉ Board of Directors and the jailing of a journalist.
Henceforth, self-censorship was the rule.
Specifically, the State ban applied during this period in refusals to interview any member of the IRA (Provisional or Official) and was later extended to Provisional Sinn Féin. It was enforced within RTÉ by management including members of the Workers’ Party1 who also led one of the unions.
Docudrama Few Can See focused on the application of the ban to spokespersons of people in the occupied Six Counties and of a number of campaigning groups: Gays Against the H-Blocks; Concerned Parents Against Drugs; the Gateaux bakery strike in Finglas (factory closed 1990).
Gay rights activists in Cork also campaigned against the H-Blocs and were subjected to censorship under Section 31. (Photo sourced: ICCL website)
Frank Sweeney said he had been intrigued by Betty Purcell’s memoir of her time producing programs for RTÉ and her battles with censorship there2. Conducting interviews with people about their experiences of being censored, he then worked the material into a script.
The format was of a 1980s studio with a program presenter in the style of the times and smoking, intercut with grunge-style footage, electronic interference noise and visuals, then narrowing to interviews with actors playing the parts of victims of the ban at the time.
If the intention was to show how ridiculous it could be to apply a political ban aimed at alleged terrorists instead to community struggles against oppression and the heroin epidemic, the struggle of gays around legality and health and a bakery strike, it succeeded.
The ‘RTE presenter’ in the docudrama screening (Photo: R.Breeze)
However, the issues of whose interests the State was representing in that period of heavy censorship and why it felt threatened were not teased out. Nor why it was able do what it did.
Had those issues been addressed we might have observed a vulnerable neo-colonial ruling class during a high point of struggle against the very colonial and neo-colonial nature of the state and the colony of its imperial neighbour, which also imposed censorship on broadcasting at home.
An aspect of such censorship which might not occur to one but which was discussed in the documentary is the effect of censorship not only on struggles of the time but also on the lack of available footage for archives in the future, leaving history the poorer in material.
Few Can See film has been screening around the world this year and has won some awards including the Tiger Short Award at International Film Festival Rotterdam and is due in Barcelona next year, hopefully to be screened in Ireland again, followed by a fuller discussion.
Film maker Frank Sweeney (centre) speaking during post-screening discussion at the IFI with Ruairí McCann (left) and Purcell (almost out of shot, right). (Photo: R.Breeze)
In addition to exposing the State-led censorship of the past, Sinn Féin might benefit from the film as those who were being gagged were either members or were thought to be supporters of the party. However, SF has its own history of censoring critics both within the party and outside.
And as one member of the audience was heard to remark: “It’ll be the dissidents, not SF that will be getting censored now.” True, though no longer enforced by the State, rather voluntarily by program makers, editors and by the reporters themselves, as with the genocide in Palestine.
Indeed both Sweeney, Purcell and a member of the audience alluded to ongoing censorship around that subject. But it is not only suppression of the truth which is the problem but also the obligatory insertion of the false narrative that everything began on 7th October with the Palestinian raid.
BACKGROUND: THE BROADCASTING BAN MECHANISM
Section 31 of the Broadcasting Authority Act 1960 empowered the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to issue a ministerial order to the government-appointed RTÉ Authority not to broadcast any material specified in the written order.
The first order under the section was issued in 1971 by Fianna Fáil Minister for posts and Telegraphs Gerry Collins.It instructed RTÉ not to broadcast
any matter that could be calculated to promote the aims or activities of any organisation which engages in, promotes, encourages or advocates the attaining of any particular objectives by violent means.
Collins refused clarification when RTÉ asked for advice on what this legal instruction meant in practice and RTÉ interpreted the Order politically to mean that spokespersons for the Provisional and Official IRA could no longer appear on air.
The following year, the government sacked the RTÉ Authority for not sufficiently disciplining broadcasters the government accused of breaching the Order.
RTÉ’s reporter Kevin O’Kelly had referred to an interview that he conducted with the then Provisional IRA Chief of Staff, Seán Mac Stíofáin, on the Radio Éireann This Week programme. The recorded interview was not itself broadcast, nor was Mac Stiofáin’s voice heard.
Premiere balladeer Christy Moore (right) marching with Provisional Sinn Féins Joe Cahill (Photo sourced: Internet)
Mac Stiofáin was arrested after the O’Kelly interview and charged with membership of the IRA, an organisation listed as illegal by the State.
Soon afterwards O’Kelly was jailed for ‘contempt’ at the non-jury Special Criminal Court because he refused to identify a voice on a tape seized by the Gardaí as that of Mac Stiofáin. However Mac Stiofáin was convicted anyway in the “sentencing tribunal” of the SCC.
O’Kelly appealed to the Supreme Court and a fine was substituted as a means of purging O’Kelly’s alleged contempt. O’Kelly declined to pay the fine but it was said to have been paid anonymously and O’Kelly was released.
In 1976, when Conor Cruise O’Brien (Labour) Minister for Posts and Telegraphs amended Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, he also issued a new Section 31 Order. This censored spokespersons for specific organisations, including the legal Sinn Féin political party, rather than specified content.
That prevented RTÉ from interviewing Sinn Féin spokespersons under any circumstances, even if the subject was unrelated to the IRA campaign in Northern Ireland conflict.
Visually impacting and clever punning in placard parade protest against Section 31. (Photo sourced: Internet)
Bizarrely even a call-in show on radio about gardening was interrupted once because a caller was a member of Sinn Féin.
The changes undermined the relatively liberal interpretations by RTÉ of its censorship responsibilities under the original 1971 Order and encouraged a process of self-censorship and illiberal interpretation.
However in 1976 O’Brien attempted to extend the censorship to newspaper coverage of the conflict, targeting in particular The Irish Press, revealing his thinking in an interview with Washington Post reporter Bernard Nossiter, naming as a possible target Press Editor, Tim Pat Coogan.
Nossiter immediately alerted Coogan, who then published the Nossiter-O’Brien interview in the Irish Press (as did The Irish Times).
Due to public opposition the proposed provisions were amended to remove the perceived threat to newspapers.
But Fine Gael and Labour were not to be left out as the 1973-77 Fine Gael/ Labour Coalition Government also tried to prosecute the Irish Press for its coverage of the maltreatment (not to say torture) of republican prisoners by the Garda ‘Heavy Gang’, with the paper winning the case.
1The Workers’ Party grew out of Official Sinn Féin which was declining after the split which led to the creation of Provisional Sinn Féin in 1970 and later another split, resulting in the 1974 creation of the Irish Republican Socialist Party. The WP was extremely hostile to the IRSP and PSF, in particular the latter.
2Inside RTÉ – a memoir, Betty Purcell, New Island Books (2014).
Clare Daly stood for election in the 2024 elections of the Irish State, in the Dublin Central parliamentary constituency, one with a tradition of independent representation going back to Maureen O’Sullivan and Tony Gregory before her.
Daly was standing as one of the loose Left coalition of Independents for Change in a heavy competition for the four-seat constituency.
Clare Daly has a track record as elected public representative and socialist political activist, also as a prominent Socialist Party activist, with which organisation she partedcompany in August 2012.
She was elected MEP for the Dublin constituency from July 2019 to July 2024, TD1 for Fingal from Feb. 2016-July 1999 and TD Dublin North Feb. 2011-2019; in recent years Daly has been better known outside Ireland due to her public interventions in the European Parliament.
Daly and her partner Wallace were both vilified by pro-imperialist liberals and ‘Left’ for publicly opposing US/NATO/ EU imperialist campaigns against Islamic regimes and the Russian Federation, being subjected to a host of unfounded allegations contrary to their actual record.
Tik Tok clips of Daly’s biting attacks on the EU’s complicity in the US-backed ‘Israeli’ genocide provided relief for many around the world from the Zionist sycophancy and insincere and ineffective concern for the victims of that daily genocide prevalent in the EU Parliament.
And who can forget Daly’s calling German politician and EU Commission President Ursula Van Der Leyen out as ‘Frau Genocide’ in the European Parliament in December last year!2
While an MEP, Daly also intervened in the discussion around the Irish Gombeen3 class’ attempt to push us towards NATO, further undermining a quite tattered Irish neutrality. And while a TD, she and her partner Mick Wallace TD were arrested protesting the foreign militarisation of Shannon.
To their credit both risked jail by refusing to pay the fines imposed but the Gombeen ruling class decided to restrict the damage of its exposure of collusion with US imperialism by also reducing the punishment of both to a few hours in captivity.
Daly has been one of the few TDs prepared to speak in public against the repression of Irish Republicans and to visit some of the consequent victims in jail.
In the EU Parliament, Daly also denounced the Spanish State’s police invasion of Barcelona and violence against voters there on 1st October 2017 during the referendum on Catalunya’s independence.
2024 Dublin Central election poster for Clare Daly.
In Ireland today
In her election flyer here Daly highlighted representation independent of political party for her electoral area, housing, health service, cost of living, Palestine, the endangered climate and Irish neutrality without any indication of how these issues might be effectively addressed.
Daly’s election flyer did not mention capitalism or imperialism, nor did she campaign on a platform of overthrowing the current neo-colonial and neo-liberal capitalist system in force, instead indicating her wish to “hold to account the people who’ve got us into this mess.”
“Holding to account” is something to which Daly is accustomed doing and does it well, eloquently, with passion and fluently, scarcely having to refer to her notes while doing so. But like ‘speaking truth to power’, it has little effect on those who are in control of the political-social system.
It can indeed have an effect on the victims of the system but we are left with the question of what to do about the situation. Refreshing as it may be to hear her again in Leinster House, neither voting Daly in — nor fifty Dalys — is going to change any of the conditions under which we suffer.
BY THE WAY,
in case anyone’s interested, I gave my first preference vote to Daly and hope she does get elected.
End.
1Teachta Dála, the title of a public representative elected to the parliament of the Irish State.
2Imperialist politician and proven plagiarist in her doctoral thesis.
3Vernacular term in Ireland for huckster, carpet-bagger-type capitalists, derived from the Irish language gaimbíneachas, profiteering, nowadays used to describe the neo-colonial Irish capitalist class.
Yahya Sinwar, head of the Palestinian resistance organisation Hamas, was killed in action by an Israeli Occupation Force in what was for them a routine operation in Gaza on 16th October, his last moments captured on video and broadcast widely.
From that event alone there is much for us to learn about Hamas and the Palestinian Resistance in general as well as about Sinwar himself — but also about the IOF, the way it fights and the extent of its self-discipline.
For the bare details as publicly shared, Sinwar was in military outfit, in tac vest, armed with a pistol and automatic rifle and accompanied by two local Hamas commanders in the Tal as-Sultan, Rafah area of Gaza patrolled by the IOF, very close to the semi-permanent IOF front lines.1
One may assume Sinwar was on a reconnaissance operation.
Sinwar with Hamas comrades in 2021 (photo cred: John Michillo)
Something gave away their position to a passing patrol in an area where, as far as the IOF were concerned, nothing should be alive except themselves. Pursued, they split up, local commanders in one building and Sinwar into another so the patrol called a tank to fire into each.
The patrol attempted to enter the building into which the individual fighter had gone but two grenades beat them back, injuring one soldier,2 so they retreated and called for a tank to put another shell in the building.
Still wary in the aftermath, they sent a surveillance drone into the building and the image it captured was what was seen in the widely-circulated video: a Palestinian fighter, apparently unarmed, right hand mangled. As they watched, he threw a stick at the drone with his left hand but missed.
So the IOF patrol had another tank round fired into the building and they went on their way.3
The last image of Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar alive. Right arm mangled he stares at the IOF drone videoing him in house ruined by IOF bombing in Tal Al-Sultan, Rafah, before throwing a stick at it. Moments later the IOF call a tank to put a shell in the building, collapsing it on top of him.
But unusually,4 they came back. Perhaps someone thought they recognised Sinwar in the camera video? It was then they discovered that one of the three fighters they had killed was Yaha Sinwar, confirmed by test results matching his DNA records they had from his years in captivity.
According to ‘Israeli’ postmortem, although he’d been hit by shrapnel and his right hand was mangled, what killed Sinwar was a bullet to the brain – which raises other questions.5
Whatever he was doing at that time, it was clear that he was there as a commander and Resistance fighter, armed and dressed for combat in a highly dangerous area, regularly patrolled by the IOF and only a short distance from their secured front lines.
That alone spoke of courage but also his and his comrades’ resistance in the face of superior numbers declared their courage and determination. But Sinwar’s continuing to resist while badly wounded and his comrades dead, spoke of heroism.
Although only weeks from his 62nd birthday and after 22 years in a Zionist jail, Sinwar seems to have been quite fit. However, according to the results of a postmortem examination carried out by the IOF, Yahya Sinwar had not eaten in 72 hours prior to his death – a period of three days.6
The event was revealing in outlining how the IOF infantry is accustomed to fighting. They are fine with killing civilians but when confronted with armed resistance fighters, they hold for a short while if at all before retreating and calling up artillery or air strikes.
Their dead and wounded are picked up by helicopter and rushed to undamaged ‘Israeli’ hospitals, well equipped and staffed less than an hour away, a journey that is never fired upon by the Palestinian Resistance.
The contrast could not be starker, as the IOF fire on Palestinian paramedics and their vehicles, blockade Palestinian hospitals from receiving fuel and other essential supplies, even bombing and occupying them, kidnapping and killing medical personnel.
What people saw in the video of Sinwar’s last moments exposed Israeli lying propaganda about Sinwar, accusing him of living safe and well inside the tunnels and never emerging or, if he does, going about in a burka, disguised as a woman, also of intending to flee to Egypt with ‘hostages’.7
Iconic photo of Yahya Sinwar in May 2021, sitting in an armchair outside his home in Gaza, ruined by IOF bombardment. He went there directly after concluding an interview with words to the effect that he did not fear assassination by the IOF, that they knew who he was and the route he would take and if they wanted to kill him “Be my guest … I won’t bat an eyelid.”
The quick circulation of the video by the IOF exposed also the renowned indiscipline of their military and their total lack of comprehension of the mental and emotional processes of the people they have been occupying and oppressing for seven decades.
Their indiscipline is attested to by the thousands of videos on social media posted by the IOF during their genocidal operations as, contrary to orders, they film themselves blowing up buildings including a university, humiliating and brutalising prisoners, even on occasion raping them.
The IOF are renowned too for leaving graffiti inside occupied houses and for prancing around houses they have destroyed, often wearing the intimate underclothing of Palestinian women, whom they have at least turned into refugees and may have killed.
In those circumstances their release of the video before discussing it with their intelligence and propaganda department is not surprising but doing so underlines their failure to understand their enemy. They thought that killing Sinwar would undermine Palestinian morale.
They, colonialists and other oppressors in general fail to take account of the human will to resist and the potency of the memory and example of martyrs. This is an aspect we understand well in Ireland.
The Zionist intelligence services would surely have preferred not to have Sinwar’s last moments shared publicly and possibly would have liked the opportunity to lie about them.
Yahya Sinwar gives the victory sign with both hands while speaking from a rally in Gaza.
Sinwar was clearly a remarkable individual, Palestinian Resistance fighter, thinker and leader but the IOF made him a martyr and in their arrogance showed his heroism not just to the Palestinians — nor to Arabs alone — but to the world.
Yahya Ibrahim Hassan Sinwar (Arabic: يحيى إبراهيم حسن السنوار, romanized: Yaḥyá Ibrāhīm Ḥasan al-Sinwār; 29 October 1962 – 16 October 2024) was a Palestinian resistance fighter, former political prisoner and subsequently politician who was killed in action.
Sinwar served as chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau from August 2024 and as the leader of Hamas in the Gaza Strip from February 2017, until his death in October 2024, succeeding Ismail Haniyeh (assassinated by Israeli strike while on a fraternal visit to Iran) in both roles.
He was born in the Khan Yunis refugee camp in Egypt-ruled Gaza in 1962 to a family who were refugees from Majdal (Hebrew: Ashkelon) during the 1948 Palestine War. He gained a bachelor’s degree in Arabic studies at the Islamic University of Gaza.8
Sinwar’s first arrest was in 1982 for ‘subversive activities’, serving several months in the Far’a prison where he met other Palestinian activists and dedicated himself to the Palestinian cause. Though arrested again in 1985, upon his release he continued his organising trajectory.
Israeli propaganda has claimed that during this period his work in internal security against Zionist agents and informers earned him the nickname “Butcher of Khan Younis” but no-one who knew him or seriously studied him even heard of that alleged nickname until after his death.9
Ismail Haniyeh, leader of the Hamas politburo, welcomes Sinwar with a kiss after the latter’s release from jail in the prisoner exchange of 21 October 2021 (Photo cred: Abed Rahim Khatib/ Flash 90)
Sentenced to four life sentences in 1989, Sinwar spent 22 years in prison until his release among 1,026 others in a 2011 prisoner exchange for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. According to John Elmer10 Sinwar wanted others released before him but the prisoners insisted he be one of those leaving.
The prisoners had elected Sinwar as their leader in the prison11 and he was known for encouraging prisoners to use their time productively and to study – in particular to study the enemy. He certainly practised what he preached, becoming fluent in Hebrew and studying IOF tactics.
And also, incredibly, in writing a political novel, The Thorn and the Carnation.12
Sinwar (centre photo) photographed carrying the son of Mazen Faqha, a Hamas leader who was shot dead by unidentified gunmen in Gaza at martyrs’ memorial 27 March 2017. Another photo of Sinwar shows him carrying the child and an automatic rifle; yet another, carrying an automatic rifle and a child who might be a girl, perhaps the child of another martyred fighter. The child and the gun may be seen as symbolising the future through resistance.
On 21 November 2011, a month after his release, Sinwar married Samar Muhammad Abu Zamar and the couple had three children. Sinwar’s wife received a master’s degree in theology from the Islamic University of Gaza. His brother Mohamed remains active in the resistance and is being sought by the IOF.
Re-elected as Hamas leader in 2021, Sinwar survived an ‘Israeli’ assassination attempt that same year.
3All of this is according to the Israeli Occupation Force.
4 According to Jon Elmer, blogger and weekly podcast military analyst for the Electronic Intifada, also in discussion with Justin Podur https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj43mbQ3AiE (at 1.23.3), that was so unusual because the IOF don’t usually go back to carry out battle analyses for intelligence.
11This seems not unusual among political prisoners:Irish Republican prisoners also elected their OC in the British Occupation jails: Mairead Farrell had been O/C in Armagh Jail and, before he entered his fatal hunger strike, Bobby Sands had been O/Cof the H-Blocks.
In the Basque Country the Day of the Patriot Soldier is commemorated on two different dates: by the Basque Nationalist Party on October 28th and by the Patriotic Left on September 27th. Each date marks different events but each is anti-fascist in character.
On October 28th one of the many atrocities of the Spanish Civil War/ Anti-Fascist War was enacted by the Spanish fascist military when they executed 42 captured Basque soldiers of the Eusko Gudarastea, a Basque antifascist militia opposing the military-fascist coup of Franco and another three generals.
Section of the crowd at the Gudari Eguna commemoration in Arrigorriaga, Bizkaia province, southern Basque Country. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
This atrocity occurred in 1937, when that war had another two years to run. The Basque Nationalist Party (PNV) was then the main political party in that part of the Basque Country1 and many of its politicians and administrative officials were executed by the Franco regime too.
Commemoration of the PNV´s Day of the Patriotic Soldier (Gudari Eguna) was carried out clandestinely during the four decades of the fascist Franco regime but was permitted in the post-Franco arrangement in the Spanish State, when the PNV were legalised.
The PNV became the dominant force politically in the two provinces that had declared for the Spanish Republic, which was the largest part of the Basque Autonomous Region. Nafarroa however was given a separate autonomous government which split the nation administratively in at least four.2
A DIFFERENT DATE TO COMMEMORATE
However in the 1960s a large part of the PNV´s youth wing had become disenchanted with the party and, entering into alliance with a Basque socialist movement, formed ETA, a mainly political organisation but, existing under a fascist-military regime, inclined also towards armed resistance.
The platform at the Gudari Eguna commemoration organised by Jarki with the event’s speaker/ chairperson addressing the participants. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
ETA grew in support and in actions, military but not only, the Left Patriotic movement (Izquierda Abertzale) widening to fight on a number of fronts, linguistic, social, trade unionist and political with the armed section carrying out many actions.
The last political executions of the Franco regime were in 1975 of two members of ETA and three of FRAP3; the two Basques were Juan “Txiki” Paredes4 and Angel Otaegui. All five, despite huge international solidarity mobilisations and appeals for clemency, were shot by firing squads.
Today, the Patriotic Left´s Gudari Eguna is commemorated by different groups and not all together. As has occurred in Ireland, the accommodation of the leadership of the Basque Patriotic Left to the Spanish electoral system and abandonment of armed struggle has resulted in fragmentation.
A protest in Arrigorriaga I passed by on my way to the Gudari Eguna commemoration. I did not stop to enquire as to the purpose; I had made an error on the journey, was late and in a hurry. From the arrows design I understand these to be the Sare group doing their last Friday of the month picket in solidarity with the prisoners. ‘Giltzak’ means ‘keys’ as the graphic banner design shows and so the aim is probably to have them all leave jail. That is also the aim of the ‘dissident’ group Amnestia but they seek complete amnesty for the political prisoners whereas Etxerat, Sare and EH Bildu normally refrain from even calling them ‘political prisoners’since, according to the Spanish State, that amounts to ‘supporting terrorism.’ (Photo: D.Breatnach)
The political party EH Bildu commemorated the executions but so did the dissenting Jarki and Tinko/Amnistia and the historical memory organisation, Ahaztuak. They did not do so together nor, naturally with the PNV on the different date.
In Arrigorriaga Jarki organised their event in the birthplace and home of Argala, nom-de-guerre of José Miguel Beñaran Ordeñana, a theoretician and activist of great importance in the development of ETA and assassinated by the state-sponsored GAL terrorists.
The attendance at the event listened to the event’s MC addressing them, after which a group of youth carrying flaming torches came on stage. The MC ended her talk with calls for a free and socialist Basque Country, after each which the audience chanted “Gora!” (‘Up!’).
She then led them in singing the Eusko Gudariak with clenched fist in the air, followed by introducing the Internationale in Basque, the revolutionary socialist song that emerged from the Paris Commune of 1871, the audience joining in (though not everyone as well-versed as with the previous song).
I sang the chorus in French, the only language other than English in which I know the chorus, sadly.
HISTORICAL MEMORY & THE MARTYRS
The martyrs of the people´s struggles around the world are remembered organically and kept close to their hearts by the people from which they came, at least for a few generations. Initiatives of conserving and transmitting historical memory keep those commemorations going further.
Section of the crowd at the commemoration of Gudari Eguna, organised by the Jarki organisation. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
In Ireland we know that commemorating the risings of the United Irishmen (1798 and 1803) fed into the struggles of the Young Irelanders a half-century later, their memory in turn contributing to the Fenians which again became part of the history of future generations and of several armed struggles.
Counter-movements, recognising the potency of historical memory, try to appropriate it and adapt it to their political program or to diminish its importance and even deny it. Both those counter-currents can be seen in many parts of the world, including in Ireland and in the Basque Country
However, the ongoing revolutionary streams and their commemorations will always be closest to the real meaning of those events in the historical memory of the people, in the real social and political meaning of martyrdom.
Patrick Pearse remarked on this process in his famous oration over the grave of O´Donovan Rosa: Life springs from death and from the graves of patriot men and women spring living nations.
Footnotes:
1The Basque Country is composed of seven provinces, four on the Spanish state´s side of its northern border and three on the French state´s side. The Anti-Fascist War split the southern Basque Country with principally two provinces, Gipuzkoa and Bizkaia, taking the side of the Spanish Republic, which at the last minute granted them national autonomy. Nafarroa (Navarre) mostly took the fascist-military side and murdered around 3,000 antifascists and Alava province took that side too.
2Two separate autonomous regions in the Spanish state and the provinces on the French side in different French regional administrative areas.
3Frente Revolucionario Antifascista y Patriota (Revolutionary Anti-Fascist & Patriotic Front); the three were: José Luis Sánchez-Bravo Sollas, José Humberto Baena Alonso and Ramón García Sanz.
4According to his brother who, despite being misdirected arrived as Paredes was being shot by the Guardia Civil, who were shooting at different parts of his body, Txiki Paredes continued to sing Eusko Gudariak (‘Soldiers of the Basque Country’) until he finally died.
Not only our internationalist duty but also our longer-term practical interests are with supporting the Resistance. If so, then it is surely even more required of us that we condemn the collusion of the collaborators.
This is based on the fact of the Resistance opposing colonialism, occupation, imperialism, fascism, exploitation and so on. It is not based on whether the Resistance embraces all of our particular ideology or objectives. But that also means that we do not necessarily offer unconditional support.
Karl Marx, who from Britain not only went to some lengths to support the Irish Resistance to colonialism1 but advised the working class in Britain to do likewise,2 also remarked that it was not to be expected that British workers would support themselves being blown up for Irish freedom.3
I say that internationalist solidarity is not only a question of a kind of moral duty, but also a practical one. If we examine our own situation here in Ireland and our hopes for a united independent and socialist republic, we must also look to what happens when we achieve it.
The lessons of struggles in the world have surely taught us that we cannot hope that the imperialist countries around us will allow us to nationalise our resources and infrastructures which they’ve appropriated in full or in part, close their military bases and wish us good fortune!
Or that they will allow a positive example of the potential of socialist society to exist for the encouragement of their own working classes or for those they exploit elsewhere.
No, we will need movements of solidarity, especially in the states which will be the quickest to threaten us, i.e the western imperialist states. And, whether by coincidence or not, those are in great part the very states that are at this moment attacking Palestine and independence in the Middle East.
We think in that respect first of the United States, UK, Germany but also France, Italy, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden (even Switzerland4). Of course, we’ll be dealing with their interventions of various kinds before we even reach our independent, united socialist republic.
PA Security Forces attacking a demonstrator (Photo cred: Getty Images)
COLLABORATORS AND COLLUSION
Naturally, if we support the Resistance, we must have a corresponding attitude to those who collaborate and collude with colonialism, occupation, imperialism, fascism, exploitation and so on, not only in our own immediate struggle but also in those we support internationally.
The genocidal attacks of the ‘Israeli’ Zionist state could not last a week without the financial, military and material support in particular of the USA, but also without those from Germany, the UK and France, nor in turn without the collusion of many Arab states of the Middle East.
That is a collusion in many cases of the regimes and not supported by most of their own populations. Most dangerous of all of course are those agencies of collusion among the oppressed people themselves and we have experienced those throughout our history of anti-colonial struggle.
Our historical culture is full of contemptuous references to them, even to terms such as “Castle Catholics”; Marx too was scathing in reference to Daniel O’Connell, who sought only Irish autonomy within the British Empire, as did John Redmond, later rejected by the population.5
Many other struggles around the world have had such temporisers and actual collaborators in their midst. Indeed after liberation from fascism in countries in WWII, many of them were executed, some such as “Quisling” and “Vichy” becoming bywords in treachery and collusion.6
Palestinians hold posters depicting human rights activist Nizar Banat during a protest triggered by the violent arrest and death in custody of Banat, in his hometown of Hebron in the occupied West Bank, on June 27, 2021. [ Photo cred: Mosab Shawer/AFP]Al Jazeera correspondent Laith Jaar, beaten up by PA officer while covering the Tulkarem massacre by the IOF, then jailed when he complained to the PA. [Photo sourced: Internet]
Well then, how is that we tolerate the presentation of the ‘Palestine Authority’ as a representation of the Palestinian people? This corrupt agency with its ‘security force’ beating up and jailing critics and freedom fighters, some of which it also shoots? And dismantling defensive anti-IOF bombs?
This agency which in the Oslo Accords gave up the struggle in exchange for corrupt control of 20% of Palestinian land, which has held no elections since 2006 because the Palestinian people across the political and religious spectrum rejected the Fatah party then and elected Hamas instead.
It is no surprise then that the western imperialist countries claim the PA to be the legitimate representation of the Palestinian people and that some of them fund it, that Palestine ‘embassies’ are PA-run and that Palestine ‘Ambassadors’ are employed by the PA.7
But how is that the PA is not publicly denounced by the wide Palestine solidarity movements in the Western countries? Why this conspiracy of silence and spreading of ignorance?
It is not easy in on-line searches to find how many political prisoners the PA has in its jails or wounded or shot dead – and of course the amount of information about the Resistance passed on to the Zionists and the US awaits some historical investigations in a free Palestine of the future.
What we do know is that the PA holds over 100 political prisoners, that it arrests freedom fighters (even invading hospitals to arrest wounded fighters), that it tortures prisoners, beats up critics and demonstrators and clears the way of explosives for IOF invasion of West Bank communities.
Very recently, Palestinian journalist Laith Jaar, after reporting on the Palestinian Resistance in Tulkarem, was beaten up while covering the massacre there by Ahmed Ghassan Qawzah, an officer of the PA’s security force. When the journalist went to complain to the PA, they threw him in jail.
The Palestinian Resistance periodically denounces the PA, calling on it to support the people, threatens it when the PA’s actions are particularly egregious but refrains from using arms against it. I admit that I cannot understand that degree of forbearance, even for temporary tactical reasons.
But what about us? How is that only one protest against the PA’s Ambassador to Ireland took place and that the protesters were ejected by alleged Irish supporters of the Palestinian people? How is that only one small protest to date has taken place outside the PA’s Dublin Embassy?
How can we stomach this collusion in what is effectively a conspiracy of silence?
End.
Palestinian Police – their firearms are for opposing the Palestinian Resistance (Photo cred: Issame Ravi/ Flash90)
FOOTNOTES
1Marx and Engels had led the International Workingmen’s Association (later known as the “First International”) in not only supporting the Fenian movement but also accepting Fenians in Britain into the organisation.
2Not out of altruism but in their own interest! “As to the Irish question….The way I shall put forward the matter next Tuesday is this: that quite apart from all phrases about “international” and “humane” justice for Ireland – which are to be taken for granted in the International Council – it is in the direct and absolute interest of the English working class to get rid of their present connection with Ireland.And this is my most complete conviction, and for reasons which in part I cannot tell the English workers themselves. For a long time I believed that it would be possible to overthrow the Irish regime by English working class ascendancy. I always expressed this point of view in the New York Tribune.Deeper study has now convinced me of the opposite. The English working class will never accomplish anythingbefore it has got rid of Ireland. The lever must be applied in Ireland. That is why the Irish question is so important for the social movement in general.”
3Karl Marx, then living in London, observed: The London masses, who have shown great sympathy towards Ireland, will be made wild and driven into the arms of a reactionary government. One cannot expect the London proletarians to allow themselves to be blown up in honour of Fenian emissaries.Marx was commenting on the reaction to the disastrous explosion attempt to liberate Fenian prisoners from Clerkenwell Jail in London, on 13 December 1867, when 12 mostly working class people were unintentionally killed and around 120 injured.
5That was the essence of the O’Connell’s constitutional Repeal Movement objective of the 1840s and of the Home Rule promised by the UK ruling class to the Irish Parliamentary Party in 1914, against which the 1916 Rising took place. In the British General Election of 1918 in Ireland, Redmond’s party was all but annihilated.
6Nazi collaborator Prime Minister in occupied Norway and the French collaborator government under Petain and Lavalle.
7It should perhaps be a surprise that certain parties in Europe, including Ireland, also support the PA but then, perhaps not. Not a year has passed since a meeting hosting the ‘Palestine Ambassador’ for Ireland in Belfast was protested by Palestinians who were ejected among cheers by ‘Irish Republicans’.
Irish Republican hunger strikers were commemorated in Dublin with a march and rally on 24th August. The event was organised by Dublin Independent Republicans and attracted representation from many groups in addition to independent activists.
Those ten Irish Republicans who died on hunger strike in 1981 are still remembered well in the general Irish population, most of all their leader Bobby Sands. However another twelve died on hunger strike in earlier days, going back to 1917, before the War of Independence (1919-’21).
Marchers in Westmoreland Street carrying images of the hunger-strike martyrs on the return to the Garden of Remembrance. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
For over a century, hunger strikes have been one of the traditional methods of protest and struggle by Irish Republican prisoners in jails of the British and also of the Irish State.
Those Republican prisoners who died on hunger strike in 1981 did so from the effects of starvation but some died through force-feeding also, which was the case with Vols. Thomas Ashe (1917), Michael Gaughan (1974) and Frank Stagg (1976).1
James Connolly Memorial Band with their own colour party in Westmoreland Street on the return to the Garden of Remembrance. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
PARADE THROUGH CITY CENTRE AND RALLY
Led by a colour party,2 the parade set off in two columns3 from the Garden of Remembrance in Parnell Square with the James Connolly Memorial Republican Flute Band leading and along the City’s main thoroughfare, O’Connell Street, crossed the Liffey to ‘touch’ Trinity College and back again.
Marchers setting off from the Garden of Remembrance in Parnell Square. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
Upon returning to the Garden of Remembrance, the banners and band took up position in front of the memorial with the audience facing them, where Ado Perry as MC for the event welcomed all.
As well as recalling the struggles of Republican prisoners within the jails and deaths on hunger strike, Perry also took some time to denounce the Zionist genocide in Palestine and to express the Palestinian solidarity of Republicans (and of the majority of the Irish people).
Ado Perry as MC of the rally in the Garden of Remembrance, flanked by the No Extraditions banner, the colour party behind and behind them, the Monument to those who fell in the struggle for Irish freedom. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
Perry also condemned the planned extradition of Irish Republican prisoners to British jurisdiction and called for Irish Republicans to unite in opposition, recalling the struggles against extradition over the years.
Floral tributes were laid at the Monument and Cáit Inglis read the names of the 22 who died on hunger strike, before the MC called on Cathal Graham for a song. Graham performed Wrap the Green Flag Around Me, a song that seems to have fallen somewhat in popularity in recent years.
Frankie Quinn giving his speech at the rally. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
The main speaker for the day was Frankie Quinn, a long-time Republican, community activist and ex-political prisoner who spoke first in Irish before turning to English. Quinn too condemned the genocide in Palestine and expressed solidarity with the Palestinian resistance.
In a reference to recent racist mobilisations in Ireland, Quinn made it clear that those people had nothing in common with Republicans or with the Irish national struggle for a socialist republic. (A known racist female activist had reportedly been encouraged to leave the scene a little earlier.)
The speaker was vigorously applauded and was followed by Gráinne Gibson who performed hunger strike martyr Bobby Sands’ poem The Rythm of Time.
(Photo: D.Breatnach)
Cathal Graham returned to perform The Time Has Come, a representation of hunger strike martyr Patsy O’Hara’s plea to his mother not to withdraw him from the fast when he lost consciousness, unless their demands were conceded. The colour party lowered their flags in respect to the martyrs.
Perry thanked all for their attendance in particular the marching band, colour party, performers and stewards, once again emphasising the need for united action to prevent the extradition of Irish Republicans to British jurisdiction, then called the band to perform Amhrán na bhFiann.4
The colour party leading the march out of Westmoreland to cross the river to the rally in the Garden of Remembrance. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
There was broad support for the event as shown by the participation of a number of different organisation and individual activists, which is a hopeful sign for the future. The real test however will be whether the disparate elements will act in unity as called for by Perry and Quinn.
End.
The lowering of the flags in honour of the martyrs in the struggle. (Photo: D.Breatnach)
Footnotes
1Their deaths under medically-supervised force-feeding caused the British Medical Association to oppose force-feeding of any hunger-striker in possession of normal cognition.
2The flag composition of Irish Republican colour parties varies but when flags and members are available traditionally are composed of the Irish Tricolour, the Starry Plough (blue or green version), the Sunburst and the flags of the Four Provinces. I have also seen on occasion the inclusion of a Scottish Saltere and on another, the Palestinian flag.
3More or less two columns – outside of the Six Counties marchers are unaccustomed to that formation and stewards were hard-pressed to ensure marchers kept to either one column or the other, a difficulty I remember well myself from my capacity as chief steward on a Dublin march against internment of Marion Price years ago.
4Irish language translation of The Soldiers’ Song by Peadar Kearney and Patrick Heeney, the air of the chorus which is the official National Anthem of the Irish State. At commemorations and such events it is usual for the air of both the verses and the chorus to played. In the 26 Counties it is common for people to sing along to the air played (or to a solo singer) but not in the 26 Counties. Unusually with cases of songs with versions in both langauges, it is the translated lyrics into Irish which most people know.
The Palestinian Authority had a small protest against it in Dublin on the afternoon of Friday 23rd August 2024. This seems to be the first protest that has taken place outside the Palestinian Embassy at 66 Lower Leeson Street.
It would perhaps have been the first protest against the PA in Ireland, were it not for the Palestinian solidarity activists who attempted to convey the Palestinian reality in contrast to the Ambassador’s speech at a public meeting in Belfast in February, before being evicted by Sinn Féin supporters.
Palestinian solidarity activists protesting the Palestinian Authority and Embassy?
At first sight that seems bizarre but as some solidarity activists and most people of Middle Eastern origin know, the PA is not only widely considered unrepresentative and corrupt – and in fact has not held elections since 2006 – but also represses protests in the West Bank against ‘Israel’.
However, the Ireland Anti-Internment Campaign says that its main purpose in calling the protest was to raise awareness of the harm the PA is doing to the Palestinian Resistance, in arresting Resistance fighters and disrupting resistance defence against ‘Israeli’ army incursions.
Photo of placard being displayed outside the Palestine Embassy today. (Photo: R.Breeze)
The IAIC’s leaflet handed out at the event points out that the PA’s security force shot and wounded and even killed Resistance fighters, also attempting to enter hospital in force to arrest fighters on two occasions recently, their attempts being frustrated by large mobilisations.
Could a picket on the Palestinian Authority and its Embassy be considered divisive? “Not with justification,” replied an IAIC spokesperson. “It’s the actions of the PA that are divisive. We are supporting the broad resistance there, not one faction or another.”
He points out – as did their leaflet – that 14 Resistance factions including Fatah met in Beijing recently and agreed that the Palestinians have a right to resist, including with weapons and called for unity of all the resistance organisations. “The PA is acting against that unity”, he said.
But why is it that the IAIC called this protest and not one of the Palestinian solidarity organisations? “You’d need to ask them that,” says the spokesperson. “We regularly fly a Palestinian flag on our anti-internment in Ireland pickets; the PA was overdue to be done but nobody else was doing it.”
(Photo: R.Breeze)
The IAIC was founded a decade ago to raise awareness about ongoing internment of Irish Republican activists by revoking ex-prisoners’ licence and through refusal of bail by special no-jury courts. In those cases it can take two years for a case to come to trial.
However the IAIC has organised or participated in other events also, such as those around framed prisoners like the Craigavon Two in the Six Counties and the Munir family in England. It has also called two of its pickets since October 2024 to specifically highlight Palestinian prisoners.
Will the group be regularly picketing the Palestinian Authority now? “Probably not. It’s not what we were set up for but we felt the ice needed breaking on this. Others need to step forward now,” replied their spokesperson, though signalling that they would support others in doing it.
Photo of copy of the leaflet being distributed outside the Palestine Embassy today. (Photo: R.Breeze)
It is probable that a representative of the PA will be welcomed soon by the Irish Government as part of its recognition of the ‘Palestinian State’. One wonders how this reception of a corrupt and Occupation-collusive organisation will be mediated in the Palestinian solidarity sector in Ireland.
The Governments of the EU, including Ireland’s, formally recognise the PA but not only that – so does Sinn Féin in Ireland, EH Bildu in the Basque Country and Esquerra Republicana in Catalonia. This corresponds across the board also to support for ‘the Two-State Solution’ (sic).
What that entails is allocating the Palestinians less than 20% of their homeland weaving around illegal zionist settlements, with least water and some of the worst land, under the permanent watchtowers and guns of their genocidal neighbour.
Organisations and individuals within the broad Palestinian solidarity movement will need to decide exactly what their solidarity with Palestine actually means, especially for the Palestinians themselves.
rebelbreeze 