In the context of ongoing positions since October 7, a somewhat unsurprising statement was issued lately by UN Women expressing concern about acts of violence against women – “Israeli women, Palestinian women, and others,” applying the well-known ‘both sides’ principle. The condemnation of the infamous October 7 attack is included at the beginning of the statement, rather than a condemnation for the genocide against the Palestinian people.
Similarly, the director of UNICEF was forced to take a stance calling for support for Israeli women and girls who are victims of sexual violence after Israeli emergency teams, doctors, and witnesses claimed that Hamas members carried out several assaults, including rape and the mutilation of intimate parts.
In this context, it is useful to recall how Israelis have mastered the art of exploiting legitimate issues, such as the case of LGBTQ+ rights, commonly referred to as “pinkwashing,” to serve the narratives that Israel promotes about itself. This time, the occupation has chosen to employ “feminist washing” to boost morale and pour more fuel on its unprecedented brutal war on the Gaza Strip, under the pretext of waging a war to end the “barbaric Hamas movement that rapes,” thus justifying genocide. At the same time, it redirects attention towards those who are “more deserving of sympathy,” namely Israeli women, victims of the “barbarity of the indigenous population.”
What Israel speaks of and attempts to support through certain international institutions automatically brings to mind the colonialist’s guide in dealing with colonized peoples, as explained by Frantz Fanon, or the guide for white people in dealing with people of color, as elucidated by Angela Davis. Specifically, it refers to two clear tactics, vividly participated in by Israel and its supporters: the automatic validation of the white power and the ready accusation against the black convicted man, depicting any incident that may have occurred, whether or not it is part of a deliberate series of attacks against whites, to solidify justifications that mandate isolating marginalized groups and spreading a culture of suspicion and fear, serving as a pillar for the survival of the powerful over the weak.
As for what was issued by UN Women and UNICEF and other international entities two months after the crimes of siege, genocide, displacement, and persecution against the Palestinian people, it is not surprising at all, because it either condemns the prevalent issue of sexual violence or acknowledges and cares about what is happening in Israel. These phrases are part of the abhorrent language of international forums, characterized by these circles, and are part of their natural calculations, not deserving of astonishment.
On the contrary, one can see in the mention of Palestinian women in the statement itself a development, in reality, of what was issued by the relevant authorities for protecting women and girls, which can serve the Israeli propaganda machine and humiliate the international community. This comes after two months of contemplation and reflection to plead for its approval, despite the heinous acts committed, without receiving it.
In our region, we can quickly revert to our past to trace the roots of the tension between colonial feminist groups and those of the region.
Today, we are witnessing more than that. We are observing discrepancies in positions regarding what is happening on the ground, not only at the level of differences between international institutions and feminist groups active on the ground but even among feminist groups themselves, especially between those in the Global South with a long history of suffering under occupation, colonialism, and impoverishment, and others funded from the Global North, sometimes rejecting and sometimes resembling it (without generalizing).
In our region, we can quickly return to our past to trace the roots of the tension between colonial feminist groups and those of the region. For example, at the beginning of the twentieth century, the Egyptian Feminist Union, a pioneer in politicizing feminist struggle, gradually distanced itself from Western feminist organizations that did not comprehend the feminism of the union attached to the necessity of liberating women from British colonialism and its agents as a fundamental approach to women’s liberation in their land without negating other battles.
At that time, Western organizations remained focused on the theory of the similarity of women’s experiences and needs around the world, primarily concerned with the priority of women’s suffrage raised by the then International Women’s Alliance. This came in place of removing the grip of colonization on the necks of its comrades who were occupied with challenging colonization and defending women simultaneously.
And our history, to a great extent, resembles what is currently happening with the Western focus on promoting “feminist foreign policies” and combating gender-based violence, isolated from the drivers of this violence and its roots associated with colonization, occupation, and the complete militarization of the country.
From here, we understand how Israelis anticipated, after the spread of testimonies about sexual violence in Israeli media and later on prestigious Western platforms, swift and wide feminist, human rights, and international condemnation. This condemnation was added to the initial condemnation following the events of October 7, accumulating one after another to divert the world’s attention, even if for a moment, from their daily crimes.
We understand through these condemnation tactics how the powerful, by employing a just cause, can score points in the international community’s goal and embarrass it. This comes after they embarrassed it initially through the words of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, who, two months ago, said that October 7 did not happen in a vacuum.
When Volker Türk, the UN Commissioner for Human Rights, asked Benjamin Netanyahu to allow an independent UN mission to investigate sexual violations and draw conclusions about their nature and extent, it could have been in his favor. Instead, it was met with ignorance and silence. This allowed Israelis to remain in control of the narrative, clinging to their pink and feminist washing. The mentioned assaults or others, more hidden or more severe, could have occurred, and there is no fear in assuming so, as history has taught us that no armed or religious group in the world, regardless of its just cause, whether colonialist or resistant, is immune from it.
History has also taught us that our feminist struggle, which targets intertwined and complex forms of oppression, is smarter than falling into the trap of absolving a particular party or “not believing survivors,” including those of the occupier and the man who should not be likened to us.
Therefore, there is no need to attempt to prove accusations in favor of Israeli women who enjoy immense local and international support, or attempt to prove the opposite to preserve an imaginary sanctity that will not be of any use.
What truly matters to us today is to continue facing one entity, the entity of genocide and a catastrophe that no allegations, whether true or false, will erase, and to support those enduring it with all the strength we have.
