One of the Islamic Jihad’s more prominent leaders, Sheikh Khader Adnan, died in an Israeli prison this week, after a hunger strike lasting 86 days. Adnan, who in the past had been under administrative detention for prolonged periods of time, was indicted in February for belonging to a terror organization. During his hunger strike, he refused any medical attention. He did not want to wrangle over the conditions of his detention, but to discuss the essence of his arrest; he not only his arrest, but the imprisonment and liberty of the entire Palestinian people.
Adnan wanted to be a free person, thereby becoming an icon even before his death. His death is therefore not a “mishap,” as described by many in the democratic camp, not from his perspective nor from the perspective of the state, which wanted him dead. He wanted to fight till the end, and end his life either as a free man or as a shahid, a martyr.
A Palestinian like Adnan, who was a philosopher by nature and in his conceptions, has nothing to lose. For Israel it’s obviously a matter of black or white. In both colors, Palestinians, be they leaders, activists or just children, are terrorists by nature. They are raised to the stature of arch-terrorists if they take any steps to resist the occupation – even if it’s only verbal opposition, as in the case of Adnan.
The hunger strike that led to Adnan’s death was not a response to an arbitrary administrative detention, as imposed in the past, but a response to the arbitrary indictment accusing him of incitement and of belonging to the Islamic Jihad. One should remember that for the Israeli authorities, any action taken by a Palestinian can be interpreted as incitement, including a Facebook post, or perhaps even this article.
Israel, a waning democracy, directly caused the death of Adnan, who was under the guardianship of the Shin Bet security service and the Israel Prison Service. The court, the “last bastion of democracy,” also lent its hand to his dying in agony, by conditioning the end of his hunger strike on undergoing tests he objected to, and insisted on this even after being warned about his health condition by his lawyers and doctors working for human rights organizations.
The words of military judge Lt. Col. Menachem Lieberman, who refused to release Adnan at the last hearing in his case, a few days before he died, speak for themselves: “He is master of his own body… he must accept the possible results of his actions. An orderly society cannot allow itself to become hostage to a person demanding his release.” But what kind of justice could Adnan expect in a state occupying his country and people? What options did he have for fighting for the justice of his path?
Israel defines itself as an orderly and democratic state, meaning that it doesn’t yield to threats or actions deemed as holding it hostage. Democratic state? Even Hamas, which Israel regards as a terror organization, knows about the ethics of war and how to look after the prisoners of war it holds. The same “democratic country” has defined Adnan’s death as a “disturbing incident.” But it’s clear that what he disturbed was Israel’s image and public relations, even though they are no longer important these days.
Israel no longer wants the burden called “a show of democracy,” or the bother of being accountable to other nations and to international law. In comparison to the beautiful days of previous governments, when hunger strikes by Palestinian prisoners lead the evening news even on the mainstream channels, not just on marginal websites devoted to the Palestinian struggle, this time we only learned about the final result, since it was more important to give more screen time to lawmaker May Golan and her antics.
Israel Has Ditched Its Show of Democracy for the May Golan Show
66
1
08.05.2023
One of the Islamic Jihad’s more prominent leaders, Sheikh Khader Adnan, died in an Israeli prison this week, after a hunger strike lasting 86 days. Adnan, who in the past had been under administrative detention for prolonged periods of time, was indicted in February for belonging to a terror organization. During his hunger strike, he refused any medical attention. He did not want to wrangle over the conditions of his detention, but to discuss the essence of his arrest; he not only his arrest, but the imprisonment and liberty of the entire Palestinian people.
Adnan wanted to be a free person, thereby becoming an icon even before his death. His death is therefore not a “mishap,” as described by many in the democratic camp, not from his perspective nor from the perspective of the state, which wanted him dead. He wanted to fight till the end, and end his life either as a free man or as a shahid, a martyr.
A Palestinian like........
© Haaretz
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Andrew Mitrovica
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Tafi Mhaka
Marwan Bishara
Timotej Milanov
Ahmadi Ali
