Email this page

News from the Region

The Israeli Military Refusal Movement Grows

By Rotem Mor

Rotem Mor Photo: Terry Foss

On Saturday, May 7th, there was a conference among the four major groups dealing with refusal to serve in the Israeli military because of their objection to the occupation, pacifism, and other human rights issues. The conference was five hours long and was held at Neve Shalom/ Wahat el Salam, a joint Palestinian/ Jewish village in the center of Israel. This was the first such gathering of the different refusal groups and it was aimed at furthering the cooperation between the different groups and building a joint strategy. There were approximately 60 people present altogether. 

The four groups participating were:

1.      Courage to Refuse, a group which formed during the beginning of the current Intifada, composed of reserve combat soldiers and officers refusing to serve the occupation

2.      New Profile, a feminist movement working to bring about a civil, as opposed to militaristic, society in Israel. The group was formed in 1998 and supports all those who refuse to serve in the Israeli army.

3.      Yesh Gvul, a movement founded by reserve soldiers who refused to serve during the war in Lebanon, who have since supported all those who refuse to serve the occupation.

4.      Shministim, A movement of high school students who have recently signed over 300 high school students to a letter declaring they will refuse to serve the occupation.

The participants of the conference were divided into four different working groups divided by topics; The difference between right wing and left wing refusal, refusal in light of the disengagement program, education and militarism, and immediate cooperation between the participating organizations. Every group was given about two hours to discuss the topic, and then we gathered to share the results with people from the other groups.

The group I was in dealt with immediate cooperation between organizations. We started by presenting the different projects that the groups are involved in. A large variety of projects were presented including a day about democracy and occupation, a petition that calls for sanctions against Israel for it's occupation policy, court cases against Israeli war criminals, youth groups dealing with feminism and militarism, an alternative summer camp for young people and more.

Afterwards we discussed possibilities for cooperation with groups we are not fully in cooperation with like the Druze refusers (the Druze are an ethnic sect in the North of Israel), conscripts who refuse because of financial hardships and refusal movements overseas (like American objectors to the war in Iraq).

Finally, we tried to see if we could unite around a single project which all the groups could participate in. Different ideas were raised like working with youth movement communes, choosing September 1st (start of school year) as a joint day of action, or producing a newspaper. There was no agreement on any of the projects. We did agree, however, on sending out monthly reports to each other, which will keep the different groups well informed of what is going on. 

After our small group discussions we gathered to hear from the other groups. It seemed the dynamic of their meetings were similar to ours. There was a lot of lively debate, but little agreement. There were some things that were agreed upon like the need to support imprisoned objectors, to continue to promote objection as a meaningful way for people to oppose the occupation, and to enter into the education sphere to reach young people and let them know what service in the army means before they conscript. However, we could not agree on how we could coordinate these projects, even after attempting many times. It was finally agreed that representatives of each group would meet regularly and build a solid network for future cooperation.

My impression of the whole conference is that there is a lot of interest within the different groups to work together despite their considerable differences. This is quite encouraging since it wasn't always the case. This was the first time all of us had met like this and it was very evident during the conference that we still lack the trust and relationships to make immediate cooperation effective. I hope that this is the first meeting of many, and feel it was an important step in building a strong refusal movement for years to come.       

^ Top of page