Asian activists call out Western feminists over ‘selective empathy’ on Gaza

Indonesian women take part in a fundraising event in Jakarta on Oct. 15, 2023 to support Palestinians in the wake of Israeli attacks on Gaza. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 18 May 2024
Follow

Asian activists call out Western feminists over ‘selective empathy’ on Gaza

  • Non-Western feminists say white supremacy, imperialism are inherent to Western feminism
  • Seven months into Israel’s deadly war on Gaza, feminists in the West have been largely silent

JAKARTA: When Western actresses and female politicians cut their hair to protest the death of Mahsa Amini or rallied against the Taliban ban on girls’ education, they stood up to defend women’s rights. However, the zeal went missing when it came to Palestine, non-Western feminists say, denouncing their peers’ silence on Israel’s killing of women in Gaza.

Mass protests and displays of solidarity in Europe and the US broke out in 2022 and carried on into 2023 following the death in Iranian police custody of the 22-year-old Amini, who was charged with breaching hijab rules. In the same years, when the Taliban barred Afghan girls from school, women united in outcry and called for international pressure against them.

But more than seven months into Israel’s indiscriminate killing, wounding, and maiming of Palestinian civilians, the West’s mainstream feminist movement has been largely silent.

At least 35,800 people in Gaza have been killed and 80,000 wounded by Israeli airstrikes and ground offensive that have destroyed most of the enclave’s infrastructure and rendered it uninhabitable.

The majority of the dead are women and children. Many have lost their lives as most of the hospitals have been flattened by Israeli troops and no medical assistance could reach them.

The International Rescue Committee estimated last month that 37 mothers had been killed in Gaza each day and 60,000 pregnant women had no access to midwives or doctors, while tens of thousands struggled with breastfeeding as they were so malnourished due to Israel’s blockade of humanitarian aid.

In the face of the widely documented atrocities, Haein Shim, Korean activist and spokesperson of Haeil, a Seoul-based feminist group, told Arab News that Western feminists were exhibiting “selective empathy” and “double standards” with regard to Israel’s onslaught, the criticism of which has regularly been labeled as “antisemitism” — not only by Israeli authorities but by Western leaders as well.

“I strongly believe these issues are interconnected with racism, imperialism, and colonialism,” Shim said.

“We need to urge each other to break the silence and unite against occupation and subjugation, Israel’s human rights abuses and ongoing genocide. One thing to be clear: Our solidarity does not mean antisemitism but only to end the vicious genocide and violence against women and children.”

While Shim believes it is not too late for “global feminist solidarity” with women in Gaza, Fadiah Nadwa Fikri, Malaysian human rights lawyer and scholar focused on decolonization, sees an intrinsic flaw in Western feminism, which might prevent it.

“The function of Western feminism, which is inherently imperialist, is to reduce and dehumanize not only Palestinian women and children but also Palestinian men, who have been subjected to decades of Israeli settler colonialism, with the full support of US imperialism and its allies in Europe,” she said.

“It is, therefore, not surprising to witness the deafening silence of most Western feminists, who are staunch advocates of this strand of feminism, in the face of relentless imperialist violence in Gaza and all of historical Palestine. Their silence is an endorsement of the status quo.”

For Fikri, Western feminism has been shaped by “the racist narrative of the clash of civilizations,” and its silence on Gaza was merely consequential.

“We see women like Madeline Albright, Condoleezza Rice, Hilary Clinton, Kamala Harris — both white and non-white — who depict themselves as champions of women’s rights become members of the ruling classes of imperialist states that are responsible for the mass death, destruction, and suffering around the world,” she said.

“Therefore, there are no double standards of Western feminism; there is only one political standard meant to protect the interests of the imperialist ruling classes, which has been applied consistently.”

In the context of Israel and accusations of antisemitism fired against its critics, Asian feminists also cited the problem of white supremacy, which they closely linked with Zionism.

“Zionist ideologies are not just harming and discriminating against Palestinians, and the destruction of Palestine is not merely about Palestine. Zionism is about white supremacy and colonization, and the destruction of Palestine is just another example of imperialist violence inflicted by Western colonizers, aka white people,” said V., member of Chinese Feminism in Toronto, a Canada-based grassroots collective, who requested to remain anonymous.

“If we consider the sociopolitical context of North America, we know most Jews are also white people, yet we do not have the space to discuss the complexity of antisemitism and white supremacy simultaneously. I guess that speaks a lot (as to) why white feminists tend to be hypocritical here.”

Her colleague, G., also a member of the group, said that hypocrisy was also present among non-white women leaders who were “internalizing whiteness” and embracing Zionism.

“We need to understand this should not be done in our names. We need to have firm voices and expose these leaders as Zionist agents and complicit in genocide, instead of accepting the fact that our elected leaders turn complicit and no longer represent us. We need to hold them accountable,” she said.

“Decolonization is not just theory. We all need to move beyond the bystander observer position and let Palestine radicalize us. We need to continue to educate ourselves and our communities on colonial feminism/pinkwashing and purplewashing.”

Part of the struggle is debunking pro-Israel propaganda and fighting “against the utilization of antisemitism to shut down any criticism against Israeli or Zionist policies,” according to Okky Madasari, Indonesian novelist and academic, whose research focuses on knowledge production and censorship.

“There must be a unified campaign to stop believing anything coming out from the Israeli authorities. They are liars unless they are proven otherwise,” she told Arab News.

For those activists who for the past seven months have been silent over Gaza, Okky suggested that they stop using the feminism label altogether.

“You should be ashamed of yourself if you don’t speak up against Israel when you are so fussy about many other more trivial things,” she said.

“Condemning Israel and taking sides with the Palestinians is what any decent human being must do, let alone if you are a feminist.”


Serbia’s President Vucic cuts short US visit and returns home after falling ill

Updated 55 min 19 sec ago
Follow

Serbia’s President Vucic cuts short US visit and returns home after falling ill

  • Vucic suddenly fell ill during a meeting in the US
  • He was admitted to the Belgrade Military Hospital upon arrival

BELGRADE: Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vucic has cut short a visit to the United States and returned to Serbia over an unspecified health emergency, state RTS television reported on Saturday.
Vucic suddenly fell ill during a meeting in the US and decided to return home after consulting doctors, the report said. He was admitted to the Belgrade Military Hospital upon arrival, it added.
Vucic was previously in Miami, Florida, where he had met with former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani. Vucic had said he also was hoping to meet with US President Donald Trump.
Richard Grenell, US presidential envoy for special missions, expressed hope that Vucic would recover. “Sorry to miss you but hope all is ok,” Grenell wrote on X.
It was not immediately clear what happened and Vucic’s office said they will inform the public later. Vucic, 55, is known to have high blood pressure.
Serbia’s populist leader also has said he would travel to Russia later this month to attend a Victory Day parade in Moscow, despite warnings from European Union officials that this could affect Serbia’s bid to join the bloc.


A notorious drug gang is in the crosshairs of a French police investigation of prison attacks

Updated 03 May 2025
Follow

A notorious drug gang is in the crosshairs of a French police investigation of prison attacks

  • Paris prosecutor Laure Beccuau said one of the suspected organizers of last month’s prison attacks claims to have ties with the DZ Mafia
  • The Paris prosecutor said 21 people detained for suspected involvement

PARIS: Anti-organized crime specialist investigators probing a wave of attacks on prisons and prison staff in France are looking at the possible involvement of a notorious drug cartel, the Paris prosecutor said Saturday.
The so-called DZ Mafia is suspected of being one of the main narco-trafficking networks working out of the southern French port city of Marseille, which has a long history as a hub for the drug trade and banditry associated with it.
Paris prosecutor Laure Beccuau said at a news conference Saturday that one of the suspected organizers of last month’s prison attacks claims to have ties with the DZ Mafia. She said police investigators will examine “the real or supposed influence of the DZ Mafia” in the violence.
Several prisons were targeted by gunfire and arson, including attacks on prison workers’ homes and on cars at a prison service school, in the Paris area and elsewhere, the prosecutor said.
The letters “DDPF” were graffitied on some targets, believed to stand for “défense des prisonniers français,” which translates as “defense of French prisoners.”
The Paris prosecutor said 21 people detained for suspected involvement in the violence have been handed preliminary charges for attempted murder and other alleged crimes.
French authorities in recent months have stepped up policing against drug trafficking, concerned about growing cocaine use in France and violence associated with the trafficking of that and other drugs.


Waltz ouster adds to tumult in Trump’s national security team but consolidates power in fewer hands

Updated 03 May 2025
Follow

Waltz ouster adds to tumult in Trump’s national security team but consolidates power in fewer hands

  • The staff shake-up comes as the administration confronts foreign policy issues
  • The Pentagon, too, has been a source of tumult, with Hegseth directing firings of top military officers and now ousting his own top civilian advisers in response to leak allegations

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump’s removal of national security adviser Mike Waltz brings further disruption to a national security team that has already endured scrutiny over using the Signal messaging app to discuss sensitive military operations as well as mounting questions over the leadership of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the firing of the four-star general who led the National Security Agency.
The staff shake-up comes as the administration confronts foreign policy issues that include Iran’s rapidly advancing nuclear ambitions, a trade fight with China and conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine that have defied easy resolutions despite Trump’s initial confidence that he could settle both wars quickly.
But Waltz’s departure also presents an opportunity for Trump to consolidate foreign policy in just a few hands, with the Republican president asserting even more power over decision-making and relying on a select group of people who have entirely embraced his “America First” agenda.
Those influential voices include special envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who on Thursday was named to replace Waltz on an acting basis while Waltz was nominated as the US ambassador to the United Nations.
“I would think he has just about what he wants” in terms of consolidated power, said William Banks, founding director of what is now called the Syracuse University Institute for Security Policy and Law. “There aren’t many outliers.”
Gaining Trump’s confidence or losing it
Rubio may once have seemed an unlikely choice for such prominent positions given that the onetime Trump rival and hawkish conservative was derided by Trump as “Little Marco” during the 2016 presidential campaign.
But since then, the former Florida senator has proved adept at aligning himself with Trump’s foreign policy positions, presiding over a massive overhaul of the State Department while steering clear of some of the pitfalls that other national security leaders have encountered.
Waltz, for instance, faced intense criticism in March after revelations that he added journalist Jeffrey Goldberg to a private text chain on an encrypted messaging app that was used to discuss planning for an airstrike against Houthi militants in Yemen.
He also was considered to be part of a neoconservative wing of the Republican Party that had supported the war in Iraq and other US military interventions abroad, including in Syria and Libya, that have now found disfavor in today’s GOP. The former Florida congressman has advocated for further diplomatically isolating Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom Trump has viewed at moments with admiration.
The Pentagon, too, has been a source of tumult, with Hegseth directing firings of top military officers and now ousting his own top civilian advisers in response to leak allegations. There are now multiple vacancies in key positions at a critical time for the military. Other missteps have included a broad edict for the military services to erase images celebrating diversity, leading to the brief removal of online content of prominent figures such as Jackie Robinson and causing a public outcry.
Reports of Elon Musk being offering a classified Pentagon briefing on China and Hegseth posting airstrike plans in two Signal chats with dozens of people have spurred calls for the defense secretary’s firing. But Trump has stood by him.
Trump’s national security team could be “charitably” described as “a work in progress,” said Daniel Fried, a former US ambassador to Poland and a National Security Council official under both the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, citing what he said were concerns about coordination and portfolios.
“I’m not saying that the Trump foreign policy team is doomed. But the lack of coordination, the lack of consistency, the sense of chaotic decision-making isn’t just a media myth,” Fried said.
Trump’s approach to foreign policy
The national security adviser post, established in 1953, matters to the functioning of a cohesive government. That official is intended to serve as a hub in coordinating information, soliciting advice among agencies and developing policy recommendations for the president.
But the argument for balance in policymaking is unlikely to resonate with Trump. Over the course of his career, he has claimed expert knowledge on everything from Islamic militants to taxes and technology.
Heather Conley, a former deputy assistant secretary of state during the George W. Bush administration, said Trump often gives greater weight to advice and recommendations from television and social media than his senior advisers.
“There is very little role for policy coordination because the president is clearly setting the policy on a daily, hourly basis,” Conley said.
The NSC didn’t immediately respond to messages seeking comment.
Even as Trump has elevated Rubio, there are signs that Trump also has welcomed the input of a far-less conventional source: far-right activist Laura Loomer.
Last month, she appeared to take credit for Trump’s firing of Air Force Gen. Tim Haugh as head of the NSA and the Pentagon’s Cyber Command after a 33-year career in intelligence and cyber operations. Loomer said she had raised questions to Trump about Haugh’s ties to retired Gen. Mark Milley, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Trump’s first term but later became a critic, and she questioned Haugh’s loyalty.
On Friday, Loomer said she recommended to Trump in a private meeting last month that he remove Waltz from his job.
Changes from the first Trump administration
The Waltz ouster notwithstanding, Trump has tried to project a more ordered administration than during his first term. Those four years were marked by big personnel changes among his national security leadership and bitter disagreements with officials he felt were trying to rein him in or box in his choices.
He replaced three national security advisers, and fired an FBI director and secretary of state. He clashed with one defense secretary who resigned after differing with Trump over the abrupt withdrawal of US troops from Syria and dismissed another who broke with him over using the military during racial justice protests in 2020.
The removal of a national security adviser with views not in perfect alignment with his own may help free Trump from some of the constraints he felt from government agencies in his first term.
Yet at a moment when Trump is trying to find endgames to the wars in Ukraine and Gaza while trying to negotiate an Iran nuclear deal and waging a global tariff war, leaning on Rubio to serve in both roles may be suboptimal.
Appearing Thursday night on Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” Rubio centered his comments on the foreign policy news of the day — including the US role in trying to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine — rather than on a leadership transition that now has him juggling two major positions.
“The fact that Rubio has multiple titles may mean that his stock is rising, but not necessarily,” Fried said. “And that’s part of the problem. If it’s not clear who is in charge and it’s not clear where you go to get answers, that’s not a recipe for leverage. It’s a recipe for uncertainty and paralysis.”


Kremlin calls Ukrainian response to Putin’s ceasefire offer ambiguous, calls for clarity

Updated 03 May 2025
Follow

Kremlin calls Ukrainian response to Putin’s ceasefire offer ambiguous, calls for clarity

  • Zelensky also said that Ukraine, given the continued war with Russia, could not guarantee the safety of any foreign dignitaries who came to Moscow for the May 9 parade
  • Russia’s Foreign Ministry said his comments amounted to a threat

MOSCOW: The Kremlin said on Saturday it wanted a definitive response from Ukraine to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s offer of a three-day ceasefire next week, criticizing the reaction so far as ambiguous and historically wrong.
Putin on Monday declared a three-day ceasefire to mark the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Soviet Union and its allies over Nazi Germany in World War Two.
The Kremlin said the 72-hour ceasefire would run on May 8, May 9 — when Putin will host international leaders on Moscow’s Red Square, including Chinese President Xi Jinping — and May 10.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appeared to rule out such a brief ceasefire earlier on Saturday, saying he was only ready to sign up to a ceasefire that would last at least 30 days, an idea Putin has said needs a lot of work before it could become a reality.
Zelensky also said that Ukraine, given the continued war with Russia, could not guarantee the safety of any foreign dignitaries who came to Moscow for the May 9 parade.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry said his comments amounted to a threat, while Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said nobody could guarantee that the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv would survive to see May 10 if Ukraine attacked Moscow during the May 9 celebrations.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov convened a special conference call after Zelensky’s comments.
He told reporters that Putin’s three-day offer had been a test to assess Kyiv’s readiness to search for a peaceful settlement to end the war.
“The reaction of the Ukrainian authorities to Russia’s initiative to introduce a ceasefire is a test of Ukraine’s readiness for peace. And we will, of course, await not ambiguous but definitive statements and, most importantly, actions aimed at de-escalating the conflict over the public holidays,” Peskov said.
He accused the Ukrainian authorities of espousing “neo-Nazism,” an allegation Kyiv has repeatedly rejected as false, and of not considering the victory over Nazi Germany to be important enough to mark properly.
Peskov also commented on media reports that Ukrainian soldiers will take part in World War Two commemorations in Britain, calling the move “sacrilege.”


Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wins a second three-year term

Updated 22 min 19 sec ago
Follow

Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wins a second three-year term

  • Opposition leader Peter Dutton conceded defeat in Saturday’s election
  • The Australian Electoral Commission’s projections gave Albanese’s ruling center-left Labour Party 70 seats

MELBOURNE: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has become the first Australian prime minister to win a second consecutive three-year term in 21 years.
Opposition leader Peter Dutton conceded defeat in Saturday’s election, saying, “We didn’t do well enough during this campaign, that much is obvious tonight, and I accept full responsibility for that.”
“Earlier on, I called the prime minister to congratulate him on his success tonight. It’s a historic occasion for the Labour Party and we recognize that,” he added.
The Australian Electoral Commission’s projections gave Albanese’s ruling center-left Labour Party 70 seats and the conservative opposition coalition 24 seats in the 150-seat House of Representatives, the lower chamber where parties need a majority to form governments. Unaligned minor parties and independent candidates appeared likely to win 13 seats.
Australian Broadcasting Corp. respected election analyst Antony Green predicted Labor would win 76 seats, the coalition 36 and unaligned lawmakers 13. Green said Labor would form a majority or minority government and that the coalition had no hope of forming even a minority government.
Energy policy and inflation have been major issues in the campaign, with both sides agreeing the country faces a cost of living crisis.
Opposition leader branded ‘DOGE-y Dutton’
Dutton’s conservative Liberal Party blames government waste for fueling inflation and increasing interest rates, and has pledged to ax more than one in five public service jobs to reduce government spending.
While both say the country should reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, Dutton argues that relying on more nuclear power instead of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind turbines would deliver less expensive electricity.
The ruling center-left Labour Party has branded the opposition leader “DOGE-y Dutton” and accused his party of mimicking US President Donald Trump and his Department of Government Efficiency.
Labor argues Dutton’s administration would slash services to pay for its nuclear ambitions.
“We’ve seen the attempt to run American-style politics here of division and pitting Australians against each other and I think that’s not the Australian way,” Albanese said.
Albanese also noted that his government had improved relations with China, which removed a series of official and unofficial trade barriers that had cost Australian exporters 20 billion Australian dollars ($13 billion) a year since Labor came to power in 2022.
A cost of living crisis as the country faces generational change
The election is taking place against a backdrop of what both sides of politics describe as a cost of living crisis.
Foodbank Australia, the nation’s largest food relief charity, reported 3.4 million households in the country of 27 million people experienced food insecurity last year.
That meant Australians were skipping meals, eating less or worrying about running out of food before they could afford to buy more.
The central bank reduced its benchmark cash interest rate by a quarter percentage point in February to 4.1 percent in an indication that the worst of the financial hardship had passed. The rate is widely expected to be cut again at the bank’s next board meeting on May 20, this time to encourage investment amid the international economic uncertainty generated by Trump’s tariff policies.
Both campaigns have focused on Australia’s changing demographics. The election is the first in Australia in which Baby Boomers, born between born between the end of World War II and 1964, are outnumbered by younger voters.
Both campaigns promised policies to help first-home buyers buy into a property market that is too expensive for many.
The election could produce a minority government
Going into the election, Labor held a narrow majority of 78 seats in a 151-seat House of Representatives. There will be 150 seats in the next parliament due to redistributions.
A loss of more than two seats could force Labor to attempt to form a minority government with the support of unaligned lawmakers.
There was a minority government after the 2010 election, and the last one before that was during World War II.
The last time neither party won a majority, it took 17 days after the polls closed before key independent lawmakers announced they would support a Labor administration.