In Adam Solender’s Jan. 12 guest column [“It is moral sorting“], we are allowed to criticize Israeli policies of apartheid in Palestine so long as they are neutral. I’m not sure what a neutral critique is if not tacit approval of the status quo, perhaps with suggestions. The status quo in Palestine is something I object to. Morally and absolutely. I also reject his criticism, not for its lack of neutrality, after all he works for an organization devoted to supporting Israel, but because it denies reality.

Solander implies “apartheid” is an unfair, inflammatory descriptor. Israel controls the movement of all basic goods in the Occupied Territories. Since 2008, in Gaza they have limited the amount of food allowed in down to the number of calories. During the genocide that number has been close to zero drawing international condemnation for weaponizing starvation. Palestinian homes are demolished daily. Their owners have no legal recourse. Palestinian civilians are tried in Israeli military courts. Israelis in civil. Palestinians are required to carry color coded IDs and license plates. They are forced to drive on separate roads. Settlers burn Palestinian property with impunity. Palestinians navigate some 900 checkpoints to move through the West bank. The Israeli occupation of Palestine is nothing if not apartheid.

Many of my Jewish family members have tied their identity to Israel and this system that explicitly privileges one group over another. They tell me they feel their morals and political stances are being called into question by local movements like this. That is the risk one takes when they’ve welded their identity to an ethnostate committing the world’s first live-streamed genocide and ethnic cleansing campaigns. And it is not a valid reason to mute those calls. Their comfort does not take precedence over Palestinian liberation. Solander’s appeal for neutrality — not here, not now, not all together, not so loud — flies in the face of every liberation movement. I am proud to be a part of a community that aspires to be “apartheid free.” It’s a small, admittedly symbolic gesture, but clearly it’s moving the needle.

Ethan Markham

Amherst