A History Lesson: Haiti, Guantanamo and Our "Common Humanity"

Wednesday morning President Obama issued a statement regarding the humanitarian crisis following the earthquake that has devastated Haiti. Obama said that Haiti would have the "unwavering support" of the United States and specified that "this is a time when we are reminded of the common humanity we all share." Obama's comments, a precursor to an international relief effort directed toward the suffering people of Haiti, reminded me of a different moment in US-Haiti relations when the "common humanity" of Haitians with Americans was not assumed, or acted upon:

In the early 1970s Haitians began to flee to the United States and until 1981 they were detained in South Florida, their point of entry into the US, and quickly deported. In the early 80s a "migration crisis" occurred as 125,000 Cubans attempted to enter the United States at the same time as 25,000 Haitians. The Carter Administration responded by inventing a new legal status to describe these immigrants, "Cuban-Haitian Entrants", which allowed most of those entering the US to stay. However, following this measure the official policy toward Haitian immigration became more strict. Under the new policy Haitian boats were intercepted and escorted directly back to Haiti, never reaching our shores and without offering the Haitians aboard the opportunity to apply for political asylum. After the overthrow of President Aristide in 1991 the Haitian army and other repressive groups within the country began to slaughter his supporters, causing a massive outflow of people from Haiti to the United States. Unable to simply return the fleeing Haitians because of the inevitability of political retaliation and acutely aware of how it would look if they did, the first Bush Administration re-directed them to a small island off of Cuba, which is held indefinitely by the United States: Guantanamo Bay.


A tent city was hastily erected at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay to house 12,000 Haitians and a massive review process was undertaken to judge their acceptability to enter the United States. A bit more than 30% of the Haitians originally held at Guantanamo were permitted to enter the United States, but they kept arriving and by 1992 the Bush Administration reconsidered the policy and began to circumvent the process by--once again--intercepting Haitian ships and escorting them back to Haiti, which had descended into lawlessness by that point. The Bush policy successfully discouraged Haitians from fleeing to the United States but human rights advocates criticized Bush's policies. During his presidential campaign Bill Clinton decried them as "cruel"; however in the early stages of his Presidency when Haitian refugees once again began trying escape to the United States he reopened Guantanamo (which had closed) and employed it for the same purpose, reneging on his campaign promise to treat them differently. Further, the Clinton Administration championed new legislation that would allow it to reject the incoming Haitians wholesale despite the fact that they were fleeing political persecution, in direct conflict with the Refugee Act of 1980 which states that the Attorney General "shall not deport or return any alien" to a nation "if [s/he] determines that such alien's life or freedom would be threatened there". The justification for circumventing the Refugee Act was that it applied only to migrants on US soil, a bit of legal acrobatics that should seem familiar post- W. Of course there were objections to this legal maneuvering. In his (singular) dissenting opinion Justice Blackburn wrote,

"I believe that the duty of nonreturn expressed in both the Protocol and the statute is clear. The majority finds it "extraordinary" that Congress would have intended the ban on returning "any alien" to apply to aliens at sea. That Congress would have meant what it said is not remarkable. What is extraordinary in this case is that the Executive [meaning President Clinton], in disregard of the law, would take to the seas to intercept fleeing refugees and force them back to their persecutors and that the Court would strain to sanction that conduct."

And New York Congressman Charlie Rangel said, when interrogating INS Commissioner Gene McNary,

"Rangel: I hope I'm making it loud and clear that I think the policy is racist. And I would like to just ask you, Mr. McNary, is there any question in your mind that if the people on these boats came from Ireland, that we would exercise the same policy, notwithstanding the law? And if the situation existed in Ireland with this ragtag, crooked, violent group of gangsters who call themselves soldiers, do you think for one minute that the United States of America would return these Irish people to Ireland?

McNary: Congressman, that is even an offensive question. We return anyone who is supposed to be returned under the laws of the United States of America.''

Despite high profile objections from human rights advocates, politicians and celebrities such as Katherine Dunham and Arthur Ashe (who protested the Clinton repatriation policy a year before his death), the overwhelming political opinion was in favor of the repatriation policy. The popular perception among Americans that the Haitian "boat people" were infected with AIDS fed the justification for first holding them at Guantanamo and then turning them away en masse.

In a larger sense, this popular and legal shift set the stage for many subsequent elements of US policy. President Carter's Presidency was perceived in retrospect as suffering irreparable damage because he allowed an influx of Cubans and Haitians into the country and the US Presidents who followed him--Republican and Democrat alike-- became increasingly hostile toward immigration in general. In the 1990s, emboldened by the Haitian case, the Clinton Administration repatriated hundreds of Chinese boat people seeking asylum in the United States. And after the first World Trade Center bombing Orientalism and Islamophobia became intertwined in the public perception that immigration into the United States is "lax"-- a charge that is often repeated in our present moment. By the end of the 90s politicians like California's Pete Wilson led the charge for stricter immigration legislation, which developed into full scale xenophobia under the second Bush Administration, with immigration becoming tied to fears about the US economy and the "war on terror".

And of course, Guantanamo Bay... well, we know what happened there, right? (Actually, is happening. The prison and interrogation camp at Guantanamo Bay is still open. Just saying.)



In legal terms Guantanamo Bay is an "anomalous zone": a space where the rule of law under which Americans live is temporarily suspended. Its geographical position, just outside US borders supports this function (although historically there have been anomalous zones within national borders, like sanctuary churches and red light districts, for e.g.). That means the people detained there, whether it was Haitian boat people in the 90s or Arab and Muslim prisoners post 9/11, do not enjoy the rights--even basic human rights--that the US extends to world citizens outside this space. The space itself is designed for that purpose. So while different categories of immigration and asylum--legal and illegal, economic and political--have been collapsed into a blanket rejection of foreign (read: non-European) "others". And Guantanamo provides a place to act on those populations the US government decides do not count as entirely human.

So no matter how sincere he is, when President Obama pledges the "unwavering support" of the US to Haiti in the name of our "common humanity" there is a lot of history being swept under the carpet. The priority should be getting aid to Haiti in this moment of crisis, but the smart thing to do here--if history is any indication-- would be to keep the side-eye at the ready.

Across Histories Artist Talk Series: Segregated Spaces — On Progress with Hasan Elahi Tracking Transience: The Orwell Project

Hasan Elahi, Rhododendron 12 feet x 9 feet x 4 feet
2 channel video, sound and light installation
as installed at Beaker Gallery Tampa, Florida, 2003

Across Histories Artist Talk Series:

Segregated Spaces — On Progress with Hasan Elahi
Tracking Transience: The Orwell Project

January 13, 2010
7 p.m.
Cabinet Magazine Space 300 Nevins Street Brooklyn, New York 11215

Due to an erroneous tip-call into law enforcement authorities in 2002, artist Hasan Elahi was subjected to an intensive post 9-11 investigation by the FBI. After undergoing six months of interrogations and ultimately nine consecutive lie-detector tests, he was cleared of suspicions. After this harrowing experience, Elahi conceived "Tracking Transience", a self-tracking system that constantly and publicly presents his exact location, activities and other personal data. Please join Elahi for a presentation and discussion of Tracking Transience: The Orwell Project, a self-surveillance project and critique of contemporary investigative techniques, which provides an ongoing "alibi" for Elahi in the event of future accusations.

Hasan Elahi is an interdisciplinary artist whose work examines issues of surveillance, simulated time, transport systems, borders and frontiers. His work has been presented in numerous exhibitions at venues such as the Centre Georges Pompidou, Sundance Film Festival, Kassel Kulturbahnhof, The Hermitage and at the Venice Biennale. Elahi was recently invited to speak about his work at the Tate Modern, Einstein Forum and at the American Association of Artificial Intelligence. His work has been supported with significant grants from the Creative Capital Foundation, Ford Foundation/Philip Morris and the Asociación Artetik Berrikuntzara in Donostia-San Sebastián in the Basque Country/Spain. Currently, he is the Chair of Digital Media Art at San José State University.

Curated by Lauren Pearson, Across Histories is a free monthly series centered on developing an ongoing critical discussion of artistic practices in the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and their diasporas. Debuted at the Elizabeth Foundation Gallery in Manhattan in September 2008 and now housed at Brooklyn's Cabinet Magazine Space, Across Histories provides a compelling platform for artists, designers, curators and art critics to present and discuss their work, oeuvres, historical moments, theories, writings and exhibitions that have had the most impact on their professional practices.

LAST MINUTE: Participants needed for workshop to develop an adaptation of The Octoroon

Below is a message about a workshop/lab/play reading passed along by my colleague Raya El Zein on behalf of the playwright, director and dramaturg. They need last minute participants for this interesting project so if you are in New York please consider contacting them. Details and contact information follow.

WE KNOW THIS IS INCREDIBLY LAST MINUTE, BUT:

Playwright Branden Jacobs-Jenkins (Neighbors, forthcoming at the Public), director Gavin Quinn (PanPan Theatre), and dramaturg/producer Allison Lyman (NYC Players) are currently developing an adaptation of nineteenth century playwright Dion Boucicault's famous melodrama THE OCTOROON for Performance Space 122 (to premiere June 2010) and could use your help.

They're having a sort of super-last-minute workshop/lab on January 5 and 6 (This week! Whoops?!), during which a group of actors and artists will read out loud together all or parts of Boucicault's original THE OCTOROON--with a bit of light direction from Gavin--followed by a brief, informal, artist-led discussion. Pending available time, rough pages from the new adaptation may also be read.

(Links to information about Dion Boucicault and the play are appended to the end of this e-mail.)

Again, WE KNOW THIS IS INCREDIBLY LAST MINUTE BUT:

They are looking for enthusiastic actors/artists to read this play aloud and participate in the discussion.

They are also looking for other informed voices--academics, lazy actors who dont feel like reading, directors, writers, thinkers, nineteenth century theatre enthusiasts--in the room to listen and also participate in the discussion.

The total time commitment is roughly is 3 hours. (There will be five different readings by give different groups of actors and/or participants.You could come to more than one, if you REALLY wanted.)

Unfortunately, this is an unpaid, volunteer gig, but all selected actors/readers will receive a modest honorarium to cover travel. This is the opportunity to participate in the ground-level developmental phase of what will undoubtedly be a bizarre and exciting collaboration, premiering next season. This is also an opportunity to geek out on Early American Drama and maybe discuss such thrilling things as "how to adapt nineteenth century plays," "identity politics in the theatre," "how hard it is to be an actor," the idea of a contemporary avant-garde, commercialism in the theatre, "what it's like to be an ethnic," and Ireland.

Here are the dates and time slots available:

January 5: 11am-2pm, 3pm-6pm, 6:30pm-9:30pm

January 6: 11am-2pm, 3pm-6pm

Location will be disclosed to all parties who inquire.

If interested and available, please send an e-mail ASAP to theoctoroon@gmail.com, expressing your interest and telling us a bit about who you are--what you do (actors, director, Theatre Studies Phd, Indian Chief) and your interest in the event (reader or observer)--and what time slots you are available, in order of preference.

Also: PLEASE PLEASE re-post/forward this along to any others actors or artists you think might be interested.

Thanks!

LINKS TO INFORMATION ABOUT DION BOUCICAULT AND THE OCTOROON:
b
http://www.wayneturney.20m.com/boucicault.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Octoroon

http://www.bookmice.net/darkchilde/maude/mplay18.html

Israel Admits Harvesting Palestinian Organs Pt. 2: Wherein Joe Responds to Hate Mail

From the (Hate)mail bag re: my post on the theft of Palestinian organs by Israeli doctors.

Anonymous said...
"My family moved to the United States from Lebanon at the beginning of the 20th century and the strange, hybrid identity Arab/American shapes the way I see the world. But don't be scared, I am one of the good ones"

I'm not scared, but this post of yours is so misleading that I while I suspect you are one of the good ones, I also think you are a dumbass.

The harvesting was done to any "eligible" body that entered that coroner's department, regardless of race, creed, color, gender. It happened to Palestinians, and it also happened to Israeli soldiers.

That's not racism, that's a few doctors ideas on the morality of organ harvesting in providing to the living culture.

And it stopped over 10 years ago.

I don't know if you're stupid, or evil.

@"Anonymous"
I published your comment not because it is worth hearing in and of itself, but to illustrate the repulsive, knee-jerk defense of anything Israel does, no matter how heinous, among many of its supporters. I sometimes wonder what it would take for Zionists to actually admit Israel's actions weren't perfectly justified in every instance: The murder of Rachel Corrie? The targeting of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians including women and children (as confirmed by the Goldstone Report)? And now the theft of organs from the very population it oppresses? All are apparently perfectly justified by your ideology.

If you had bothered to read the post you would see that I republished it from the Guardian UK where it was written by Ian Black, not me. The headline--which is the Guardian's, not mine--specifies the theft of Palestinian organs by Israeli doctors because the original accusation of organ theft made by a Swedish reporter was decried as a "blood libel" by the Israeli government. Outraged Israelis and Zionists around the world called for a boycott of Sweden. The reporter was vilified and the Swedish government was urged by Israelis to disavow the assertion, drawing ironic parallels to the Muhammad cartoon affair. Sweden refused, citing the value of a free press in its society and the outraged sputtering continued...

Until a third party came forward with proof that the most important element of the accusation is true, Israeli doctors DID illegally strip the organs from the bodies of Palestinians to benefit Jewish Israelis who needed them.

So, does an accusation still count as a "blood libel" when it's true? Perhaps you think so.

But according to you these gruesome crimes don't merit comment in any event because they "stopped over ten years ago"? That is ridiculous, but sadly typical of the attitude of Israel's boosters, no matter what the crime. Yes, there were also Jewish Israeli bodies stripped of their organs, as Black points out, but that does not make the recycling of Palestinian body parts (skin, eyes, etc.) less racist in sum. When the "living culture" you describe is composed entirely of Israeli Jews--who were the exclusive beneficiary of the stolen organs--then one needn't look too far to see the racist intent that views Palestinian bodies as a renewable resource to sustain an Israeli body politic. If you cannot (or more likely will not) see that, then you are blinded by an ideology that affords you privileges that Palestinians do not enjoy in their own homeland because of Israeli occupation. The Latin Americanist Diana Taylor has coined the term "percepticide" to describe the willful blindness of a population to the crimes of the State. She describes how the Argentine government were able to snatch people off the street, "disappearing" them in full view of Argentinians who continued about their business as if it weren't happening. I think that might be a useful term to describe the phenomenon at work here in and around Israel.

A final note: I am happy to post dissenting opinions but...really... grow a pair and sign your name(s). Anonymous name calling is cowardly to the point of embarrassment in conversations between adults. If you cannot bring yourself to sign even a made-up name to your argument then perhaps you should look a bit more deeply into your motivations for making it.

Unfortunately for you I am neither stupid nor evil. I am an Arab who is paying attention. Fair warning: there are an awful lot of us and we are not going anywhere.

Discussion and Exhibition: "Darcy Lange: The Art of Teaching"

Darcy Lange, from Study of Three Birmingham Schools, UK, 1976.
Courtesy Darcy Lange Estate and Govett-Brewster Art Gallery.­

Date: January 7, 2010, 7–9 pm
Location: Cabinet, 300 Nevins Street, Brooklyn, NY
FREE; no RSVP necessary

Jeff Dolven and Simon Critchley will host a discussion on the relationship between pedagogy and art by showing segments of videos from Cabinet’s current exhibition of work by New Zealand artist Darcy Lange (1946–2005). In the 1970s, Lange took his video camera into schools in Birmingham and Oxfordshire to record the daily business of the classroom, and then put teachers and students on camera again as they watched the record he had made. The result is a penetrating and sometimes uncomfortable study—across a wide range of schools and social classes—of the strange combination of ordinariness and performance that occurs in every classroom. The panel will consider pedagogy as a work of art, and look beyond Lange’s work to the surge of interest in didacticism as a mode and motive for contemporary artists.

ABOUT THE PARTICIPANTS

Simon Critchley is a philosopher who teaches at the New School. His books include The Book of Dead Philosophers (Granta, 2008) and Infinitely Demanding (Verso, 2007)

Jeff Dolven teaches English at Princeton University, and is the author of Scenes of Instruction (Chicago, 2007). With D. Graham Burnett, he organizes the series Poetry Lab at Cabinet.

The exhibition “Darcy Lange: Work Studies in Schools,” curated by Mercedes Vicente, draws from a series of videos by New Zealand artist Darcy Lange (1946–2005) which examine the processes of teaching and learning. In 1976, Lange videotaped a number of classrooms at three schools in the English city of Birmingham, carefully choosing institutions that would represent different social classes. Focusing on the teaching of art, history, and science, Lange first filmed each class in action. Afterwards, he would watch the tapes with the teachers and then the students, each time recording their reactions. The following year, Lange continued the project, this time in four Oxfordshire schools. Lange saw his tapes as material for “research,” an “educational process” in which the reactions of his subjects to the footage were just as important as the original films.

About Darcy Lange
A graduate of Elam School of Fine Arts in Auckland, New Zealand and the Royal College of Art in London, Darcy Lange (1946–2005) established a career in the late 1960s as a sculptor with large, hard-edge abstract works but soon turned to photography, film, and video. In 1972, he began videotaping and filming under the general theme of “people at work” in English factories, mines, and schools and continued documenting workers’ lives after returning to New Zealand. In the late 1970s, Lange joined Maori activists’ struggles to establish land rights during what became known as the Maori Renaissance when bicultural policies in New Zealand fully came into place, and developed his ambitious Maori Land Project (1977–1981). Beginning in the 1980s, Lange became increasingly involved in the study of music, especially flamenco, and created several multimedia performances involving music, poetry, and art. He died in Auckland in 2005.­

Exhibition Dates: December 4, 2009–January 16, 2010
­Location: Cabinet, 300 Nevins Street, Brooklyn, NY
Gallery hours: Tuesday to Saturday­, 12–6 pm, and by appointment (closed December 23–January 2)
Curated by Mercedes Vicente

January 1, 2010

Happy New Year, future people.

So far my new year has been inauspicious-- in a good way.

Dog got me up before seven am for his early walk, so we both went back to bed and napped it up. Eventually I woke up, ate leftover Mexican food and watched a marathon of the Resident Evil movies in my sweatpants. Later I will go out to dinner and get Thai food with friends.

In my world, this is close to a perfect day.

But I am sadly aware that the simple pleasures of such days are at a high premium globally.

For example (speaking of resident evil), Mohammad Othman, a non-violent activist in the “Grassroots Stop the Wall Campaign” who was arrested by Israeli Defense Forces on September 22nd when he was returning home after a speaking engagement in Norway, didn't get to lazily ease into the new year by alternating sleeping and eating with rubbing the dog's belly. Instead he remains in Israeli "administrative detention", an Orwellian term for imprisonment without trial, and all efforts at getting him freed have been thus far been frustrated by the Israeli government. The international movement that grew up in response to his arrest--which has been completely ignored by the US media-- broadened by year's end when other activists in the popular movement against the Apartheid Wall were arrested as well.

Does this signal a change in Israeli policy as the Shin Bet, Israel Defense Forces, Border Police, police, and civil and military judges have begun to target the leaders in the popular struggle against the wall? Haaretz reporter Amira Hass seems to think so. In a December 23 article she writes,

"Over the past few months, the efforts to suppress the struggle have increased. The target: Palestinians and Jewish Israelis unwilling to give up their right to resist reign of demographic separation and Jewish supremacy. The means: Dispersing demonstrations with live ammunition, late-night army raids and mass arrests... Since June, dozens of demonstrators have been arrested in a series of nighttime military raids. Most are from Na'alin and Bil'in, whose land has been stolen by the fence, and some are from the Nablus area, which is stricken by settlers' abuse... Israel also recently arrested two main activists from the Palestinian organization Stop the Wall, which is involved in research and international activity which calls for the boycott of Israel and companies profiting from the occupation. Mohammad Othman was arrested three months ago. After two months of interrogation did not yield any information, he was sent to administrative detention. The organization's coordinator, Jamal Juma'a, a 47-year-old resident of Jerusalem, was arrested on December 15."

Haas argues that the purpose of this unofficial policy change (which she describes as "coordinated oppression") is to wear down the activists and deter others from joining the popular struggle, which supports an international boycott of Israeli companies and those that support and profit from the occupation. Such boycotts have proved to be historically effective, notably in the case of Apartheid South Africa. According to Haas, "what is dangerous about a popular struggle is that it is impossible to label it as terror and then use that as an excuse to strengthen the regime of privileges, as Israel has done for the past 20 years." Yuval Diskin and Amos Yadlin, the respective heads of the Shin Bet security service and Military Intelligence, seemed to confirm this justification for the campaign against non violent activists in Palestine during a cabinet briefing when they said, "The Palestinians want to continue and build a state from the bottom up ... and force an agreement on Israel from above ... The quiet security [situation] in the West Bank and the fact that the [Palestinian] Authority is acting against terror in an efficient manner has caused the international community to turn to Israel and demand progress."

In other words, the source of their frustration is that these activists use nonviolent means which shift the international focus to Israel and its violent policies and subsequently put the onus for peace progress back in Israel's lap. So this way the Israeli government gets to arrest and terrorize nonviolent peace activists AND condemn those who act violently as terrorists.

If that doesn't definitively illustrate that the Israeli government is not the victim but rather the perpetrator in the dynamic between Israel and Palestine, I don't know what would.

Did I mention that the US media has completely ignored this story?

State of the Blog: Happy New Year

Photo by Hans Haake

Well hello there, new readers and followers.

According to the fine folks at Google Analytics you are from countries all over the globe. It is an exciting prospect, having an international readership, so I thought I would pause as the year comes to an end and restate my goals with this blog.

What do I blog about? Glad you asked:

I am interested in the ways that culture and politics overlap and rub up against each other. I don't make distinctions between "high" and "low" culture, so you are as likely to read about contemporary art and experimental performance as films and TV here. And my notion of politics, which I take to mean the structures of power that shape the relations between people, is similarly broad. I am also a performance and interdisciplinary artist and scholar and if you are interested in that work you can find it here on my website. You can find my critical writing in the Journal of Dramatic Theory and Criticism and (upcoming) in The Drama Review. And I have guest blogged at Racialicious and had my work reposted at Altmuslimah.com.

You may notice by looking at my archive that I often write about the Middle East. I am interested in the politics and culture of the Arab and Islamic worlds and the dynamics between East and West, more broadly. Orientalism and Islamophobia are particular concerns for me but I also write about racial and ethnic prejudice--and the ways those things are represented in culture-- in general.

Also: after decades of successfully avoiding and/or sabotaging interpersonal relationships in favor of an artfully crafted cynicism and lots of black clothing I got a dog and became a complete sap. So sometimes I write about him too.

So, um, that's me. Now, if you like tell me about yourselves.

What brings you here? What sorts of things would you like to see me address? Where are you from? Don't be afraid to speak up. I have no formal commenting policy and do not mind posting dissenting opinions as long as they are offered respectfully and move the conversation forward. But don't waste your time writing me hate mail: I'll just delete it without a second thought. I've enjoyed starting this blog this year. In 2010 I plan to resume my interview series with artists and thinkers I find interesting so hopefully you will enjoy that.

Have a happy New Year.