In wanting Mumsnet to help Judi Dench and Joanna Lumley

[GiantBranch]

Last week, Israel banned 37 international aid organisations from operating in the strip, including Oxfam, Save the Children and Medicine Sans Frontieres (MSF). MSF delivers one in three of Gaza’s babies, and experts warn that immediate action must be taken to prevent a catastrophe.

It has prompted more than 100 leading members of the arts, including Dames Judi Dench, Imelda Staunton, Joanna Lumley, Sienna Miller, Suranne Jones and singer Paloma Faith, to sign a letter urging popular online platform Mumsnet to join them in demanding urgent government action ensuring maternity care is accessible in Gaza.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gaza-israel-baby-birth-judi-dench-letter-b2896981.html

That is I am afraid completely untrue and close to slanderous I have been nothing but polite on this thread

It is. I don't think either the letter or the thread have achieved what they hoped. Because the problem is that using this unusual and unprecedented tactic means there's two sets of people who aren't on board, when there could've been just one.

There's those who want more explanation from the charities concerned of why they think the security risks of not providing this information outweigh the downsides of providing it. That balancing exercise has been absent so far. These people wouldn't support any campaign to try and pressure Israel into allowing the charities in without that security information, so it doesn't really matter how you deliver it.

But then there's also people who might actually agree with the message, but think this is such a counterproductive and/or unethical way to do it that they won't support it for that reason. Telling this group that the alternative is to do nothing, when clearly it isn't, is unlikely to get them to change their minds either.

https://www.oxfamamerica.org/press/53-international-ngos-warn-israels-recent-registration-measures-will-impede-critical-humanitarian-action/

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found here.
https://www.ft.com/content/7abb519c-ebb6-493d-8637-5a25ff508e5d

NGOs said the demands, set to take effect in the new year, would breach EU data protection laws and put their staff at risk. The groups are in danger of losing their ability to operate in both war-shattered Gaza and the occupied West Bank in the coming two months. EU equality commissioner Hadja Lahbib wrote on social media on Wednesday that Israel’s “NGO registration law cannot be implemented in its current form. All barriers to humanitarian access must be lifted.” A group of 10 foreign ministers from the UK, France, Canada, Japan and elsewhere said the new law “would have a severe impact on access to essential services including healthcare”, with one in three Gazan health facilities at risk of closing. “Any attempt to stem their ability to operate is unacceptable. Without them, it will be impossible to meet all urgent needs at the scale required,” they said in a joint statement on Tuesday.

Totally agree. There are so many rude posts on here. The OP has shown remarkable patience given the number of times she has been asked the same question.

MSF said Israel’s core demand, that the NGO’s share personal information about Palestinians employees, is especially dangerous in Gaza where humanitarian workers have been intimidated, detained, attacked and killed. Some 15 MSF colleagues have reportedly been killed by Israeli forces.
“Demanding staff lists as a condition for access to territory is an outrageous overreach,” MSF said, adding that there is no clarity on how such sensitive data would be used or shared. The organization said Israeli authorities had ignored repeated requests for meetings and instead accused MSF in the media of harbouring alleged militants – an allegation MSF rejects.
“MSF would never knowingly employ anyone involved in military activities, which contradicts our core values and ethics,” the organization said.
“Denying medical assistance to civilians is unacceptable under any circumstances, and it is appalling to use humanitarian aid as a tool of policy or collective punishment.”

https://healthpolicy-watch.news/un-agencies-aid-groups-protest-israels-move-to-bar-many-ngos-from-gaza-as-winter-exacerbates-dire-conditions/

They did, and their desire for more clarity on data sharing from the Israeli government seems reasonable to me.

What they have not done, or it wasn't in the press communiques anyway, is addressed the security concerns and problems with Hamas involvement in aid groups, and how they think these could be managed without providing the information asked for and in a manner that doesn't cause further problems for Gazan civilians.

NGOs said the demands, set to take effect in the new year, would breach EU data protection laws and put their staff at risk

I mean the GDPR is routinely breached on a daily basis by companies and usually fuck all happens. I don't think that's a strong argument for not helping Gazan women and babies is it?

Risk to their staff, fine, but are we supposed to uncritically accept their point of view on this when Israel seems to have some evidence that Hamas are hiding behind some aid agencies and carry out acts of terror using these agencies. What does 'risk' to their staff mean? Which staff? Can't they just comply with the request for the others and alter their operations in order to be more transparent? Is there no middle ground here? Other charities appear to have complied?

From my reading around this I think there does appear to be a problem with some charities that in this conflict in particular they have strayed quite far from their charitable aid aims into at best political activism.

And agree with Binus - how about putting forward some constraints around the data sharing that would BOTH ensure they can demonstrate they are not harbouring Hamas terrorists but ALSO address concerns about data usage and data protection.

It seems they just won't meet Israel halfway and are digging their heels in and saying a flat 'no'. Which doesn't seem to be much of a focus on helping Palestinians. Israel's concerns seem legitimate to me and ALSO in the best interests of Palestinians. If aid agencies funnel aid to Hamas rather than civilians that doesn't help the civilians does it?

The NGOs have requested meetings with Israel to discuss but these have not been facilitated

So it would seem Israel may be the party “digging their heels in

So the UK Foreign Minister (a mother no less!) has already condemned Israel's policy on NGOs. What more pressure or can Justine/Mumsnet create?

The more pressure to address this situation the better

Maybe that's because no one is answering our questions about why you're defending the tactics of the open letter. And it can't just be because the means justify the ends because that never has any consequences does it...

Oh yes, this 💯 times!
But no, they'll just keep shouting "dead babies!" and ignore the rest.

Maybe address concerns to the people who wrote the letter, I didn’t. Approach may have been clumsy but I thoroughly support the aims of the campaign which is to help pregnant women in a dire situation get proper pregnancy related care

Again though, none of these NGOs need a meeting to explain to the public whose support they seek how they'd balance the security issues. Even if we assume there are some things the Israelis aren't making public, there's still enough in the public domain for it to be clear that the risk exists. Unless the NGOs simply want to pretend it doesn't, which I hope isn't the case, they must have some idea.

They have explained and have repeatedly and increasingly desperately requested meetings with Israel to discuss a solution these meetings have not been facilitated by Israel

But you chose to share it, uncritically and as a question that people would be unreasonable if they didn't support it/ you.

I did not say people would be unreasonable if they didn’t support I asked if it would be unreasonable for me to ask Mumsnet as a collective to support this important cause.
you don’t wish to support the campaign I gather and that is your choice

And I have repeatedly pointed out that they have not told the public anything about how they plan to manage the obvious security risks (including the impact on Gazan civilians) if the Israelis accede to their requests. The only way you can refute this point is if you know of something they've released that actually addresses it.

Maybe send them a query ? I don’t speak for the NGOs I just support their work

Never told you where you can post simply pointed out there was a thread running on this already on the fwr board where you're all happy with people not RTFT and hounding posters by repeating the same point or question already asked by previous posters something that's considered quite annoying and not in the interests of a proper discussion else where.

By definition it's absolutely not coercive control and that's a really inappropriate use of the term. Coercive control is something women are already struggling to have properly recognised and understood - using it to describe something you dislike doesn't help that. Again, many users on FWR are more than happy with public calls for people to "speak up" without considering it coercive control or bullying when it suits them and are simply derailing OPs thread with their double standards. Do you want to share your own stance on the issue or are you just insisting on speaking on Justine's behalf about why she shouldn't have to share a view when she's happily been political before?

Because many people who don't flippantly comment about dead babies do find it unreasonable to not support protections of women and children in these circumstances. You're not one of them but you seem to be policing OP very unfairly. If you have a problem with the thread or it's title report it to MN.

Yes, I can see that you're supporting them without expecting any information about how they expect to manage the security issues in a way that doesn't cause any further problems for Gazan civilians. That's clear.