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

So you want to ask Mumsnet to support it as a collective without the support of the Mumsnet as a collective?

There’s an exhaustive thread on the whys and wherefores of the decision on another board @Binus

Remembering that 579 humanitarian workers have been killed there in 2 years.

It sounds like you've read it, can you link anything where the NGOs concerned have talked about how they plan to balance the security risks? I've seen the releases where they've said they don't think they should've been asked in the first place and why they don't want to do it, but not what their proposed alternatives are and how they expect they'd work.

And we're back to the fact that activism can actually have an impact on the people it purports to help that is in fact opposite than the desired one - i.e. is bad for them.

This isn't the primary school playground. Life isn't as easy as goodies and baddies and shouldn't be measured in meaningless soundbites.

Allowing in agencies that are supporting Hamas rather than providing aid is not going to 'ensure maternity aid is accessible' in Gaza. It's going to at best provide the illusion that agencies are helping women and children when in fact they're not. We need proper, neutral, verifiable sources of information on this - the people most likely to have access to that is Government ministers.

Also, the UK government has ALREADY made a statement that they want to ensure maternity care is accessible and ALSO is continuing to apply pressure to ensure this happens. So I don't really understand what more can be reasonably expected of the UK government or anyone else in the UK?

I'm beginning to think it's just a meaningless publicity stunt.

Meanwhile total silence from these celebs on ensuring UK women have access to decent maternity care, an existing MN campaign grown out of MNetters real concerns and experience. 61% of women couldn't access food when they needed it on postnatal wards in the uk. It's not a minor problem. Our survey: what women told us about care on postnatal wards | Mumsnet

You'd think there'd be some quid pro quo if they want to tell the normal mummies what to think and do.

I don’t know what you want exactly @Binus . I suspect that any middle ground would firstly require a discussion / meeting and Israel will not facilitate (as @GiantBranch has patiently and repeatedly explained).

The NGOs to explain to the public whose support and donations they seek how they think they could manage the security concerns in Gaza, without providing the information Israel is insisting on.

I agree that if the Israeli government refuse to facilitate a meeting that NGOs would willingly attend, that's their fault and worthy of criticism. And have also mentioned I think the NGO concerns about data are reasonable.

But the fact is, the NGOs don't require a single thing from the Israeli government in order to more fully articulate their current, existing position to the public. It is within their control. If they have done that and it's just not been posted on this thread, links would be helpful.

Well certain aid agencies (only some) are saying Israel won't meet with them that's not actually the same as it definitely being a fact. Perhaps they HAVE met with the aid agencies who have complied with their request and found a middle ground.

??

Clutching

@GiantBranch if you had asked me on 6 October 2023 I would have unequivocally condemned Israel's treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. I was then utterly horrified by the brutality of the Hamas-led attack on 7 October.

I can agree that Israel's reaction to 7 October 2023 (and subsequent attacks) has created a humanitarian disaster while also disliking the emotional blackmail in this letter, thinking that the letter writers know nothing about how Mumsnet works, and that it simplifies and does nothing to acknowledge the myriad complexities in Israel/Gaza including how aid agencies need to contribute to Israel's need for security.

Citing complexities all the time is just a tool for obfuscation and a justification for inaction.

Sometimes things really are that simple: mothers and babies in warzone situations need access to humanitarian aid that will save their lives and they are now at grave risk.

This is really not too complicated; Israel are placing unreasonable demands on NGOs that will put the lives of their volunteers at risk, and they are refusing to facilitate discussion to enable them to provide life-saving care. Multiple international organizations and countries have said as much out loud.

Israel of course could provide maternity and neonatal services directly themselves, but they are not doing this are they? Why not, if they won't let services in and this is happening under their watch?

Of course any reasonable person should speak up about this, and it is reasonable to ask Justine, as a previously-demonstrated influential political figure and founder of the largest parenting forum in the UK to speak up as well.

If she can't speak up as a representative for Mumsnet because a sizeable portion of posters here have apparently fallen into a moral abyss where the lives of mothers and babies in another country apparently don't matter, she should speak up for herself, recognising that she is an influential public figure with relatedness on this issue, and there is responsibility that comes with that.

No, I don't think so. Ploughing through complexity through sheer force of tactical naivety usual never leads anywhere good.

It might be reasonable to ask her.
It was off-the -charts unhinged to solely target her in an open letter to the press.
At best it was naively ill judged. At best.

When women who've been in abusive relationships are telling you that the decision to publish this letter is coercive control, we are probably correct. We have first-hand experience of coercive control, we know what it looks like.

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?

where you're all happy with people not RTFT

If you had yourself read the full thread, you'd know my stance on this, and you'd know that my concern is that Justine might get swatted again.

Israel of course could provide maternity and neonatal services directly themselves, but they are not doing this are they? Why not, if they won't let services in and this is happening under their watch?

Let's think this one through, shall we?

• Sunday 10th January: Israel sends 100 doctors, nurses, and midwives into Gaza to deliver babies.
• Monday 11th January: Hamas issues ransom demand for safe return of 100 Israeli medical staff.
• Tuesday 12th January: Hamas announces execution of a hostage and vows to kill one per day until Israel pays up and gives into their demands.

a sizeable portion of posters here have apparently fallen into a moral abyss where the lives of mothers and babies in another country apparently don't matter

That's not the case at all. The situation out there is complex beyond belief. The hatred is so deep, it makes Northern Ireland's sectarianism look like a playground quarrel. Hamas will hurt their own people, especially women, just to get one up on Israel. It is definitely one of those situations where outsiders wading in unthinkingly will make it worse.

I am unwilling to co-sign on the letter's demands without being sure that Hamas won't divert people, money, and equipment away from the mothers and babies it is intended for.

And I think that targetting Justine is grossly irresponsible, given that she's already been swatted once for not bowing to other people's demands.

Stopped reading after the first line. You are not the only abused woman on here and being abused doesn't mean you get to redefine coercive control and apply it to things you dislike after the amount of years it took for us to get a workable definition and public understanding.

Coercive control is defined in statutory guidance as "an intentional pattern of behaviour which takes place over time, in order for one individual to exert power, control or coercion over another" (Home Office, 2023).

Coercion is where the threat of force is used to bend someone to your will. The force doesn't have to be delivered by the person doing the coercing.

An individual intentionally set about and planned over a period of time to draft, recruit signatories for, and publish this letter, with the intention of securing Justine's cooperation. The intent and the pattern is there.

It is public knowledge that Justine has been swatted in the past by politically-motivated people because she said "no" to them. It is public knowledge that some of the people sympathetic to Palestinians use violence and property damage against those who they percieve as disagreeing with them. It is obvious to anyone who has read this thread that saying "no" to this letter will be interpreted as taking Israel's side and hating babies, despite there being several legitimate reasons to do so. Justine has to say "yes" or "no" in public, because the letter was published; failing to say "yes" is, by exclusion, a "no". The threat of force from third-parties if she says "no" is clearly there. It's coercion.

Hamas don't particularly want to avoid Palestinian civilians dying, not if it gets them closer to their goal (complete destruction of Israel, Hamas to establish an Islamic state in its place). This is sadly (from the point of view of western values, valuing life and human rights), one of their greatest strengths in this war.

That's why they have absolutely no qualms about using their own people as human shields, nor diverting aid to their cause.

Most western activists seemingly don't understand this or choose not to acknowledge it (alongside the fact that Hamas also don't share their other values, like gay rights), despite Hamas actually quite clearly stating it. It's a fundamental mismatch of outlook between Hamas and most western people and organisations.

There are a number of groups within Palestine who oppose Hamas rule and are willing to accept a two state solution (or at least say this now, maybe they just want power). Hamas sometimes kill them too. This article by the New York Times about an execution of Palestinian men by Hamas gives some sense of the complexity of the situation. With Truce in Place, Hamas Pursues Bloody Crackdown on Rivals in Gaza - The New York Times

Now I'm sure some people will say that Israel is evil for working with the Palestinian militia groups seeking out oust Hamas. But really, what else can they do? Welcome their own destruction? Of course they want a different set of rulers in Palestine - if there are rulers who concede Jewish people have the right to exist, then a two state solution and lasting peace might be possible. Which is also the preferred solution of the UN, and would be the best way to avoid more suffering and death of mothers and babies (and all civilians).

In my opinion aid agencies in this context do need to be transparent and demonstrate as far as is possible that they have put in place safeguards (such as not employing fighters of any type) to ensure their aid is going to what it's intended for and not either to Hamas or indeed to the militia groups.

Sources please.

I can't find anything to back up your post

No.

It is not off the charts unhinged to put a public letter together to ask those who have relevance, standing, and influence to say out loud that they are Not OK with what is happening right now, especially when they have made their wealth off this specialism, and have put themselves out there again, and again, and again in previous years, at the very highest levels of public and political influence with four UK prime ministers and plenty other politicians.

It is absolutely apposite.

And absolutely shameful if nothing is forthcoming.

There's no one as blind as someone who doesn't want to see.

Hamas taking and murdering hostages: https://www.ajc.org/news/who-are-the-hostages-still-held-by-hamas

Gazan medical staff directly involved in abuse, including sexual abuse, of hostages: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-881435

Gazan medical staff hiding hostages and working with Hamas: https://archive.is/JZXYV

Aid agency staff working for Hamas: https://news.sky.com/story/unrwa-staff-fired-over-possible-involvement-in-hamass-7-october-attack-on-israel-13191705

Any Israeli who sets foot in Gaza will be killed or taken hostage, immediately. Gazan medical staff cannot be trusted to treat hostages decently, never mind work with Israeli medical staff as peers. Israel cannot send medical staff to Gaza.

absolutely shameful if nothing is forthcoming

Thank you for proving my point that the publication of this letter makes it very difficult for Justine to say "no" for any reason.

Yes. They have shown their hand now. It was targeted coercion

😂 Who is 'they' ?!

People are allowed to have opinions about other people.... Shocker! Who knew!?

No but the celebs only support "some" women. Where is the support for Afghan women for example.