The English branch of PEN, the international writers' association, has decided to honour the Israeli author Amos Oz by allowing him to hold a public relations exercise under its name.

The decision to celebrate Oz is particularly disturbing since PEN claims that it "acts as a powerful voice in opposing political censorship and speaking for writers harassed, imprisoned, sometimes murdered, for the expression of their views". Amos Oz, the foremost apologist of Israel's brutal occupation, refrained from demanding the release of imprisoned Palestinian writers.

PEN describes Oz as an "internationally acclaimed Israeli author and peace activist". However, Oz's peace is both hollow and tainted with his support for the apartheid system in Israel. As Jonathan Cook wrote in the 8-14 February 2001 issue of Al-Ahram Weekly On-line,

Israel's doves ... especially Barak's foremost apologist, Amos Oz, continue to impress the international community with claims that they have only the best interests of the Palestinians at heart. And this despite the fact that since last summer's Camp David negotiations their moral bankruptcy has become all too apparent, particularly over the most difficult of the final settlement problems: the right of return... His [Oz's] vision precludes a future in which Jews and Palestinians could ever share a commitment to the same villages, schools, workplaces and leisure centres. Instead, it insists on a territorial segregation that will create a political and economic ghetto next to Israel. The Palestinians deserve a homeland, Oz argues, but only one forever subservient to the Jewish state.

This, in essence, is why many advocates of a just solution to the Palestine-Israel conflict, including Palestinians and Israelis, are angry at PEN's decision to honour Oz. Many have written to PEN voicing their dismay at this decision. Among them is William Dalrymple, a PEN member and award-winning author, who has told PEN that he will resign his membership unless the invitation to Oz is withdrawn "or at the very least postponed until Oz has the courage to speak out against a system of occupation that denies the indigenous population of Palestine their most basic human rights". Elfi Pallis, former editor of the London-based Israeli Mirror and former PEN International volunteer, has also written to PEN voicing her dismay at the decision to celebrate Oz.

Indeed, a report published in the Jewish Chronicle on 23 February 2001 cited a PEN spokesman as saying that PEN had been inundated with letters from members and non-members criticizing the invitation to Oz. It quoted one protester, Yael Oren Kahn, as saying: "Oz could have made a significant contribution to human rights had he published attacks on Barak's human-rights abuses, but he chose not to." She added: "Instead, he attacked the Palestinians for protesting."

For his part, Mr Dalrymple, told the Jewish Chronicle: "PEN is an organization that fights for the underdog and for the oppressed, while Oz is an apologist for Barak and an opponent of the Palestinian intifadah. I know he was once on the left, but he has clearly veered to the right. He may speak on the soap-box of peace, but he gives legitimacy to Barak's policies."

PEN has justified its decision with the explanation that the event with Oz "is of a purely literary nature and will focus solely on his new novel. It will not be a vehicle for promoting any political agenda." It added: "As an organization that represents freedom of expression and international understanding via literature, it did not seem inappropriate to host this event."

This woefully inadequate explanation raised many questions. One of them is whether PEN would also find it appropriate to host an event featuring Radovan Karadjic, the Bosnian Serb author and apologist for Serb atrocities in Bosnia-Hercegovina (see Mick Napier's letter below).

However, responding to a proposal from Mr Dalrymple that PEN ought to "show some sympathy with the oppressed", Victoria Glendinning, the president of English PEN, said that her organization "would certainly wish to express its understanding of the strength of feeling this event has aroused, and of the suffering of the Palestinian people", and assured him that PEN "will certainly be planning a literary event featuring Palestinian writing or a Palestinian author".

In the meantime, we would like to encourage individuals concerned at Israel's abuses of Palestinian human rights to send an email to PEN expressing their views regarding its decision to host Oz. We shall publish on our website copies of correspondences sent to PEN as soon as we receive them and obtain permissions from their respective authors. If you do write to PEN and would like your correspondence to be posted on our website, please email us a copy of the message you wrote to PEN.

Selection of emails sent to PEN in protest at its decision to host Amos Oz

Dear PEN,

I have for sometime been prepared to give Amos Oz the benefit of the doubt as far as the Middle East conflict is concerned, but his article in the Guardian of 8 February [2001] has put paid to that. This shows him up for what he is - a hypocrite and a fraud.

I wonder if he ever crossed over to Palestine as I did last year and saw what has been happening there. The settlements, the zoning and the day to day humiliation of the Palestinian people has to be seen to be believed.

I wonder [why] it took so long for the second intifadah to erupt. This really had nothing to do with Arafat. It was because of the way the Israelis have always treated the Palestinians. This uprising was inevitable and it makes no difference what Arafat might or might not have done. Any nation which suffers such a relentless and planned annihilation will eventually react in this way.

Joan Beazleigh,

London, England

20 February 2001

Re: PEN's association with Amos Oz

Dear Director,

I am writing to you as a former editor of the London-based Israeli Mirror, as someone who reported on Israel in the last two decades and as a former PEN International volunteer, to express my dismay at PEN's plan to give credibility to the Israeli writer Amos Oz.

Oz represents himself as a founder of the Israeli peace movement. It is crucial to realize that "the peace movement" is, in fact, an umbrella term for a variety of different groups. Oz was a co-founder of Peace Now, founded to campaign for peace between Israel and Egypt after [Egyptian] President Anwar Sadat's historic visit to Jerusalem. Closely linked to Israel's Labour Party, it has taken the weakest stand of all Israeli peace groups on the shooting of unarmed Palestinians in this intifadah (30 were killed before the Palestinians began to shoot back).

Moreover, Oz has never taken up issues like the torture and detention without trial of Palestinians, which have long been of concern to human rights bodies everywhere.

What is most objectionable about Oz, though, is his recent campaign to persuade the world that Israel is a sane, peace-loving country, while the Palestinians are irrational murderers. Oz has consistently refused to acknowledge that the current uprising has perfectly rational grounds: seven years after the Oslo talks began and three years after they should have ended, the Palestinians still do not have a state.

Oz keeps reiterating that Israel is committed to peace, yet Israel's recently defeated "Peace Premier", Ehud Barak, never presented Yasser Arafat with anything viable. Not only did Barak continue to build settlements during last year's talks, but he made him a deeply dishonest offer: the "95 per cent" he was willing to return were, in fact, three separate areas. There was to be no Palestinian political sovereignty over any part of Greater Jerusalem and, worst of all, Israel's violent settlers were to keep the land and water sources in between.

All this is well known in Israel and Ehud Barak's duplicity was condemned by many peace groups. It was, therefore, disgraceful of Oz to argue, as he has widely done, that if the Palestinians are fighting, they clearly do not want peace. To Oz and his ilk, the Palestinians are not, of course, entitled to wish for anything else. Peace is what they ought to want, and it will therefore be fed to them, if necessary at gun-point.

Should you really be associating with such a man?

Yours sincerely,

Elfi Pallis,

London, England

11 February 2001

I am an American freelance writer who is dedicated to writing against the oppression of the Palestinian people. I believe that all men are created equal and all are entitled to their inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, I find the fact that you are honoring Amos Oz a great disappointment not only to me, but also to the dignity and integrity of all people.

Mr Oz is a propaganda tool for the Israeli leaders who are exterminating all that is human in the Palestinian people. These are a people under siege. Statistics speak for themselves. Since the beginning of intifadah al-Aqsa which began in September, 2000, more than 400 Palestinians have been killed and more than 20,000 have been injured.

The Palestinians are fighting for their freedom with their bare hands and with stones. They fight against propaganda, armored tanks, helicopters and gunboats.

The skill of any writer should be dedicated to the principles that all decent men hold dear. That Mr Oz not only condones this Palestinian Holocaust, but also uses his talents to promote it, is tragic.

What the Palestinians live in now are two ghettos or concentration camps that are cut off from the rest of the world and surrounded by Israeli settlements and cities. It is time that this continued propaganda against a noble people's struggle for freedom stops. It is time that the Israeli government makes a sincere and diligent effort for peace. Prime Minister Ehud Barak speaks with a forked tongue. He speaks of peace while he does his best to liquidate the Palestinian people.

I urge you to reconsider your promotion of Mr Oz. It does not coincide with the objectives of PEN, which promotes human rights and peace.

Respectfully,

Edna Yaghi

Amman, Jordan

13 February 2001

Amos Oz's own life is deeply intertwined with the tragedy of the Palestinians. For many years, Oz happily lived in kibbutz Hulda, an experience which he dramatized in several of his novels. I myself went on weekly picnics in Hulda wood as a child and particularly enjoyed clambering over the ruined houses dotted among the trees. I didn't then realize that these were the homes of Palestinians who had been made refugees in 1948. Their land became the property of kibbutz Hulda and Oz knew that. I later met some of these wretched refugees in the Deheishe refugee camp near Bethlehem. Oz did not even protest against the brutal Israeli attacks on their Deheishe refugee camp, let alone correct the wrongs of dispossessing these Palestinians. Amos Oz has always refused to acknowledge this injustice, which makes him less than a liberal, even in Israeli terms.

Oz has excelled himself since the election of Sharon and yet again has given his services to the Israeli propaganda machine. He legitimized the election of Sharon by blaming the Palestinians for his victory (see his article in the Guardian, 8 February 2001). His article lacks everything that is mentioned in Seumas Milne's article, published in the Guardian the following day and entitled "The man of blood: we call such men war criminals when their names are Milosevic or Pinochet. But not when it's Sharon.

If PEN's objectives include the promotion of peace and human rights, these could not be reconciled with promoting Oz.

Looking forward to hearing from you,

Yael Oren Kahn,

Warwickshire, England

11 February 2001

We are horrified that you are putting on anything for this man [Amos Oz]. His article in today's [8 February 2001] Guardian is proof of either his intellectual dishonesty or his stupidity. He blames [Palestinian leader Yasser] Arafat for not accepting Barak's proposals for settling the Israel-Palestine problem.

But all that Barak offered was a Palestinian state to consist of various divided and disjointed areas between which freedom of movement would have depended entirely on Israeli goodwill. Except, perhaps, for a few miles of the Gaza/Egyptian border, the state would have been entirely surrounded by Israel, the latter having ultimate control of the movement of people and goods in and out of the state. The much-vaunted offer on Jerusalem would have given the Palestinians limited control of portions of the city - again separated by Israeli-held land. And yet in international law the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem is illegal!

Had it been Israelis in the position that Palestinians are in, and had they been made such an offer, would Amos Oz have been prepared to accept it? We very much doubt it. But it should have been good enough for the Palestinians. So he is a racist , sharing the same kind of attitude to another people as Hitler did.

Incidentally, we were alerted to your action and asked to protest not by Palestinians or other Arabs, but by Jews, Israeli and British!

Yours sincerely,

Donald and Sheila Miller

Ringmer, England

8 February 2001

I am absolutely appalled by Waterstone's decision to host a PEN event for the writer Amos Oz. Far from being a peace campaigner, this man is an apologist for Israel's brutality and its continued and illegal occupation of Palestinian land.

To invite someone so controversial at such a sensitive time in Middle Eastern affairs is outrageous and thoughtless. In case you have not seen or read the news lately, over the last few months alone more than 350 Palestinians (mainly children) have died at the hands of Israelis whose policies are more than supported by Amos Oz.

Shame on Waterstone's to put profit before lives. I or my family will never enter another Waterstone's store again if you insist on publicizing such a person.

What next? Ariel Sharon's memoirs of how he engineered the Sabrah and Shatila massacres?

Mrs Lily Jamil

Dudley, England

13 February 2001

The grave injustices - daily expropriations, bulldozing of homes, etc. - even now being visited upon the Palestinian people have never been opposed by Amos Oz. He refuses to oppose intellectually past ethnic cleansings of native Palestinians, events which the Israeli government denies ever happened.

Amos Oz supports Israel's apartheid policies towards Palestinians both inside Israel proper and in the occupied territories. As a Jewish supremacist, he opposes Palestinian refugees' right to return to the areas they were driven from by Zionist death squads in 1948.

I am far from asking that his voice should be silenced; it certainly ought to be opposed by all human rights organizations. Who will PEN honour next - the 'poet' [Radovan] Karadjic who favours ethnic cleansing and a form of apartheid in Bosnia? There may be a yawning gulf between Oz and Karadjic in terms of artistic talent; there is little in terms of adherence to supremacist politics. Both promise unending blood and horror wherever their ideas penetrate. Must PEN really provide another platform?

Yours in despair and disgust,

Mick Napier,

Edinburgh, Scotland

11 February 2001

I have great difficulty with the news that you are hosting an event for Amos Oz. But since you are, could you ask him what should be done about the several hundred students from Gaza who have been trapped in Ramallah for the past four months. Their [identity] papers are out of date, so they risk arrest if they are caught outside Ramallah. Hence they have no means of renewing them or of getting permission to make the 80-mile journey to their homes.

Oz is a hypocrite and you devalue your organization by entertaining him.

Yours sincerely,

Ross Campbell

Edinburgh, Scotland

10 February 2001

Oz may be one of the founder of [the Israeli] Peace Now movement, but he is no peace dove. Your event cannot be seen as "of a purely literary nature", and, by hosting a literary event for Amos Oz, PEN will be seen as promoting a political agenda that supports apartheid, racism and Zionism.

Yours,

Nada Hudson

Edinburgh, Scotland

12 February 2001

I am appalled to learn that you will be organizing an event for Amos Oz.

PEN has in the past played an admirable role in promoting human rights. However, this role is in total contradiction to the role of Amos Oz, especially in the last few months, when he was one of the most prominent propagandists defending Israel's systematic abuse of Palestinian human rights.

While Oz has refused to criticize the killing of hundreds of unarmed Palestinians and the collective punishments imposed by Israel, he verbally attacked the Palestinians struggling against the Israel's brutal and illegal occupation. His verbal attacks complemented the military's brutalities and murders.

By honouring Oz, you have betrayed your ideals and your friends.

Shame on you!

Nureddin Sabir

London, England

8 February 2001

Dear Sir,

As an enthusiastic member of PEN I was horrified to see that Amos Oz has been invited to speak to us, and even more horrified to see him described as a leading peace activist.

Long, long ago Oz may have been a voice for peace, but in recent years he has become the leading apologist for the brutal occupation of the Palestinian territories and a vocal supporter of the recent Israeli war atrocities that have left 11,000 Palestinians wounded and over 100 Palestinian children dead. To invite him to promote his book at this time is nothing short of scandalous: it is a denial of everything PEN stands for.

Would you have invited a leading Serbian apologist of [deposed Serbian and Yugoslav President Slobodan] Milosevic to promote his novel during the ethnic cleansing of Bosnia? Of course not. PEN must be consistent if it is to mean anything at all.

I intend to resign my membership forthwith unless the invitation to Oz is withdrawn - or at the very least postponed until Oz has the courage to speak out against a system of occupation that denies the indigenous population of Palestine their most basic human rights.

I repeat: what on earth is the point of an organization like PEN if it gives a platform to writers who act as semi-official apologists for human rights violations and the vicious oppression of an entire people?

Yours,

William Dalrymple

In a further email to PEN on 15 February, William Dalrymple made the following proposals:

Dear PEN,

... If, on consideration, you really think PEN should go ahead and endorse the chief apologist of an oppressive government [Amos Oz], would you not agree that it would be appropriate for PEN to show some sympathy with the oppressed (what I had rather assumed was its principal function) by championing a campaign on behalf of imprisoned Palestinian writers? Or perhaps mounting an event to commemorate the writing of some of the Palestinian poets assassinated by Israel?

Maybe PEN could also write an open letter to Israeli authors, such as Oz, asking them to call for the immediate release of imprisoned Palestinian writers?

Or perhaps you could organize an event with Palestinian writers who have been imprisoned by Israel? Perhaps even paying the flight cost of getting them?...

One last possibility would be even easier to organize. Last night [14 February] myself, Colin Thubron, Ahdaf Soueif, Charlie Glass and Brigid Keenan spoke at an event at the RGS to raise money for the 11,000 Palestinian children wounded by Israel in the last few months. Somewhat to my surprise, the event not only sold out (800 seats- raising some £20,000 for Palestinian medical charities) but we had to return 500 applications that arrived after we filled the hall. In view of this, we all agreed to speak again and see whether we could raise some more money. Perhaps PEN might like to get involved in this - and possibly find us a new venue? If so, we could certainly give the evening a slant which talks of the role of Palestinian writers and poets in resisting the occupation, and which highlights the repression faced by Palestinian writers...

I still think very strongly that PEN should leave Waterstone's to their dubious promotion of Oz and that it is a huge mistake for PEN to have got involved. In many ways Oz is the most dangerous sort of Israeli: while any reasonable person can see that [Israeli Prime Minister-elect Ariel] Sharon is a war criminal, Oz, with his honeyed words and insistence that he speaks for peace provides, a much more respectable cloak for the same oppression, the same gradual dispossession of an entire nation. As you have got yourself in this hole I can see the difficulties you face extricating yourself. But, having feted the oppressor, I do hope that you understand the responsibilities you now face to do something for the oppressed. If not, as I said before, I will feel no option but to resign my membership - hardly a great blow to PEN I know, but there you go.

Yours,

William Dalrymple

Dear William,

Thanks for your emails. PEN as you know stands for freedom of speech, and is against all censorship. We fully realize how controversial the Oz event is. With that in mind, and so that key English PEN members are fully apprised of the situation, we will be discussing the matter fully at a meeting next week.

I believe we are sufficiently well-informed, and have received enough communications, to understand the issues involved...

PEN is well aware of its responsibilities... You may like to know that Norwegian PEN, with the support of English PEN, is just now sending a mission to meet next week in Israel with both Israeli and Palestinian writers who are cooperating in seeking a solution to the impasse.

English PEN would certainly wish to express its understanding of the strength of feeling this event has aroused, and of the suffering of the Palestinian people. I shall deal with this in my introductory remarks at the event. We will certainly be planning a literary event featuring Palestinian writing or a Palestinian author...

As ever, your sister-writer,

Victoria