Repression unleashes wave of protest MICHEL WARSCHAWSKY, director of the Alternative Informagion Center in Jerusalem, was released on bail on March 17. He had been arrested on February 17 in a televised raid on the Center. Alain Krivine interviewed Warschawsky on March 20. [See the previous two issues of International Viewpoint.] a broader public, the authoritie: attempt fizzled.
My release on bail by the Suprem Court is above all a direct result o the failure of this attempt to portras me as a dangerous terrorist, despite the charge of collaborating with ar organization regarded as one of th most dangerous in the struggle agains Zionism.
My release can only increase solidarity, because nobody is apt to believe that the Supreme Court woul free anyone who worked on behal of the PFLP.
Q. What is the situation now?
A. I was released on 50,000 dollars bail, with a whole series o restrictions. I am banned from rostrictions working for the Center, even if it i re-opened. I am forbidden to do paic or even unpaid work in anything that has to do with printing or publish ing. I have to report to the police three times a week.
All these restrictions are in force until the trial, for which the date has not yet been set. On the other hand the appeal in the Jerusalem district court against the closing of the Alternative Information Center began this week.
Q. What are the next tests What is the role for solidarity now?
A Now, we are waiting for the date of the trial. That gives us a certain breathing space to give a new impetus to local and international solidarity. This has been decisive in forcing the various retreats on the part of the authorities, such as ending the interrogations after two weeks, which is not long for the security services; their rapid presentation of a cobbled together indictment; and, finally, my release on bail.
It is important today to center solidarity around two axes - the demand for the immediate reopening of the Alternative Information Center and the dropping of the charges against me. The Israeli government, especially its Labor Party wing, remains very sensitive to Western public opinion, especially in the various Jewish communities.
Finally, it is important that the financial campaign continue. All our material was confiscated. And my friends do not want, come what may, to stop the publication of alternative information for technical reasons. Without that, as many Israelis have acknowledged recently, it would be hard to know the reality that lies behind the statements of the spokes. persons for the occupation forces. [Contributions for the defence fund can be sent to 2, rue Richard Lenoir, 93108 Montreuil, France.J International Viewpoint 6 April 1987
Question. What were the official reasons given for your arrest?
Answer. The decree of the general police commissioner closing the Center and the formal charge lodged against me at the start of interrogation, as well as confidential information that the police gave to some journalists, intimated that the Center was a front run and financed by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) of George Habash. It was suggested that far from being an alternative press agency and an office offering cheap composition and translation services to progressive movements, it was a cover for a liaison operation for the PFLP within the country and outside of it.
After several days of questioning the various members of the Alternative Information Center, and a detailed study of dozens of boxes of materials confiscated during the police raid, the charges were reduced to the following two points: possession of leaflets from illegal organizations and having composed material that served the publications of organizations that operated as a cover for the PFLP.
By virtue of the decree against terrorism, a British emergency decree of 1945, I was charged with "rendering services to an illegal organization."
The decree prohibiting typing or possessing banned leaflets or journals has virtually never been applied. But it provides for penalties of up to 10 years in prison. What is more, this decree stipulates that it is up to the accused to prove their innocence and not to the accusers to prove their guilt.
Q. What is the objective of the Israeli government in this case?
A. The closing of the Center and my arrest, in my opinion, had two central political objectives. First of all they wanted to hit an institution that has managed to gain a cer tain credibility, even with the official press, and has used this credibility to unmask the reality of the occupation, of the repression and the resistance of the Palestinian population.
More recently, we have systematically exposed the Israeli-Jordanian maneuvers against the Palestinians. In this regard, the closing of the Center was linked to the shutting down of several Palestinian journals hostile to Jordan.
The second objective, without any doubt, was to try to reconstruct national unity, or at least to paralyze the opposition, by once again waving the per of the terrorists, who had supposedly infiltrated the Israeli left. On this level, the operation of the Israeli authorities failed miserably.
Q. What has the reaction been in Israel? Why did the government have to release you?
A. Even the members of the security services that carried out the interrogations couldn't hide their surprise at the flood of solidarity in Israel and abroad against the closing of the Center and my arrest. Far from arousing a surge of chauvinist hysteria, these repressive measures unleashed a vast wave of protests that extended far beyond the circles of the radical and non-Zionist left. • Protests came from the Jerusalem Journalists' Association; from the very prestigious Association for Civil Rights, which is far from being a "leftist" front, who agreed to take charge of the appeal against the closing of the Center; and famous writers signed a petition. All the press reported daily on the case in a style that varied between objective neu. trality and open support for our cause.
In the court hearings, dozens of friends were there. They were by no means all anti-Zionists, but they did not hesitate to show their solidarity publicly. For two weeks, solidarity pickets of 30 to 50 people stood daily across from the jail. Even among