How the phrase ‘from the river to the sea’ was interpreted made it so divisive

Palestine’s “From the River to the Sea” is a Palestinian Call to Israel: The A.D.L., the House of Representatives, and Israel’s Anti-Defamation League

Some Palestine rights advocates have begun saying that Palestine will be free from the river to the sea in the wake of the Oct. 7 attack on Hamas by Israel.

The land in the middle of the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is a constant source of tension between Palestinians and Israelis.

In a post on X this week, the A.D.L., a Jewish advocacy group that fights antisemitism and discrimination, wrote: “‘From the River to the Sea’ is a Hamas call to annihilate Israel,” adding that “claiming it is a rally of coexistence gives cover to terror.”

The House of Representatives voted on Wednesday to censure Tlaib, who had used the phrase in a post on social media.

Yousef Munayyer, head of the Palestine/Israel Program at Arab Center Washington DC, says supporters of Palestine who invoke the phrase are often misinterpreted as threatening violence.

“What they are responding to is the fact that, within this space, Palestinians live along with Israelis, but it’s the Palestinians that don’t have freedom,” he said. “They don’t have justice. They don’t have equal status. They don’t have safety. They do not have security.

The phrase ” from the river to the sea” gained steam in the 1960s when Palestinians wanted to break free from the rule of the Israeli government as well as those of Jordan and Egypt.

Some Jews say that what may have been a simple plea for independence can’t be separated from the catchphrase employed by fighters bent on the destruction of Israel.

“It is an antisemitic charge denying the Jewish right to self-determination, including through the removal of Jews from their ancestral homeland,” according to the Anti-Defamation League.

“What’s the meaning of the slogan?” Palestinian American educator and anthropologist Dr. Beniazian Muhammad Mahmouddin

Munayyer believes it’s important to listen to what people say about the meaning of the slogan and not let the most extreme elements dictate its meaning.

“It’s not right to silence other people when they tell you that’s not what this means.” he said. If a person uses this phrase, it doesn’t mean they have to determine what it means for everyone else.

Mr. Khalidi pointed out that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel embraced a similar slogan in the original 1977 platform of his party. That phrase also could be seen “as having a malign intent,” he said.

Nevertheless, Munayyer and others say Congress should direct less attention toward what its only Palestinian American member says and focus instead on how to deal with the ongoing military assault and humanitarian crisis inside Gaza.

Maha Nassar is an associate professor of Middle Eastern history at the University of Arizona. They believe they identify with their ancestral home in Palestine even if it is not on a map today.

That has only intensified in the wake of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack on southern Israel, in which the group killed more than 1,400 civilians and soldiers, the largest single-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust, and took hundreds of others hostage. Gaza’s health ministry, which is run by Hamas, says that more than 10,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israeli strikes since.

Professor Beinart said that if it were coming from an armed Hamas member, he would feel threatened. “If it is coming from someone who I know has a vision of equality and mutual liberation, then no, I would not feel threatened.”