From the river to the sea, Facebook is free

Numerous Palestinian activists have used the slogan, ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ on Facebook. This was flagged by other Facebook users for breaking rules on hate speech, incitement to violence, and glorifying dangerous organizations. Nevertheless, Facebook recently made a final decision to leave the posts untouched. We need some background to understand what’s going on.

Let’s begin by acknowledging that this type of inflammatory rhetoric deepens the conflict. To be willing to trade land for peace, Israelis need to feel secure that Palestinians aspire to have their own state alongside Israel and do not aim for Israel’s destruction. This phrase, which makes it seem like Palestinians want to destroy Israel and take all the land for themselves, only hardens Israel’s resistance and strengthens those who say peace is impossible and oppose all negotiations.

Let’s also remember that it is not Facebook’s responsibility to rid the world of harmful rhetoric. In fact, Facebook profits from posts that are extreme and provocative, as they push people’s buttons, generate comments, and drive engagement.

There are only two reasons why Facebook sets limits on what users can post. The first is that if newsfeeds become too overflowing with offensive content people may abandon Facebook and seek out other platforms. Second is Facebook’s own sense of corporate responsibility to be a good global citizen and uphold human rights. To these ends it has established an independent, quasi-judicial oversight board to decide whether content violates its, ‘policies, values, and human rights commitments’ or not.

In this case, the board issued a lengthy ruling examining the meaning of ‘From the river to the sea.’ It begins by acknowledging that the phrase appears in Hamas’s charter calling for the destruction of Israel. That is what a literal interpretation of the phrase would seem to mean, and clearly what Hamas intends by its use. The board acknowledges the problematic nature of the phrase by stating:

When heard by members of the Jewish and pro-Israel community, it may evoke fear and be understood by them as a legitimation or defense of the unprecedented scale of killings, abductions, slaughter and atrocities committed during the October 7 attacks, when Jewish people witnessed an attempted enactment of the aim to annihilate them.

But then the board goes on to say that ‘from the river to the sea’ has different meanings as well. They write:

The phrase . . . has been adopted by various groups and individuals and its significance depends on the speaker, the listener and the context.. . . many understand the phrase as a call for the equal rights and self-determination of the Palestinian people. At times it is used to indicate support for one or more specific political aims: a single bi-national state on all the territory, a two-state solution for both groups, the right of return for Palestinian refugees, or an end to the Israeli military occupation of Palestinian territories seized in the 1967 war, among other aims. In other contexts, the phrase is a simple affirmation of a place, a people and a history without any concrete political objectives or tactics.

The board cites the public comments of various Palestinian organizations in support of these interpretations, and also an AP News article in which a handful of prominent Palestinians were asked what the phrase means to them and they gave these sorts of explanations.

In the end, the majority of the board voted that since the phrase can have multiple meanings, it should not be banned from Facebook unless accompanied by additional text or photos which make clear the intention is to advocate for violence against Israel or to glorify Hamas. So, for example, one of the posts that triggered this review was a computer generated graphic of watermelons spelling out ‘from the river to the sea Palestine will be free’. According to the majority this is okay, and photos of demonstrations with signs that say this are allowed too. Only if there is a specific reference to Hamas or call for violence would it be removed.

The board’s minority said the opposite. In their view, the phrase should be assumed to bear its literal meaning as a call for violence, and it should only be allowed on Facebook if accompanied by text or photos which make clear that is not the poster’s intention. The board does not reveal what the vote tally was or which members took which position.

While this decision to allow ‘from the river to the sea’ on Facebook may disappoint some of us, it also provides an opportunity. If the phrase was censored by Facebook, Palestinian activists would be forced to stop using it. Giving them the opportunity to continue posting it allows them to voluntarily switch to rhetoric that is more peaceful and unambiguously in favor of coexistence. Isn’t that what we really want to see happen, after all?