CDP Platform Urges Just Middle East Peace!

Well, here’s a pleasant surprise! (Its publication here is largely swiped from a Facebook post by Kev Abazajian; I can’t get a usable direct link, but you can find it through his Facebook feed. )

“OC Palestinian activist and Chair of the California Democratic Party’s Arab Caucus Mirvette Judeh has announced that she and Andrew Lachman, Chair of the California Jewish Democrats, reach agreement on the language that appropriately prioritizes justice.”

The “surprise” part is that it was adopted into the CDP platform!

Back to Kev:

In case you missed it, the California Democratic Party 2026 Platform is considered by many as historic in achieving planks that support the priorities of both California Palestinian-American and Jewish Democrats.

Congratulations to OC’s own Mirvette Judeh (pictured), Chair of the Arab-American Caucus, and Andrew Lachman, Chair of the California Jewish Democrats, on reaching agreement on the language that appropriately prioritizes justice.

Kev links to this excellent KQED story on the events, which quotes Mirvette and Lachman extensively:

Mirvette comments that: “It starts with item 28 … which generally speaks about our duty to prevent genocide then we go into Gaza. Here is all of it- thank you Kev for uplifting this historic moment with language that is more just and realistic in addressing what has happened and is happening in Gaza and West Bank. This is a big step in our party’s discussion of Palestine and Israel“

That language appears below:

28. Support efforts to prevent through diplomatic measures (including the use of diplomatic pressure and provision, suspension or conditioning of military, economic, and/or humanitarian assistance) and ensure accountability through legal processes for actions proscribed by the Geneva Convention and established international law namely 1) war crimes – committed during armed conflict; 2) crimes against humanity- systematic acts of violence, enslavement or sexual violence during peace or wartime, and 3) genocide – acts committed with the express intent to destroy, completely or partially, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. Work to enhance the U.N. and regional organizations and commit to the objectives of the U.N. Sustainable Development Goals, including eradication of extreme hunger and poverty, achievement of universal primary education, and promotion and empowerment of women;

29. Advocate for a diplomatic solution in Gaza for an immediate end to the mass civilian casualties, destruction, displacement and starvation of Palestinians in Gaza;

30. Support a full and permanent ceasefire in Gaza recognized and honored by Israel and Hamas, the release of illegally detained Palestinians, the immediate rebuilding of Gaza with the provision of humanitarian aid, restoration of funding for an UNRWA that serves the Palestinian people, and conditioning of any international assistance by the U.S. or any other source on adhering to the ceasefire conditions and any future agreements signed by all parties to the conflict, and as well as compliance with U.S. law and the Geneva Convention[;]

31. Continue to work toward a solution to the Israeli Palestinian conflict directly negotiated by the parties that guarantees equality, security and democracy for all; recognizes Israel’s future as a secure and democratic Jewish state with recognized borders; and provides Palestinians with independence, sovereignty, and dignity, opposing efforts to undermine the prospects for two states;

32. Support efforts among representatives of Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank to de-escalate tensions through good-faith negotiations that recognize Israel’s future as a sovereign, secure, and democratic Jewish state and that can lead to security and independence for Palestinians that includes Palestine state as a full member state of the United Nations;

33. Recognize Israelis and Palestinians should have security, recognition, and a normal life free from terror, violence, corruption, incitement, collective punishment, and the end of and discriminatory laws in the West Bank and in Gaza, including ensuring that Palestinians in the West Bank are able to live with dignity without the threat of settler violence and harassment condoned by (and often assisted by) the Israeli Defense Forces, or forced displacement from expanding Israeli settlements;

34. Recognize that Palestinians in Gaza should be able to rebuild without displacement, with international humanitarian, economic and security assistance;

35. Recognize that Palestinians and Israelis must rebuild trust through peace-building efforts and should be free to govern themselves, each in their own viable states in peace and with dignity”

My commentary:

I am strongly of two opinions — four, actually! — regarding the content of the various eight points found above. I think that in some cases the concessions by the pro-Palestinian side to the pro-Israel position are too much, and in other places they are not enough. And I feel the exact same way regarding the concessions of the pro-Israel side to the pro-Palestinian side. I didn’t notice that one side was being more reasonable than the other (although I expect that partisans from outside this process would disagree.) I’m not going to get into detail on my views about those concessions, though I’ll note some examples: the concession that Israel has the right to exist as a Jewish state is a huge one; so is the concession that Israelis who have committed crimes against Palestinians, up to and including genocide, must be brought to justice. (This is not to say that either concession should be huge; it is just that partisans of one or another position will likely find each so, without seeing the defeats being adequately offset by other victories that each side thinks are just what their side deserves.

Zooming out from the specifics, though — this agreement is a thrilling and significant success. The notion that this could even be put together at all by proponents of the opposing sides is, in the present climate, pretty amazing. The notion that one of the major political parties would include these ideas in their party platform is shocking! It gives me hope that I haven’t felt for a long time; these positions immediately become a legitimate and even-handed starting point for further discussions at all levels, and I never would have expected to see that coming from a CDP convention. The more we talk about this in the more forums, the better.

As a platform document, this is supposed to guide the positions taken by local parties (though not, some of us successfully argued back when I was last involved, by all local clubs. I don’t know whether that’s still true. Producing a document that could be the grains of sand that lead to future pearls is a wondrous accomplishment. My hat’s off to Mirvette and Andrew for hammering it out; and the same for Kev for bring attention to it even outside of the attendees of a Democratic state party convention. Right now, the party nomination process is being riven in part by disagreements by those supportive and opposing of Zionism, giving Democrats a realistic chance of losing the Governor’s race. Now Democrats can just ask candidates whether they are willing to be bound by these platform planks; we can demand their concession that they are, and then hold them to it.

[Note: I’m going to be pretty quick on the ban-hammer with those who have issues with Kev, Mirvette, or Andrew. I think that you know who you are. Rules of war involving disproportionate retaliation will NOT be honored in this instance!]