Rethinking Solidarity: unquestioned loyalty or ethical resistance?

Par Samah Jabr

The slogan “We are with Palestine, right or wrong” has long been a rallying cry of solidarity, famously echoed by Algerians and others who stand with the Palestinian cause.

While its sentiment reflects deep historical bonds and unwavering support, it also raises a critical question: Does true solidarity mean blind allegiance, or does it demand accountability? Genuine support must go beyond slogans—it must engage with the complexities of justice, ensuring that resistance is rooted in integrity rather than immunity from scrutiny.

A European activist, deeply engaged in the Palestinian cause, once asked a Palestinian group about transparency in their work. They had mobilized support, raised funds, and organized campaigns. Yet, when international comrades inquired about due process, the response was swift and indignant:

“Your question is patronizing, orientalist, and reeks of white saviorism. Who are you to demand accountability from us? We are so much hurt by your question!”

The activist, taken aback, had spent years advocating for Palestinian rights, boycotting Israeli goods, and enduring personal costs for their solidarity. They had not expected to be chastised for simply asking a question—one they would have posed in any movement they supported.

This incident is not an isolated one. It belongs to a broader pattern where the struggle for liberation is used as a shield against accountability, where the rhetoric of antiracism is deployed to suppress legitimate discussion, and where solidarity is interpreted not as mutual engagement, but as blind allegiance. In the name of resisting colonial arrogance, a troubling form of exclusion takes root—one that replaces meaningful dialogue with silencing, and replaces responsibility with immunity.

The Paradox of Antiracist Racism

There is an increasing tendency, both in Palestine and beyond, to conflate political critique with racial bias, and to conflate moral authority with historical pain and suffering. This paradox manifests in several ways:

1. Weaponizing Identity: Dismissing critical engagement based on the identity of the speaker rather than the substance of their words. A Western comrade in solidarity raising concerns about governance is labeled as arrogant, while an internal critic is accused of undermining unity.

2. The Immunity of the Oppressed: The assumption that suffering automatically confers moral purity. The oppressed are seen as beyond reproach, their actions beyond question. Yet, oppression does not necessarily produce virtue, just as privilege does not necessarily produce vice.

3. Selective Standards: Some movements demand that international comrades challenge injustice in their own societies but resist similar scrutiny when it comes to their own structures. An activist questioning corruption in a Western government is applauded; the same activist questioning corruption in a liberation movement is vilified.

4. Silencing Internal Criticism: Within the struggle itself, internal dissent is often discouraged in the name of unity. Those who question leadership, financial mismanagement, or strategic decisions are accused of betrayal, as though critique were an act of treason rather than a necessary exercise in integrity.

The Price

While such attitudes may offer a temporary sense of self-righteousness, they do not serve the struggle. They push away committed allies, weaken the movement’s moral standing, and allow internal injustices to persist unchecked. A movement that refuses to examine itself does not grow—it stagnates.

Accountability is not a colonial imposition; it is a human principle. The Palestinian cause, like all just causes, must remain open to reflection, critique and reform. Our legitimacy should not rest solely on our suffering but on the ethical standards by which we conduct our resistance and govern ourselves.

Towards Mutuality in Solidarity

True solidarity is not an act of submission; it is an act of shared commitment. It requires the sharp mind and the beating heart to engage in difficult conversations and the humility to listen as much as to speak. Rejecting both colonial arrogance and defensive victimhood, we must foster a culture where solidarity is built on truth rather than performative loyalty.

To resist oppression is to resist all forms of exclusion and silencing—including those that masquerade as resistance itself. A movement grounded in integrity will always be stronger than one sustained by fear of critique.

* Dr. Samah Jabr is a consulting psychiatrist practicing in Palestine, serving the communities of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and former head of the mental health unit within the Palestinian Ministry of Health.
She is an associate clinical professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at George Washington University in Washington, DC.
She is also a member of the scientific committee of the Global Initiative against Impunity (GIAI) for International Crimes and Serious Human Rights Violations, a program co-financed by the European Union.

March, 5, 2015 – Transmitted by the author