Bulletin N°64 2026 In an article published online on July 6, entitled " Behind Rima Hassan, a New Generation of Activists and Painful Controversies ," a Mediapart journalist attempts to characterize what she considers a new generation of activists in solidarity with Palestine and their differences with what she calls the "traditional supporters of Palestine." The issue, even when addressed through a highly questionable and incomplete article, is important. We have repeatedly clarified the different currents of professed solidarity with Palestine, and in particular highlighted that the activists targeted by state repression are all activists in solidarity with the national liberation of Palestine; they advocate the dismantling of the Zionist colonial state. We will try to decipher the article and characterize the activists in defense of a free Palestine; not all of them come from a "new generation," even if it is undeniable that youth plays an important part in it.
Some points about the general framework of the article
Intended to present Rima Hassan as the spokesperson for this new generation, the article relies heavily on terms from the dominant ideology. For example, the phrase " the bloody attacks of October 7, 2023, perpetrated by Hamas " appears twice, even though the text lacks any analysis or discussion of the nature of the Resistance's attack during Operation "Al-Aqsa Flood." The denial of the plurality of armed Resistance groups and the demonization of the October 7, 2023, act of Resistance are part of the repertoire of the typical "left-wing journalist," attempting to project a false neutrality and, in this case, an investigative approach. Similarly, the article, in order to properly "balance" things, calls upon the inevitable "left-wing" Zionist, here, Albert Herszkowicz, of the Collective for the Anti-Fascist Struggle Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (Clara), whom the journalist opposes to Alain Gresh and whose statement she publishes, justifying his "desertion from the demonstrations," also ritualistic in the expression of the "left" of the question, with the obligatory reference to a supposed anti-Semitism: " the lack of concern to clearly differentiate oneself from anything that touches, directly or indirectly, on anti-Semitism, the failure to take into account the question of the hostages and the failure to consider the two-state solution which is, in principle, the common platform of the entire French left ."
The article, written the day before Rima Hassan's latest trial, struggles to present both sides of the argument regarding the MEP and this new generation of activists. For example, concerning Rima Hassan, it speaks of "genuine judicial harassment suffered by the left-wing MEP ," which is difficult to deny; but then adds: " She is accused by certain anti-Semitism organizations of having adopted anti-Semitic tropes. " As for the new generation of Palestinian activists, it " arouses as much admiration as virulent criticism. "
The journalist simply tells us that the famous new generation is " less affiliated with traditional parties, but also more radical and vocal ," yet she carefully avoids investigating the organizations these people belong to, whether political or civic, and especially their connection to anti-colonialism—a question never addressed, a word never uttered. We are treated, once, to the infamous "decolonial," but it serves only to describe Tsedek. From this fragmented and incomplete study emerges the role that La France Insoumise (LFI) proclaims in its own name, that of spokesperson, without in any way analyzing LFI's positions, which are the same as those of the rest of the left, and carefully avoiding seeing how Rima Hassan's positions should be distinguished from those of the official La France Insoumise, even if she serves as their figurehead. Thus, we can read this: " La France Insoumise (LFI), the main party to have taken a stand and which has since been targeted by a barrage of accusations for condoning terrorism. " That La France Insoumise (LFI) was the first of the official left-wing parties to denounce the genocide is an undeniable fact, as we have already stated. But it is equally undeniable that since the French Communist Party (PCF) and Europe Ecology – The Greens (EELV) have also adopted this position, nothing distinguishes the three organizations from a position standpoint regarding the future of Palestine. The difference lies in the far more active and numerous presence of LFI activists in these initiatives.
A true observation on the role of the left, but a generational explanation that doesn't hold water.
The article, through the lens of the French Communist Party's (PCF) positions, highlights a genuine evolution in the solidarity movement with Palestine. The apt observation is expressed as follows: " This new social movement has emerged amidst regularly banned demonstrations, university blockades violently dispersed by the police, and other pro-Palestinian rallies targeted by a French-style McCarthyism. And it has radically transformed in France a movement previously driven primarily by middle-aged activists, often drawn to the Palestinian cause by the Communist Party or the anti-imperialism of the 1970s. " It also notes: " The leadership of the French Communist Party (PCF) has abruptly toned down its rhetoric on Palestine, much to the dismay of its members, since October 7th. " Finally, the journalist interviews Taoufik Tahani, former president of AFPS (France Palestine Solidarity Association), whom she describes as "a historical channel for the mobilization for Palestine in France." And Taoufik Tahani's words are crystal clear: " At the beginning, we demonstrated without the support of the left, with the exception of LFI. The activists were demonstrating, but their party apparatuses kept repeating, 'Do you condemn Hamas?' "
However, the explanation attributed to Rima Hassan for this divide does not satisfy us: “ Of course there is a generational break, because there is a boomer left that is thirty years behind and clings to ‘peace’, ‘the two-state solution’. They no longer have any revolt. I am insolently criticizing them, certainly, but rightly so. ”
The idea of a "generational divide" is therefore both that of the article and that of Rima Hassan. We refute it. The difference in approach between the left and the solidarity movement on the Palestinian question is not so recent. The French Communist Party (PCF), first of all, shifted its position as early as the Oslo Accords, but we have also pointed out how erroneous its positions on the colonial question in general, particularly since 1945, have been, marked by a profound misunderstanding of the colonial issue. This misunderstanding persists today in certain other organizations stemming from the PCF network, leading them to endorse the two-state solution or the implementation of UN resolutions—which amounts to the same thing—and, objectively, to reject the liberation of Palestine and the recognition of its central role. This is not a question of "baby boomers," but of ideological stance and the legacy of colonialism.
October 7th was a revealing event, but not a trigger. These disagreements already existed, but the renewed focus on the Palestinian question brought about by the attack on the Palestinian Resistance dragged them out of their dormant state. While the article is right to mention Omar Alsoumi and the creation of the "Palestine Emergency" association following October 7th, its superficial analysis prevents it from grasping the true nature of the solidarity movement with the Palestinian Resistance in France. In particular, it misses what truly brought to the forefront the self-proclaimed defenders of Palestine, who see Palestinians only as victims, and the true advocates of national liberation, who see Palestinians as a people building their own national liberation. And La France Insoumise (LFI), like the entire "left," was among the former. This revelation was the victorious end of the battle for the release of Georges Abdallah, in which LFI, including Rima Hassan, played only a marginal role. On the contrary, this victory owes much to the diverse Marxist-Leninist activists gathered in the Unitary Campaign for the Liberation of Georges Ibrahim Abdallah (CUPLGIA), including those from the Revolutionary Communist Party. It is in light of this victory, the only one in France since October 7, 2023, on the subject of Palestine, that we must analyze the composition of the movement in solidarity with the national liberation of Palestine.
On the contrary, the article gets bogged down in misinterpretations. In its section on Albert Herszkowicz, mentioned above, it reports his remarks on the Palestinian defense movement, which it describes as having adopted a radical stance symbolized by the slogan "from the sea to the river, Palestine will be free," which, according to him, includes the abolition of the State of Israel . This is true, but the article adds: " a statement contested by pro-Palestinian activists who chant it throughout the world. " This is false and demonstrates a deliberate attempt to ignore the colonial situation and the role of Zionism from the outset. True defenders of Palestine demand the dismantling of the Zionist colonial state, an essential condition for the national liberation of Palestine and the definitive end of colonization. This is why they are persecuted by state repression. There was certainly enough material to delve into the subject, as the journalist reports the remarks of Anne Tuaillon, president of the AFPS, who is nevertheless considered part of the "old generation," regarding the "left" of "just and lasting peace": " There is a difficulty in recognizing that, from the outset, Israel had colonialist aims, that Israel practiced settler-replacement colonialism and was built on injustice. The question is there; for these people, nothing must be said that could suggest that Israel is not legitimate ."
An attempt to characterize the movement of solidarity with free Palestine more in line with the truth.
The article is mired in errors, superficiality, and pseudo-neutrality. For instance, in an attempt to criticize Rima Hassan, the journalist states: " Some of Rima Hassan's positions on issues other than Palestine have also drawn criticism, such as her refusal to vote for the resolution on prisoners in Algeria (including the writer Boualem Sansal) or her relative silence on the Syrian regime and, in particular, the Palestinians who are victims of the Assad regime and the Russians... " The criticisms, therefore, all point in the same direction: to review what, in Rima Hassan's discourse, doesn't conform to the dominant ideology. Yet, regarding the Palestinian question and from a perspective intended to demonstrate the "radicalism" of the MEP and her image as a "moral leader" of the solidarity movement with Palestine, other criticisms would have been far more relevant, but they would have undermined the journalist's "demonstration." It would have been more accurate to point out her limited understanding of the imperialist stage and the role of Western imperialist states not merely as accomplices, but as active participants in the colonization of Palestine. Similarly, her highly ambiguous stance on Western Sahara, a situation identical in every respect to that of Palestine, where Western imperialists colonize through an intermediary at their service—Morocco in one instance, the Zionist colonial entity in the other—deserved to be addressed; this alone would have sufficed to demonstrate that Rima Hassan may not be as anti-colonialist as some believe.
Furthermore, the only political organization besides LFI mentioned is Révolution Permanente (RP), on the pretext that its leader, Anasse Kazib, is also on trial for alleged "apology for terrorism." However, Révolution Permanente, like other Trotskyist organizations close to it (NPA, LO), fails to grasp the colonial question because of its connection to the national question. These "anti-nation" internationalist movements make no distinction between a French nationalist and a Palestinian nationalist, between the imperialist bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie of oppressed countries, often divided between the comprador bourgeoisie and the national bourgeoisie. For RP, this translates into placing the dominant US imperialist aggressor and the admittedly bourgeois government of Venezuela on the same level during the US aggression. For the Revolutionary NPA (NPA-R), there was nothing more urgent than driving out Iranians who supported the regime from demonstrations against Iran's imperialist aggression. Finally, LO urged Palestinian resistance fighters to "abandon nationalism," when it wasn't suggesting fraternization between the Palestinian proletariat and the so-called "Israeli proletariat."
While the journalist rightly notes the entry of young people, particularly students, into the struggle, pointing to the repression by university administrations against supporters of solidarity with Palestine, she chooses not to examine the political commitments of these young people who, if not in traditional parties, are sometimes in the RP (Rassemblement Populaire) or the Independent Workers' Party (POI, a Lambertist Trotskyist party, traditionally pro-Palestinian and playing a role in LFI), but also in Marxist-Leninist organizations, first and foremost the recently reconstituted Young Communists, whose future activists spearheaded the campaign to free Georges Abdallah, and in a student union, the Student Union Federation (FSE). It would also have been useful to investigate the numerous victims of state repression, such as Alex, from the Young Communists, repressed for his support of the armed Resistance, or the honorary academic François Burgat. This would have allowed the article to move beyond the cliché that runs through it: They are all young; they are all behind Rima Hassan; And the divide is generational. And perhaps this explains why activists in solidarity with a free Palestine believe that the Palestinian struggle is essential for their own emancipation.
In conclusion
For those who support the national liberation of Palestine, nothing is more urgent than constantly speaking out about the situation in Gaza and throughout Palestine, and reiterating all the issues at stake. It is essential, of course, to denounce the ongoing bombings, the systematic destruction of homes in Gaza—a model also being used in southern Lebanon—the torture in the prisons, the trade with Zionist settlements in the occupied West Bank, the Bedouin being driven from their homes in the occupied Negev, and the occupation and colonization of Palestine in general.
Let us be the voice of those whom they seek to erase. And so, let us denounce, certainly, but let us not be content with merely denouncing. This means not clinging to the view of Palestinians as victims, but rather recognizing them as a people building their own national liberation. Nor should we accept the explanations of our politically correct "left" regarding the so-called "just and lasting peace," which is nothing more than colonial peace and never questions the existence of the Zionist colonial state—in other words, the continuation of colonization. For the most part, people on the "left" refuse to properly analyze the colonial situation in Palestine. And the reason is simple: they are indelibly marked by the ideological legacy of colonization, French imperialism, and Voltaire's "Enlightenment." Their position consists of denigrating Hamas or the armed resistance, telling the Palestinians who should organize the resistance and how. It's always the same people who talk about peace and not the national liberation of Palestine. The same people talk about a "two-state solution" that effectively allows for the continuation of colonization. These are also the same people who speak of the "complicity" of Western imperialists and not of their direct involvement in colonization. Finally, these are the same people who objectively try to excuse French imperialism by claiming it's under pressure from lobbies like the CRIF (Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France).
We reiterate: the Palestinian Resistance fighters are battling the same enemy that oppresses us: Western imperialism. Their victory would be a powerful signal in favor of our own emancipation. A people fighting for their national liberation against a creature of Western imperialists is also fighting against colonialism and its ideological underpinnings, which are now poisoning the entire French "left."
For the Revolutionary Communist Party, the struggle of the Palestinian Resistance, which directly confronts the vanguard of Western imperialism, is vital for the proletariat of the entire planet; the Palestinians are a people who are actors in their own history, fighting against Zionism, imperialism and reaction, for their national liberation, a long struggle whose centrality and strategic nature for our own emancipation we must recognize.
The Zionist colonial state will fall, that is the direction of history; and Palestine will be free from the sea to the Jordan!