The peaceful slumber of Amira and her spouse, Anwar, in their Berlin flat was disturbed at 6 am by aggressive knocking on their door. Anwar, bleary-eyed, was met by a throng of eleven police constables in the corridor, some armed with semi-automatic firearms. Without hesitation, they made way into their living space, presenting Anwar with a search warrant, as a frightened Amira hastily shut their bedroom door. She was attempting to dress as two female constables joined her in the bedroom to oversee.
Amira, a 28-year-old Palestinian American who has been residing in Berlin for three years and is pursuing her master’s degree in science, recalls, “We were utterly bewildered.” She and Anwar, who requested anonymity, were only enlightened about the situation in the living room. “They [the police] explained it was prompted by a ‘river to the sea’ statement on a social media platform”, says Amira, “I was taken aback to say the least.”
Anwar, a native of Berlin with a Palestinian lineage, serves as an engineer. Upon perusal of the search warrant, showed amusement that befuddled Amira – “He found the whole ordeal amusing,” she narrates.
However, this matter wasn’t treated as lightly by Germany. This invasive search at their residence on May 16th was a result of a statement Amira supposedly posted on her Facebook biography on February 24th, “Chase your dreams & life becomes a jubilant journey … From the RIVER to the SEA, PALASTINE [sic] will be FREE!!”.
Following the onslaught by Hamas upon Israel on 7th October, this particular phrase which has been in existence for decades, has suddenly attracted attention and controversy in Germany and internationally. Supporters of Palestinians interpret the slogan as a cry for harmony and fairness following the protracted Israeli control over Palestinian territories. Nonetheless, numerous Israelis and Zionist Jews globally interpret it as an advocacy for eradicating their nation, located between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan river, off the map.
In response to a strike by Hamas last year, Germany implemented a law which equates the phrase “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” with Hamas, deemed as a terrorist group by the law. Individuals using this phrase may face legal action, a monetary penalty, or a sentence of incarceration for as long as three years.
Fast forward three months from a pre-dawn raid, Amira shares that she harbours fear being alone in her flat. She expresses anger with regard to not having a lawyer at 6am and claims that she was coerced by the police into unlocking her iPad, which remains under their possession.
At present, it is unclear to her legal representative, Benjamin Düsberg, whether legal action or a fine will be imposed on Amira. He questions whether the expended efforts were necessary. Amira’s case file, comprising an exhaustive 75 pages, reveals that exhaustive background checks were conducted alongside a covert scan of the pair’s apartment complex, capturing visuals of their balcony and front doorbell, as well as a compilation of all possible exits.
The investigation was kickstarted by a woman in Frankfurt who reported Amira’s Facebook profile to the “Hesse against Hate” platform. This site, overseen by the state interior ministry of Hesse, has been inundated with 60,000 complaints since its inception four years ago.
Axel Schröder, the platform’s director, refrains from commenting on Amira’s situation. He admits the nature of the platform’s work is intricate and complex. Aware of those who associate the platform with modern digital denunciation, he suggests that there are many who witness online hate speech or provocation and refrain from intervention.
“We perform checks on potentially troubling content reported to us,” says Schröder. They proceeded to send Amira’s complaint to local prosectors, who then passed it to Berlin. A representative from Berlin’s state prosecutor proposed that the search operation conducted at Amira’s flat in May occurred without extraordinary incidents. He explained that early morning visits, like the one at 6am, are typical strategies used to ensure the presence of the person in question. He added that domiciliary visits are crucial to ensure that potential evidence, especially digital devices, remain intact and untouched.
Regarding the presence of armed officers, an official spokesperson clarified that their dispatch is essential for “self-protection… when information suggests that weapons are present in the dwelling”. Anwar, who is a former member of the German military, verified that he lawfully possesses firearms which are stored securely in his apartment.
This situation is just a fragment of Germany’s contentious response to the assaults that occurred on October 7th, illustrating a clash between history and current affairs. Berlin isn’t just the place where the Holocaust was orchestrated, it presently houses a substantial community of 300,000 Palestinians – one of the largest in the world.
People belonging to this community along with their supporters express that their pro-Gaza rallies and participants have suffered undue attention and criminal charges. Artists who are critical of Israel also feel the pressure of a stringent approach in the German cultural scene.
Regarding the recently imposed “river to the sea” ban, neither the federal interior ministry of Germany nor the prosecutor of the state of Berlin can provide figures on the individuals who are under legal scrutiny. To date, German judiciary has given inconsistent decisions.
For instance, in August 2023, prior to the enforcement of the new law, a Berlin court decreed that the slogan conveys the aspiration for a liberated Palestine but does not clarify how this highly contentious objective ought to be achieved.
This sentiment was contrasted earlier this month when another Berlin court imposed a fine of €600 on a 22-year-old woman for chanting the slogan at a pro-Palestinian rally on October 11th.
Despite her arguments that the slogan was used as a peace cry rather than endorsing Hamas, the court disagreed, concluding that using the phrase so soon after the attacks could only be perceived as a negation of Israel’s right to exist and endorse the assault.
Nine months after the attacks, ambiguity looms over the discretionary powers of German judges under the new law when adjudicating “from the river to the sea” cases and the importance of context.
During May, a pair of legal decisions from courts based in the southwestern state of Baden-Württemberg offered conflicting verdicts on “river to the sea” scenarios. This was followed a month later by a pronouncement from Bavaria’s top-tier administrative court which declared the phrase as vague whilst subject to penalisation if interpreted as a show of support for Hamas. In the absence of this context, the court declared that the most benign interpretation should be given to the individual making the statement.
The Central Council of Jews in Germany, the nation’s largest Jewish organisation, labels the slogan as a declaration of war by Hamas, with the aim to annihilate Israel and exile its Jewish citizens. The group praised the German prohibition, urging lawmakers to swiftly reconcile the discordant judgements.
The phrase’s interpretation varies amongst Middle East historians. Some perceive it as a demand to end the division of Palestinian lands caused by the Israeli occupation. Others view it as a rallying cry against foreign domination by Israel, Jordan, and Egypt in the post-war era.
Elliott Colla, a US Middle East scholar and associate professor at the University of Georgetown, argues that these slogans are perpetually evolving, part of an ongoing heated debate. He considers the German prosecutions over the phrase “from the river to the sea” as ludicrous.
Indeed, the discourse surrounding the use of this contentious phrase can be seen as a culture war within the broader legal, political, and historical confrontation that persists as the Israel-Hamas conflict escalates. The question then arises: in the context of such a disputed phrase, what carries more weight—intent or interpretation? When Amira, a Palestinian, utters the words “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”, what is the status of Israel?
Her response is immediate and visceral: “Nowhere,” she states. “They have no right to exist… too many massacres are still occurring. The hardships my family, my father have endured…” A few moments later, she appears more thoughtful, dreaming of a self-governed Palestine, free of occupations and constraints. She concludes with a desire for peace with the Jewish people.
Discover the latest episode of our In The News podcast, now published daily.