Ever since October 7, it is hard to go a day without hearing about the horrifying violence happening in Israel and Palestine. Every day, we see the death toll in Gaza climb higher and higher; at the time of writing, it is reported to be at least 18,000 by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. A sickeningly high toll achieved through U.S.-made weapons, sold to U.S. allies, paid for with U.S. taxpayer monies ($3.3 billion in 2022 alone).
It is within this context that on November 6, 2023, the Austin Human Rights Commission passed its Resolution on Combating Antisemitism, Islamophobia, and Anti-Arab Sentiments in the City of Austin and Calls for a Ceasefire. The resolution calls on Austin City Council to “express its support for an explicit ceasefire.” Raising our voice in Austin and calling for a cease-fire in Gaza is, first and foremost, the minimum moral action we can take. To see such immense violence and death and to not call for an end is unconscionable. Second, a call for a cease-fire is popular. Thousands marched on the Capitol demanding a cease-fire, a recent poll for U.S. Rep. Greg Casar found overwhelming support for a cease-fire, and the Texas Democratic Party unanimously passed a resolution calling for a cease-fire.
So why is it that City Council has not called for a cease-fire yet? One argument that has been circulating is that calling for a cease-fire is an international issue, not a local one. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that calling for a cease-fire is in fact not a local issue. We should first point out that City Council in the past has taken moral stances on nonlocal issues. For example, consider the resolution passed in 2003 condemning unilateral military invasion into Iraq. When it comes to city policy, the Iraq invasion is no more local than the bombing of Gaza. Both are violent projects occurring outside of the city’s borders and paid for with U.S. taxpayer money. There is an established precedent that City Council can pass resolutions taking moral stances on nonlocal issues.
Also, does it even matter if it’s local? The resolution from the Human Rights Commission asks City Council to express its support for a cease-fire. This is a symbolic gesture which helps reassure citizens that our leaders share our values. Where the atrocity is occurring does not change that it is still an atrocity that we must denounce. If news broke that a U.S. state had brought back Jim Crow, would it make sense for City Council to say nothing just because it is not within the city limits? No, it would not.
Not calling for a cease-fire because it is nonlocal is at best an overzealous appeal to jurisdiction, and at worst a cowardly way to hide from taking a moral stand demanded by Council members’ constituents.
The fact that City Council has yet to call for a cease-fire more than a full month after the Human Rights Commission’s recommendation is a major failing of our Council both morally and democratically. Many Austinites feel helpless to stop the grotesque violence in Gaza. Raising our voices as a city officially is a major way we can put more pressure on the White House and Congress to do more.
The lack of a statement from Council brings into question their ability to solve local crises. How can we expect our Council members to lead with empathy and a moral fortitude to provide housing for all, provide us power during winter freezes, and enforce police accountability when they can’t even decide if bombing civilians in their homes is bad? We can’t.
Garrigan Stafford is the current co-chair of the Austin chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America.
The Chronicle welcomes submissions of opinion pieces on any topic from the community. Find guidelines and tips at austinchronicle.com/opinion.
