Once again Canada has assumed its sycophantic role of supporting the U.S. and Israel in their determination to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian territories. The reality of the vote for Palestinian participation in the UN is more realistically 138 yes to nine no: the Pacific Island countries and Panama are essentially colonial protectorates of the U.S. even though they are “independent”; Canada is a well known supporter of the U.S. acting as an independent 51st state of the union; that leaves the Czech Republic as the only European country to vote no.
Negotiations, negotiations, negotiations . . .
As usual, John Baird, Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister, gave Canada’s speech at the UN denouncing Palestinian attempts to join the UN. The speech had its standard Conservative “talking point,” this time being consistent unqualified reminders about “a two state solution, arrived at through direct negotiations.” To do this, Baird walked his listeners through the 70-year history of UN Resolutions concerning Palestine and Israel, conveniently ignoring the parts of the resolutions that did not suit his purpose but which override his general argument on negotiations.
Perhaps this is because, as he says, the issues “are too intricate and too complex to be resolved by symbolic, unilateral measures.” This of course is the usual political discourse used to intimidate the public into thinking they are not to be part of the process, that better minds are at work. The symbolism of this move could be quite powerful—and indeed the vote tally demonstrates how isolated Israel, Canada, and the U.S. are in their support of Israel‘s position. Admittedly many of the other countries will not back up their vote with any further actions to try and force change on Israel, but the emotional mindset, the big idea, is out there loud and clear—Israel is on the wrong path, morally and legally.
As for unilateral measures, Israel and the U.S. both act unilaterally as they perceive it to be in their best interests; there is no reason for a Palestinian leader not to act the same way. Abbas was caught between a rock and a hard place. Hamas had just come away from another confrontation with Israel looking much more the defender and champion of Palestinian rights than the PLO/PA ‘government’ in Ramallah, a government that does not have democratic credentials for its direction as did Hamas.
The problem with negotiations is that they have not worked, at least not for peace. They have worked for Israel as a smokescreen for continued military occupation, annexation, expropriation, and settlement of Palestinian lands and the slow destruction of their culture. All this amounts to ongoing ethnic cleansing. The withdrawal of settlements from Gaza did nothing to change this, as it served as “formaldehyde” on the peace process and allowed the ongoing settlement of the West Bank.
Resolve these resolutions
As Baird breezes through the various resolutions since 1947, he gives constant reminders of how each resolution calls for negotiations—to start, to continue, or to be revived. Each subsequent resolution after the initial one also refers back to previous resolutions indicating that they should be fulfilled. What is missing from Baird’s presentation are the elements that are very significant within those resolutions that makes negotiations not quite the main principle Baird offers.
Baird’s first reference is Resolution 181, saying it has never been “fully implemented.” In reality, this resolution was never implemented at all as the Palestinians rejected it and the Jewish settlers and their armed militias, the Haganah and the Irgun, began the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian towns well before Israel unilaterally declared independence in 1948. This is contrary to resolution 181 as it states:
The Security Council determines as a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression in accordance with Article 39 of the Charter, any attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution.
In effect Resolution 181, with reference to the UN Charter, denies Israel the right to use force to change the situation in Palestine. As history has proven, Israel has used force consistently within the occupied territories, indeed all of historical Palestine, and has used force extensively against external territories as well.
The next reference is Resolution 194, and yes it says something about negotiations. But more importantly for what Baird has ignored is Article 8 that states that Jerusalem is to be an international city under the control of the UN. And article 9 gives the right of return and compensation for the Palestinian refugees. So if the need to negotiate is sustained through time by further resolutions, Jerusalem being an international city and the right of Palestinian return are also both part of the resolution which is called upon in future resolutions.
Jumping ahead to 1967, Baird refers to Resolution 242, which, yes again, refers to negotiations. The Resolution begins by “Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war” and refers to UN Charter Article 2.4 that says, “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations,” and states further in article 1.1 “Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”
If Baird is correct and consistent with his arguments, then Israel should withdraw its armed forces back to the “green line” positions at the beginning of the war—and even that is a grand concession of Palestinian territory to Israel, especially considering the “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war.” This resolution refers to previous resolutions so the positions on Jerusalem and refugee rights still stand.
From that point on, Baird keeps reiterating the negotiation stance while ignoring the other issues presented in the Resolutions. As Baird insists that Resolutions 242 and 338 (after the Yom Kippur war) form the “cornerstone of all subsequent peace commitments” then the articles identified above also need to be implemented. He states that negotiations are a “core principle,” but in reality, according to the resolutions themselves, negotiation is “immediately and concurrently with” the other principles indicated above.
Next up are the Oslo round of agreements, but the Oslo Accords have been shown to be a front by the U.S. and Israel while land annexations, expropriations, and settlements continued building in occupied Palestinian territory, against the precepts of the UN Charter and Resolutions 242 and 338. Oslo II, in Article 31, under Final Clauses (section 7), stipulates that “Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and Gaza pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.” Of course this is the period when enormous amounts of settler activity in the West Bank occurred and later the democratic elections of Hamas (2006) were annulled, both obvious steps that change the status of the West Bank and Gaza.
Later in 2002, Resolution 1397 calls for the resumption of the peace process, a process by this time recognized to be smoke and mirrors. But it also restates the importance of the earlier resolutions, “Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973).”
And it goes on through Resolution 1515 and 1850, both reconfirming the earlier resolutions. That being the case, one can hardly wonder why the “negotiations” are emphasized by Israel and Canada. If the other elements of the resolutions were implemented as they should have been and as Baird so vociferously argues for, then Jerusalem would be an international city, the Israeli military would not occupy the West Bank nor turn Gaza into an internment camp, and the Palestinians would have the right of return or compensation for lands stolen and annexed by Israel.
Baird ends his train of thought—a very singular track indeed—with more calls for negotiations and the two state outcome. Both ideas are highly arguable especially now if reference is made to any map that shows the highly non-contiguous nature of what little land is left that is still considered Palestinian. Israel controls all the land and has all the power, backed by the world’s sole superpower, hardly an arrangement under which fair negotiations could occur.
The final argument is a full non-starter: “We call on both sides to return to the negotiating table without preconditions.”
Amazing considering that he has just argued for 70 years of preconditions—all the UN Resolutions so proudly quoted in defence of negotiations, none of which has been fulfilled in any form vis-a-vis Jerusalem, refugees, occupation, and international and humanitarian war crimes against other states and people.
Apologies from Canada
Is it possible that one citizen or two or a dozen can compensate for Canada’s official stupidity by apology alone? Canada pretends to be a big player on the world scene, with Stephen Harper’s Napoleon complex changing the way Canada interacts in the world. Canada’s threat is “we will be considering all available next steps.” Not much to worry about there, Canada can do nothing alone without the backing of the U.S. and Israel, perhaps withdraw an envoy or two, always a good step in communicating and negotiating.
The majority of Canadians did not vote for Harper, yet he still has a strong majority government in which, ironically, negotiations are not something that are considered to be important. Many Canadians, even on the liberal side of things, are still swayed by the rhetoric of the mainstream media, much of which comes from the U.S. and the third place opposition Liberals also support Canada’s role in voting no to the resolution.
Regardless, from those of us in Canada who do recognize international law and the UN Resolutions as they are written—and not as revised by Canada’s department of Foreign Affairs—we do support the people of Palestine in their ongoing search for peace within their homeland, and freedom from the oppression of a militarized state that has no real interest in accommodating them.
The vote may be symbolic, but symbolism carries a long history and a long memory.
Jim Miles is a Canadian educator and a regular contributor/columnist of opinion pieces and book reviews for The Palestine Chronicle. Miles’ work is also presented globally through other alternative websites and news publications.
GREETINGS FROM CALIFORNIA BROTHER MILES IN ISRAELI OCCUPIED CANADA, ZOG NORTH AMERICA!!!
10/16/06
07:44:35 am, Categories: Voices, 1239 words
Please say “APARTHEID Israel”, por favor!!
Joe Boysen
Dear Fellow Victims of Zionist Slanderers,
May I suggest that we should always use the designation “Apartheid Israel” rather than simply “Israel”, especially in headings and captions? As we saw in the case of the liberal Jewish media’s successful trashing of APARTHEID South Africa —- at the time, ironically, virtually the ONLY ally of racist Israel, other than Occupied America —- the constant repetition IS effective, especially on a CUMULATIVE basis.
We can ALSO see this in the MediaTelviv MindFogkers’ verbal demonisation of our side, and of others, for so many terrible years via their satanic propaganda and unceasing slander of Arabs, Muslims, Germans, the USSR from the 70′s on, France on occasion, Switzerland most recently, and whoever crosses them, or “gets in the way” of “what’s good for the Jewish people”.
For example: militant Islam, Islamic terrorists, Islamic fundamentalists, fanatics, Islamofascists, etc., terrorists, terrorists, terrorists ad infinitum. These references pervade the mainstream media, and are to be found in EVERY story. (Of course, we should have our own 24/7/52/365 rapid response “full court press” media fairness monitoring effort in ADC, WRMEA, CAIR, CNIF or some especially created unit to object to this DAILY and SPECIFICALLY on a case by case basis, etc.)
APARTHEID ISRAEL trumps anything they can say, and perhaps that should be our sole terminological focus for the sake of effectiveness, and so that we don’t seem like name-callers, etc. BUT, otherwise, why shouldn’t THEY be referred to as terrorists, fanatics, fundamentalists, racists, Jewish supremacists, Jewish separatists, Nakba deniers, Nakba revisionists, zealots, hardliners, militants, chauvinists, militarists, antisemites — 95%+ or 280 million of the world’s semites are Arabs, Islamophobes, and, ESPECIALLY, Judeofascists? Out of politeness? Because the last named is a smear on fascism to associate it with the profoundly evil racist Jewish supremacism of Zionism?
We should NOT dilute or weaken our efforts out of concern for the “feelings” of, presumably, guilt ridden, but untrustworthy, “good cop, bad cop”, Divide & Conquer, “22% Justice” Jews masquerading as “friends”, but who REALLY want to have it both ways, or rather, ONE WAY, and who are nevertheless “Israel Firsters” through and through. We should NEVER have allowed them to “co-opt”, de-fang, and destroy our anti-war movement as has occurred. For example, the substitution of the dishonest LOSER slogan “No Blood For Oil”, instead of the more effective and TRUE “No War For Israel”.
This wariness of Jews is especially fitting, when gentiles of European and other non-Middle Eastern descents, people like me, are often kept at arm’s length by American Arabs and Muslims and others with only an APPARENTLY stronger stake in this fight, if not called anti-semites, as Hana Kawas called me so unjustly and never apologised, simply because we can so clearly see the hideous injustice which is being done, and because we are SO familiar from 50 years of close contact and exposure with the evil, manipulative swine who are doing it; and DISGRACING our ONLY country in the process, as well as destroying our international reputation, dividing our society, plundering our treasury, bankrupting our minimum wage grandchildren, destined to be bit players in their grandchildrens’ corruptly privileged lives, and turning our young into mercenary killers, corpses and cripples on behalf of Apartheid Ersatz Israel — their stolen GhettoMed Crusader Kingdom vacation home on the Mediterranean.
These satanically evil Zionists are defeating us despite the fact that we have ALL of the advantages on our side: 1) The truth, 2) The oil, 3) Justice, 4) Internationally hated opponents, 5) geopolitical circumstances vis-a-vis a proper resentment of ZOG Israeli Occupied AmeriKKKaner misconduct, etc., 6) the emergence of the Euro as a new “reserve currency” to eclipse the Anglo-American dollar/sterling tyranny since 1945, and, 7) the resultant shift in the “center of gravity” back to Eurasia where it belongs.
It is TIME to make some adjustments if we EVER hope to end the “Made In America” Zionist tyranny of the past six decades, and to see peace in the Middle East. People who are of Middle Eastern descent, whether Muslim or Christian, and regardless of ethnicity/nationality or political persuasion, who do NOT sense the terrible PERMANENT danger they and their descendants are in from these obsessed, vindictive “Judeofascist zealots” are FOOLS.
The Zionists have committed a terrible, unforgivable crime against history in their theft and rape of Palestine — ALL, 100%, every last hectare, when they have a right to NONE of it! They are about to plunge the world into yet another full WORLD WAR. They can NEVER admit the truth of the squalid history of Zionism and the creation of Apartheid Ersatz Israel. Therefore, they cannot allow THAT true story to be told, anymore than they now permit ANY historical examination of the “holocaust” SACRED DOGMA which they have used to justify this theft of an ENTIRELY INNOCENT nation and the related GhettoMed Guilt Geld “milking” of Germany, America and the West. They will therefore demonise and defame their innocent victims until the end of time. Thus, the Arab and Muslim “evildoers” will be treated the same as the Germans have been since way before 1933, and as they will be treated ….. permanently. And, at the moment, the “ethical ones” are demonstrating —- as they have for the past ONE HUNDRED PLUS years — their evil media power to do just this. Wake up & smell the coffee!
Having grown up “German”, I beg you Children of the Middle East, do NOT let them do this to your beloved children and grandchildren unto the last generation. Unborn descendants will curse your apathy and cowardice, rather than bless your heroism. Hate this presumptuous, uninvited messenger if need be, but love your own innocent seed. See them in the flickering light gathered around the feast day firesides of the never ending future long after you are gone. Let their familiar faces show joy, and pride and gratitude, not bitter disappointment and regret. Be their “Great Generation”! Let them sing your song a thousand years hence.
Please! Arouse yourselves. Awaken. Arise. Fight back. NOW. The hour is late, and the Deir Yassin butchers of 400 helpless Lidice villages, and of history itself, are legion, and on the march to destroy utterly the last vestiges of poor martyred Palestine. THEY, who have DELIBERATELY mis-quoted the words of President Ahmadinejad of Iran, intend to “wipe it (Palestine) off the map”. Fight them, true heirs of the People of the Book, and defeat them politically HERE in Zionist Occupied America, where they harvest their illegitimate, extorted strength from our once decent nation, destroyed by their relentless corruption of it. Help to break the stranglehold here and to liberate America from these dreadful usurpers, help to free “BOTH Palestines”!
Long live a free, united and democratic Palestine~Israel! Long live Afghanistan! Long live Iraq! Long live Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia et al, and a free, united and peaceful Middle East, and world! Long live a reformed, democratic, neutral and JUST United Nations relocated to Geneva, Switzerland, or some neutral location far from the shadow of the corrupt colossus our beloved America has become under the hammer of these swine. Finally, long live an internally liberated, peaceful and non-imperialist United States of America free of unelected governing cabals, conflicted loyalties, ethnic politics, wannabe elitists and entangling foreign alliances, our familiar old America restored to a modest dignity, international respectability, decency and full domestic sovereignty. Oh Father, let it be.
THIS year in Jerusalem! This year in a liberated Washington City & a free America.
-###-
October 16, 2006 By: Joe Boysen, Notorious Pro Arab Philosemite, hater of Zionastyness and blind supporter of ALL of historic, ancestral Palestine for its’ SOLE rightful owners since the days of post Canaanite Philistia around 1200 BC and since: GO PEOPLE OF THE BOOK! GO HEIRS OF THE ANCIENT REGIMES! GhettoMed, Ersatz IsraHell, ersatz homeland for an ersatz people (from HELL), END IT, DON’T MEND IT !!!
This is crystal clear. Thanks for tiakng the time!
Those who support Israel’s continued illegal occupation of the West Bank and the ethnic-cleansing of Palestine are fighting the tide of History. The clock is ticking…..
Mark your calendar: I agree with Dana–the sonecd paragraph, at least. Look back to campaign rhetoric, even. Obama’s healthcare plan was certainly more detailed than any foreign policy plan. And the further removed from direct US involvement an event was (i.e., anything not named Iraq or Afghanistan), the less specific he was.This is true of most candidates, by the way. Aside from some Iraq policies and McCain’s “Bomb bomb Iran,” rare was the direct foreign policy pronouncement. “I’ll talk to the leaders and make things better with my superior diplomatic skills” was the normal bullshit response.I can frankly understand his reluctance to say something that could force the US into a tense situation that would have to be handled by the sitting president. I find this silence on this far less damning than his silence on Prop 8.
Pingback: With apologies from Canada, congratulations, Palestine | Islamic News Daily