Dr. Erakat after meeting Senator George Mitchell: “We need to have a framework that can lead to a final resolution”.
Pleaae see the attached presentation for insights into the Pa;estenian issue.
Please help us spread the word and join us in supporting Palestinian Orphans
We are organizing the CHOW Charity Bazaar at the CHOW Foodcourt, level 4 the Weld, KL on Saturday the 25th of July from 10am to 3pm, to raise money for Palestinian Orphans in the refugee camps throughout Lebanon. It is our hope that we send the money to them before Ramadhan as they are in DIRE need of financial aid.
The Bazaar promises to be a full of heart event that has gathered 45 vendors, and A LOT of information about the Palestinian Children in the camps.
This is truly going to be a fun day out for the family as there will be children’s games/books/toys, cosmetics and makeovers, loads of clothes, accessories, gift items and the list goes on..and FOOOOOOOOD..
Entrance tickets are on sale for RM20 for anyone over 18 – Kids enter free:). This entitles you to 3 meals, one drink and one lucky draw entry. Tasty meals:):)
Now for the Lucky Draw….great prizes to be won form SHUZ KLCC – RM1000.00 voucher, DVD Player, countless hampers etc..
PLEASE COME and support our vendors as they have been very supportive of the cause.
Thanks so much and I very much look forward to seeing you all there on SATURDAY THE 25TH OF JULY from 10am to 3pm (just thought I wld mention that again for the zillionth time):) Please send out the flyer..pleeeeease
Barack Obama is recognized to be a person of acute intelligence, a legal scholar, careful with his choice of words. He deserves to be taken seriously – both what he says, and what he omits. Particularly significant is his first substantive statement on foreign affairs, on January 22, at the State Department, when introducing George Mitchell to serve as his special envoy for Middle East peace.
Mitchell is to focus his attention on the Israel-Palestine problem, in the wake of the recent US-Israeli invasion of Gaza. During the murderous assault, Obama remained silent apart from a few platitudes, because, he said, there is only one president – a fact that did not silence him on many other issues. His campaign did, however, repeat his statement that “if missiles were falling where my two daughters sleep, I would do everything in order to stop that.” He was referring to Israeli children, not the hundreds of Palestinian children being butchered by US arms, about whom he could not speak, because there was only one president.
On January 22, however, the one president was Barack Obama, so he could speak freely about these matters – avoiding, however, the attack on Gaza, which had, conveniently, been called off just before the inauguration.
Obama’s talk emphasized his commitment to a peaceful settlement. He left its contours vague, apart from one specific proposal: “the Arab peace initiative,” Obama said, “contains constructive elements that could help advance these efforts. Now is the time for Arab states to act on the initiative’s promise by supporting the Palestinian government under President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, taking steps towards normalizing relations with Israel, and by standing up to extremism that threatens us all.”
Obama is not directly falsifying the Arab League proposal, but the carefully framed deceit is instructive.
The Arab League peace proposal does indeed call for normalization of relations with Israel – in the context – repeat, in the context of a two-state settlement in terms of the longstanding international consensus, which the US and Israel have blocked for over 30 years, in international isolation, and still do. The core of the Arab League proposal, as Obama and his Mideast advisers know very well, is its call for a peaceful political settlement in these terms, which are well-known, and recognized to be the only basis for the peaceful settlement to which Obama professes to be committed. The omission of that crucial fact can hardly be accidental, and signals clearly that Obama envisions no departure from US rejectionism. His call for the Arab states to act on a corollary to their proposal, while the US ignores even the existence of its central content, which is the precondition for the corollary, surpasses cynicism.
The most significant acts to undermine a peaceful settlement are the daily US-backed actions in the occupied territories, all recognized to be criminal: taking over valuable land and resources and constructing what the leading architect of the plan, Ariel Sharon, called “Bantustans” for Palestinians – an unfair comparison because the Bantustans were far more viable than the fragments left to Palestinians under Sharon’s conception, now being realized. But the US and Israel even continue to oppose a political settlement in words, most recently in December 2008, when the US and Israel (and a few Pacific islands) voted against a UN resolution supporting “the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination” (passed 173 to 5, US-Israel opposed, with evasive pretexts).
Obama had not one word to say about the settlement and infrastructure developments in the West Bank, and the complex measures to control Palestinian existence, designed to undermine the prospects for a peaceful two-state settlement. His silence is a grim refutation of his oratorical flourishes about how “I will sustain an active commitment to seek two states living side by side in peace and security.”
Also unmentioned is Israel’s use of US arms in Gaza, in violation not only of international but also US law. Or Washington’s shipment of new arms to Israel right at the peak of the US-Israeli attack, surely not unknown to Obama’s Middle East advisers.
Obama was firm, however, that smuggling of arms to Gaza must be stopped. He endorses the agreement of Condoleeza Rice and Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni that the Egyptian-Gaza border must be closed – a remarkable exercise of imperial arrogance, as the Financial Times observed: “as they stood in Washington congratulating each other, both officials seemed oblivious to the fact that they were making a deal about an illegal trade on someone else’s border – Egypt in this case. The next day, an Egyptian official described the memorandum as `fictional’.” Egypt’s objections were ignored.
Returning to Obama’s reference to the “constructive” Arab League proposal, as the wording indicates, Obama persists in restricting support to the defeated party in the January 2006 election, the only free election in the Arab world, to which the US and Israel reacted, instantly and overtly, by severely punishing Palestinians for opposing the will of the masters. A minor technicality is that Abbas’s term ran out on January 9, and that Fayyad was appointed without confirmation by the Palestinian parliament (many of them kidnapped and in Israeli prisons). Ha’aretz describes Fayyad as “a strange bird in Palestinian politics. On the one hand, he is the Palestinian politician most esteemed by Israel and the West. However, on the other hand, he has no electoral power whatsoever in Gaza or the West Bank.” The report also notes Fayyad’s “close relationship with the Israeli establishment,” notably his friendship with Sharon’s extremist adviser Dov Weiglass. Though lacking popular support, he is regarded as competent and honest, not the norm in the US-backed political sectors.
Obama’s insistence that only Abbas and Fayyad exist conforms to the consistent Western contempt for democracy unless it is under control.
Obama provided the usual reasons for ignoring the elected government led by Hamas. “To be a genuine party to peace,” Obama declared, “the quartet [US, EU, Russia, UN] has made it clear that Hamas must meet clear conditions: recognize Israel’s right to exist; renounce violence; and abide by past agreements.” Unmentioned, also as usual, is the inconvenient fact that the US and Israel firmly reject all three conditions. In international isolation, they bar a two-state settlement including a Palestinian state; they of course do not renounce violence; and they reject the quartet’s central proposal, the “road map.” Israel formally accepted it, but with 14 reservations that effectively eliminate its contents (tacitly backed by the US). It is the great merit of Jimmy Carter’s Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, to have brought these facts to public attention for the first time – and in the mainstream, the only time.
It follows, by elementary reasoning, that neither the US nor Israel is a “genuine party to peace.” But that cannot be. It is not even a phrase in the English language.
It is perhaps unfair to criticize Obama for this further exercise of cynicism, because it is close to universal, unlike his scrupulous evisceration of the core component of the Arab League proposal, which is his own novel contribution.
Also near universal are the standard references to Hamas: a terrorist organization, dedicated to the destruction of Israel (or maybe all Jews). Omitted are the inconvenient facts that the US-Israel are not only dedicated to the destruction of any viable Palestinian state, but are steadily implementing those policies. Or that unlike the two rejectionist states, Hamas has called for a two-state settlement in terms of the international consensus: publicly, repeatedly, explicitly.
Obama began his remarks by saying: “Let me be clear: America is committed to Israel’s security. And we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself against legitimate threats.”
There was nothing about the right of Palestinians to defend themselves against far more extreme threats, such as those occurring daily, with US support, in the occupied territories. But that again is the norm.
Also normal is the enunciation of the principle that Israel has the right to defend itself. That is correct, but vacuous: so does everyone. But in the context the cliche is worse than vacuous: it is more cynical deceit.
The issue is not whether Israel has the right to defend itself, like everyone else, but whether it has the right to do so by force. No one, including Obama, believes that states enjoy a general right to defend themselves by force: it is first necessary to demonstrate that there are no peaceful alternatives that can be tried. In this case, there surely are.
A narrow alternative would be for Israel to abide by a cease-fire, for example, the cease-fire proposed by Hamas political leader Khaled Mishal a few days before Israel launched its attack on December 27. Mishal called for restoring the 2005 agreement. That agreement called for an end to violence and uninterrupted opening of the borders, along with an Israeli guarantee that goods and people could move freely between the two parts of occupied Palestine, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The agreement was rejected by the US and Israel a few months later, after the free election of January 2006 turned out “the wrong way.” There are many other highly relevant cases.
The broader and more significant alternative would be for the US and Israel to abandon their extreme rejectionism, and join the rest of the world – including the Arab states and Hamas – in supporting a two-state settlement in accord with the international consensus. It should be noted that in the past 30 years there has been one departure from US-Israeli rejectionism: the negotiations at Taba in January 2001, which appeared to be close to a peaceful resolution when Israel prematurely called them off. It would not, then, be outlandish for Obama to agree to join the world, even within the framework of US policy, if he were interested in doing so.
In short, Obama’s forceful reiteration of Israel’s right to defend itself is another exercise of cynical deceit – though, it must be admitted, not unique to him, but virtually universal.
The deceit is particularly striking in this case because the occasion was the appointment of Mitchell as special envoy. Mitchell’s primary achievement was his leading role in the peaceful settlement in northern Ireland. It called for an end to IRA terror and British violence. Implicit is the recognition that while Britain had the right to defend itself from terror, it had no right to do so by force, because there was a peaceful alternative: recognition of the legitimate grievances of the Irish Catholic community that were the roots of IRA terror. When Britain adopted that sensible course, the terror ended. The implications for Mitchell’s mission with regard to Israel-Palestine are so obvious that they need not be spelled out. And omission of them is, again, a striking indication of the commitment of the Obama administration to traditional US rejectionism and opposition to peace, except on its extremist terms.
Obama also praised Jordan for its “constructive role in training Palestinian security forces and nurturing its relations with Israel” – which contrasts strikingly with US-Israeli refusal to deal with the freely elected government of Palestine, while savagely punishing Palestinians for electing it with pretexts which, as noted, do not withstand a moment’s scrutiny. It is true that Jordan joined the US in arming and training Palestinian security forces, so that they could violently suppress any manifestation of support for the miserable victims of US-Israeli assault in Gaza, also arresting supporters of Hamas and the prominent journalist Khaled Amayreh, while organizing their own demonstrations in support of Abbas and Fatah, in which most participants “were civil servants and school children who were instructed by the PA to attend the rally,” according to the Jerusalem Post. Our kind of democracy.
Obama made one further substantive comment: “As part of a lasting cease-fire, Gaza’s border crossings should be open to allow the flow of aid and commerce, with an appropriate monitoring regime…” He did not, of course, mention that the US-Israel had rejected much the same agreement after the January 2006 election, and that Israel had never observed similar subsequent agreements on borders.
Also missing is any reaction to Israel’s announcement that it rejected the cease-fire agreement, so that the prospects for it to be “lasting” are not auspicious. As reported at once in the press, “Israeli Cabinet Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, who takes part in security deliberations, told Army Radio on Thursday that Israel wouldn’t let border crossings with Gaza reopen without a deal to free [Gilad] Schalit” (AP, Jan 22); srael to keep Gaza crossings closed…An official said the government planned to use the issue to bargain for the release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier held by the Islamist group since 2006 (Financial Times, Jan. 23); “Earlier this week, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said that progress on Corporal Shalit’s release would be a precondition to opening up the border crossings that have been mostly closed since Hamas wrested control of Gaza from the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority in 2007″ (Christian Science Monitor, Jan. 23); “an Israeli official said there would be tough conditions for any lifting of the blockade, which he linked with the release of Gilad Shalit” (FT, Jan. 23); among many others.
Shalit’s capture is a prominent issue in the West, another indication of Hamas’s criminality. Whatever one thinks about it, it is uncontroversial that capture of a soldier of an attacking army is far less of a crime than kidnapping of civilians, exactly what Israeli forces did the day before the capture of Shalit, invading Gaza city and kidnapping two brothers, then spiriting them across the border where they disappeared into Israel’s prison complex. Unlike the much lesser case of Shalit, that crime was virtually unreported and has been forgotten, along with Israel’s regular practice for decades of kidnapping civilians in Lebanon and on the high seas and dispatching them to Israeli prisons, often held for many years as hostages. But the capture of Shalit bars a cease-fire.
Obama’s State Department talk about the Middle East continued with “the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan… the central front in our enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism.” A few hours later, US planes attacked a remote village in Afghanistan, intending to kill a Taliban commander. “Village elders, though, told provincial officials there were no Taliban in the area, which they described as a hamlet populated mainly by shepherds. Women and children were among the 22 dead, they said, according to Hamididan Abdul Rahmzai, the head of the provincial council” (LA Times, Jan. 24).
Afghan president Karzai’s first message to Obama after he was elected in November was a plea to end the bombing of Afghan civilians, reiterated a few hours before Obama was sworn in. This was considered as significant as Karzai’s call for a timetable for departure of US and other foreign forces. The rich and powerful have their “responsibilities.” Among them, the New York Times reported, is to “provide security” in southern Afghanistan, where “the insurgency is homegrown and self-sustaining.” All familiar. From Pravda in the 1980s, for example.
The situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, remains extremely critical as Israel, the occupying Power, persists with its violations of international law, including humanitarian and human rights law, causing the continued deterioration of the situation in all aspects, including the continued suffering of the Palestinian people under its occupation, and further deepening despair and inflaming heightened tensions.
The situation is particularly acute in the Gaza Strip, where the Palestinian civilian population is struggling to cope with the humanitarian disaster inflicted upon them by the 22-day Israeli military onslaught and the more than 19-month Israeli siege of the Gaza Strip. In this regard, despite the fragile cease-fire in place – which actually continues to be violated by Israeli air strikes and threats for yet another military invasion – the massive devastation, destruction and havoc wreaked by Israel have made the task of recovery a grueling, painful and heartbreaking experience.
As you are aware, more than 1,300 Palestinians were brutally killed and at least 5,500 Palestinians were wounded by the Israeli occupying forces in the recent military aggression. Using all means of military weaponry, the occupying Power deliberately unleashed excessive, indiscriminate and disproportionate force against the defenseless civilian population in the Gaza Strip. The killings and injuries committed by Israel were clearly committed in grave breach of international humanitarian law, which forbids, inter alia, willful killing and willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health of protected persons. For days after the cease-fire, rescue workers continued to pull dead civilians from the rubble of demolished homes, including the bodies of many children. In this regard, it is both shocking and tragic that more than one-third of those Palestinians killed and injured by the occupying Power were children and that hundreds of women were also killed and injured.
In addition to the civilian casualties caused, wanton destruction of Palestinian property was deliberately caused by the occupying forces in the Gaza Strip in grave breach of international humanitarian law. As reported by the United Nations Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), at least 21,000 Palestinian homes or shelters were destroyed or severely damaged by the Israeli occupying forces. In some places, such as in the Jabaliya refugee camp, entire residential areas have been systematically bulldozed to the ground by the occupying Power.
Widespread destruction and damage was also caused to vital infrastructure, including to sanitation, water, and electrical networks and infrastructure and to several hospitals and schools, as well as to numerous public institutions and mosques, thousands of businesses, and agricultural lands. Of course, it must also be recalled that, as we are all aware, the occupying Power’s rampage in the Gaza Strip did not leave the U.N. facilities there unharmed as several UNRWA schools and the main U.N. compound also came under Israeli attack, which gravely damaged U.N. facilities and immense loss of materials stored at the main compound, including food and medical supplies.
The extent of human suffering and destruction wrought by the occupying Power is vast. Entire families and communities have been devastated. In addition to the killing and injuring of thousands of civilians, at least 50,000 people have also been displaced and made homeless by this deadly military campaign. Trauma and suffering are widespread and deep, affecting every single family in Gaza, who has already suffered inordinately under Israel’s inhumane blockade, which continues to be imposed in collective punishment of the entire Palestinian civilian population and which has caused unprecedented levels of poverty, unemployment, hunger and disease. In this regard, we stress the imperative of the immediate, sustained opening of the Gaza Strip’s border crossings for the free movement of persons and goods, including desperately-needed humanitarian assistance that countries and organizations from all around the world are attempting to deliver to the Palestinian people, as well as commercial flows to allow for the necessary reconstruction and economic recovery.
These actions by Israel, the occupying Power, have not only caused a grave humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip but, as we have reiterated on numerous occasions, also constitute war crimes. All of the crimes committed by the occupying Power must be thoroughly investigated and the perpetrators must be held fully accountable and brought to justice. In this regard, we stress our conviction that only accountability will bring an end to Israel’s impunity and flagrant disregard for its obligations under international law, and we reaffirm the intention to continue vigorously calling for and pursuing accountability until the perpetrators of these crimes against the Palestinian people are punished and justice is served.
At the same, we must draw your attention to the fact that Israel also continues to commit other grave breaches of international law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention, in the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, ensuring the continued destabilization of the situation and the fueling of tensions and frustrations. In breach of the law, in violation of U.N. resolutions, in disrespect of Road Map’s obligation to freeze settlement activities, including “natural growth” and to dismantle “settlement outposts” and in total disregard of the repeated calls from all around the international community, the occupying Power continues to illegally construct and expand its settlements and also to illegally construct the Wall throughout the West Bank, particularly in and around Occupied East Jerusalem.
Just a few days ago the Israeli government announced the decision to construct another 3,500 settlement units in East Jerusalem. Moreover, a recent report by an Israeli organization (“Volunteers for Human Rights-Yesh Din”) reaffirms the fact that such settlement construction continues to be carried out on private Palestinian lands confiscated from their rightful owners with the full knowledge and approval of the government. It has become glaringly clear that Israel’s direct and deliberate intention in pursuing this illegal colonization campaign is to alter the demographic composition, character and status of the Occupied Palestinian Territory for the ultimate aim of de facto annexing even more Palestinian land.
In this connection, Israel also continues to pursue illegal excavations in and around Occupied East Jerusalem, in violation of international law and threatening the sanctity of holy sites as well as their status as heritage sites according to UNESCO and also threatening the safety and viability of homes and institutions in the area. An incident that occurred yesterday in the neighborhood of Silwan at the Elementary School for Girls, which is run by UNRWA, is an illustration of the many dangers of this illegal activity. At least 17 Palestinian girls were injured at the school when the floor of their classroom collapsed under their desks, throwing them at least 2 meters below. This collapse was attributed to ongoing Israeli excavating and tunnel digging activities near and beneath the compound of Al-Aqsa Mosque, which is located just 100 meters from the school.
We reiterate the illegality of all Israeli colonization activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and call for their immediate and full cessation by the occupying Power. Such illegal activities are not only dissecting the West Bank into several isolated cantons and almost completely severing East Jerusalem from the rest of the Palestinian Territory, but are also totally undermining the Territory’s contiguity, unity and integrity. As a result, the prospect for achieving the two-State solution for peace also continues to be undermined and seriously endangered with each passing day of this continuing, illegal and destructive Israeli policy and campaign.
The international community has clear obligations in this regard. The obligation to respect and to ensure respect of international humanitarian law in all circumstances is unequivocal. The situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory must not be the exception. No effort should be spared by the international community, including the Security Council, to address this precarious situation in accordance with international law. Israel, the occupying Power, must be compelled to cease all of its grave breaches and violations against the Palestinian people and abide by its obligations under international law, including humanitarian and human rights law. Only such respect for international law will bring about the conditions and environment required for the genuine pursuit of peace.
Israel, the occupying Power, must be held accountable and the perpetrators must be brought to justice.
This is well worth a read…
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.Martin Niem”ller, German Theologian
Editorial by Lasantha Wicrematunge – written to by him to be published after his death
No other profession calls on its practitioners to lay down their lives for their art save the armed forces and, in Sri Lanka , journalism. In the course of the past few years, the independent media have increasingly come under attack. Electronic and print-media institutions have been burnt, bombed, sealed and coerced. Countless journalists have been harassed, threatened and killed. It has been my honour to belong to all those categories and now especially the last.
I have been in the business of journalism a good long time. Indeed, 2009 will be The Sunday Leader’s 15th year. Many things have changed in Sri Lanka during that time, and it does not need me to tell you that the greater part of that change has been for the worse. We find ourselves in the midst of a civil war ruthlessly prosecuted by protagonists whose bloodlust knows no bounds. Terror, whether perpetrated by terrorists or the state, has become the order of the day. Indeed, murder has become the primary tool whereby the state seeks to control the organs of liberty. Today it is the journalists, tomorrow it will be the judges. For neither group have the risks ever been higher or the stakes lower.
Why then do we do it? I often wonder that. After all, I too am a husband, and the father of three wonderful children. I too have responsibilities and obligations that transcend my profession, be it the law or journalism. Is it worth the risk? Many people tell me it is not. Friends tell me to revert to the bar, and goodness knows it offers a better and safer livelihood. Others, including political leaders on both sides, have at various times sought to induce me to take to politics, going so far as to offer me ministries of my choice. Diplomats, recognising the risk journalists face in Sri Lanka , have offered me safe passage and the right of residence in their countries. Whatever else I may have been stuck for, I have not been stuck for choice.
But there is a calling that is yet above high office, fame, lucre and security. It is the call of conscience.
The Sunday Leader has been a controversial newspaper because we say it like we see it: whether it be a spade, a thief or a murderer, we call it by that name. We do not hide behind euphemism. The investigative articles we print are supported by documentary evidence thanks to the public-spiritedness of citizens who at great risk to themselves pass on this material to us. We have exposed scandal after scandal, and never once in these 15 years has anyone proved us wrong or successfully prosecuted us.
The free media serve as a mirror in which the public can see itself sans mascara and styling gel. From us you learn the state of your nation, and especially its management by the people you elected to give your children a better future. Sometimes the image you see in that mirror is not a pleasant one. But while you may grumble in the privacy of your armchair, the journalists who hold the mirror up to you do so publicly and at great risk to themselves. That is our calling, and we do not shirk it.
Every newspaper has its angle, and we do not hide the fact that we have ours. Our commitment is to see Sri Lanka as a transparent, secular, liberal democracy. Think about those words, for they each has profound meaning. Transparent because government must be openly accountable to the people and never abuse their trust. Secular because in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society such as ours, secularism offers the only common ground by which we might all be united. Liberal because we recognise that all human beings are created different, and we need to accept others for what they are and not what we would like them to be. And democratic… well, if you need me to explain why that is important, you’d best stop buying this paper.
The Sunday Leader has never sought safety by unquestioningly articulating the majority view. Let’s face it that is the way to sell newspapers. On the contrary, as our opinion pieces over the years amply demonstrate, we often voice ideas that many people find distasteful. For example, we have consistently espoused the view that while separatist terrorism must be eradicated, it is more important to address the root causes of terrorism, and urged government to view Sri Lanka ’s ethnic strife in the context of history and not through the telescope of terrorism. We have also agitated against state terrorism in the so-called war against terror, and made no secret of our horror that Sri Lanka is the only country in the world routinely to bomb its own citizens. For these views we have been labeled traitors, and if this be treachery, we wear that label proudly.
Many people suspect that The Sunday Leader has a political agenda: it does not. If we appear more critical of the government than of the opposition it is only because we believe that – pray excuse cricketing argot – there is no point in bowling to the fielding side. Remember that for the few years of our existence in which the UNP was in office, we proved to be the biggest thorn in its flesh, exposing excess and corruption wherever it occurred. Indeed, the steady stream of embarrassing expos’s we published may well have served to precipitate the downfall of that government.
Neither should our distaste for the war be interpreted to mean that we support the Tigers. The LTTE are among the most ruthless and bloodthirsty organisations ever to have infested the planet. There is no gainsaying that it must be eradicated. But to do so by violating the rights of Tamil citizens, bombing and shooting them mercilessly, is not only wrong but shames the Sinhalese, whose claim to be custodians of the dhamma is forever called into question by this savagery, much of which is unknown to the public because of censorship.
What is more, a military occupation of the country’s north and east will require the Tamil people of those regions to live eternally as second-class citizens, deprived of all self respect. Do not imagine that you can placate them by showering “development” and “reconstruction” on them in the post-war era. The wounds of war will scar them forever, and you will also have an even more bitter and hateful Diaspora to contend with. A problem amenable to a political solution will thus become a festering wound that will yield strife for all eternity. If I seem angry and frustrated, it is only because most of my countrymen – and all of the government – cannot see this writing so plainly on the wall.
It is well known that I was on two occasions brutally assaulted, while on another my house was sprayed with machine-gun fire. Despite the government’s sanctimonious assurances, there was never a serious police inquiry into the perpetrators of these attacks, and the attackers were never apprehended. In all these cases, I have reason to believe the attacks were inspired by the government. When finally I am killed, it will be the government that kills me.
The irony in this is that, unknown to most of the public, Mahinda and I have been friends for more than a quarter century. Indeed, I suspect that I am one of the few people remaining who routinely addresses him by his first name and uses the familiar Sinhala address oya when talking to him. Although I do not attend the meetings he periodically holds for newspaper editors, hardly a month passes when we do not meet, privately or with a few close friends present, late at night at President’s House. There we swap yarns, discuss politics and joke about the good old days. A few remarks to him would therefore be in order here.
Mahinda, when you finally fought your way to the SLFP presidential nomination in 2005, nowhere were you welcomed more warmly than in this column. Indeed, we broke with a decade of tradition by referring to you throughout by your first name. So well known were your commitments to human rights and liberal values that we ushered you in like a breath of fresh air. Then, through an act of folly, you got yourself involved in the Helping Hambantota scandal. It was after a lot of soul-searching that we broke the story, at the same time urging you to return the money. By the time you did so several weeks later, a great blow had been struck to your reputation. It is one you are still trying to live down.
You have told me yourself that you were not greedy for the presidency. You did not have to hanker after it: it fell into your lap. You have told me that your sons are your greatest joy, and that you love spending time with them, leaving your brothers to operate the machinery of state. Now, it is clear to all who will see that that machinery has operated so well that my sons and daughter do not themselves have a father.
In the wake of my death I know you will make all the usual sanctimonious noises and call upon the police to hold a swift and thorough inquiry. But like all the inquiries you have ordered in the past, nothing will come of this one, too. For truth be told, we both know who will be behind my death, but dare not call his name. Not just my life, but yours too, depends on it.
Sadly, for all the dreams you had for our country in your younger days, in just three years you have reduced it to rubble. In the name of patriotism you have trampled on human rights, nurtured unbridled corruption and squandered public money like no other President before you. Indeed, your conduct has been like a small child suddenly let loose in a toyshop. That analogy is perhaps inapt because no child could have caused so much blood to be spilled on this land as you have, or trampled on the rights of its citizens as you do. Although you are now so drunk with power that you cannot see it, you will come to regret your sons having so rich an inheritance of blood. It can only bring tragedy. As for me, it is with a clear conscience that I go to meet my Maker. I wish, when your time finally comes, you could do the same. I wish.
As for me, I have the satisfaction of knowing that I walked tall and bowed to no man. And I have not travelled this journey alone. Fellow journalists in other branches of the media walked with me: most of them are now dead, imprisoned without trial or exiled in far-off lands. Others walk in the shadow of death that your Presidency has cast on the freedoms for which you once fought so hard. You will never be allowed to forget that my death took place under your watch. As anguished as I know you will be, I also know that you will have no choice but to protect my killers: you will see to it that the guilty one is never convicted. You have no choice. I feel sorry for you, and Shiranthi will have a long time to spend on her knees when next she goes for Confession for it is not just her owns sins which she must confess, but those of her extended family that keeps you in office.
As for the readers of The Sunday Leader, what can I say but Thank You for supporting our mission. We have espoused unpopular causes, stood up for those too feeble to stand up for themselves, locked horns with the high and mighty so swollen with power that they have forgotten their roots, exposed corruption and the waste of your hard-earned tax rupees, and made sure that whatever the propaganda of the day, you were allowed to hear a contrary view. For this I – and my family – have now paid the price that I have long known I will one day have to pay. I am – and have always been – ready for that. I have done nothing to prevent this outcome: no security, no precautions. I want my murderer to know that I am not a coward like he is, hiding behind human shields while condemning thousands of innocents to death. What am I among so many? It has long been written that my life would be taken, and by whom. All that remains to be written is when.
That The Sunday Leader will continue fighting the good fight, too, is written. For I did not fight this fight alone. Many more of us have to be – and will be – killed before The Leader is laid to rest. I hope my assassination will be seen not as a defeat of freedom but an inspiration for those who survive to step up their efforts. Indeed, I hope that it will help galvanise forces that will usher in a new era of human liberty in our beloved motherland. I also hope it will open the eyes of your President to the fact that however many are slaughtered in the name of patriotism, the human spirit will endure and flourish. Not all the Rajapakses combined can kill that.
People often ask me why I take such risks and tell me it is a matter of time before I am bumped off. Of course I know that: it is inevitable. But if we do not speak out now, there will be no one left to speak for those who cannot, whether they be ethnic minorities, the disadvantaged or the persecuted. An example that has inspired me throughout my career in journalism has been that of the German theologian, Martin Niem”ller. In his youth he was an anti-Semite and an admirer of Hitler. As Nazism took hold in Germany , however, he saw Nazism for what it was: it was not just the Jews Hitler sought to extirpate, it was just about anyone with an alternate point of view. Niem”ller spoke out, and for his trouble was incarcerated in the Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps from 1937 to 1945, and very nearly executed. While incarcerated, Niem”ller wrote a poem that, from the first time I read it in my teenage years, stuck hauntingly in my mind:
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
If you remember nothing else, remember this: The Leader is there for you, be you Sinhalese, Tamil, Muslim, low-caste, homosexual, dissident or disabled. Its staff will fight on, unbowed and unafraid, with the courage to which you have become accustomed. Do not take that commitment for granted. Let there be no doubt that whatever sacrifices we journalists make, they are not made for our own glory or enrichment: they are made for you. Whether you deserve their sacrifice is another matter. As for me, God knows I tried.
Lasantha Wickrematunge
A picture is worth a thousand word.
To understand the Palestine problem one must go back into history. Here is a beautiful time motion picture that sums it all up:
It is now very clear that Israel whacked Palestine not because of Hamas but because OBAMA is being sworn in as President. The one thing that the Zionist as represented by AIPAC dislike is a President that is overwhelmingly popular. The reason for the dislike is because it makes the President much harder to control. More so when Obama has appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State given that Bill Clinton as President was strongly sympathetic to the cause of the Palestinians. The difference between Bill Clinto and OBAMA is that Bill had dirt under the carpet so it was easy to deal with him whereas OBAMA is looking very clean from day 1.
The Israeli attack and ceasefire were all planned and timed to coincide with a period where American leadership is neither here nor there. Now they have whacked Gaza and destroyed it, they have sorted out their business for the next 4 years. OBAMA now can go and discuss with FATAH or HAMAS or whoever he likes but Israel has got what it wanted. What did Israel want? To send a clear message to OBAMA they he better play their game.
Think about it , they literally boxed in OBAMA that he did not in the course of the war make a single statement of intent.
The true hallmark of OBAMA and his team, as GLOBAL leaders, is not in its ability to revive the economy. There is more then enough self interest to motivate millions of people to fix the economy. True leadership requires going above and beyond self interest and resolving the Palestine issue will be testimony to that.
I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support.
So many billions of words have been written about Palestine—perhaps more than on any other subject in history—that I hesitate to add to them. Yet I am compelled to do so, for I am reluctantly convinced that the world in general, and America in particular, knows almost nothing of the true case for the Arabs.
We Arabs follow, perhaps far more than you think, the press of America. We are frankly disturbed to find that for every word printed on the Arab side, a thousand are printed on the Zionist side.
There are many reasons for this. You have many millions of Jewish citizens interested in this question. They are highly vocal and wise in the ways of publicity. There are few Arab citizens in America, and we are as yet unskilled in the technique of modern propaganda.
The results have been alarming for us. In your press we see a horrible caricature and are told it is our true portrait. In all justice, we cannot let this pass by default.
Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered—a minority in our home.
Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.
Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.
We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.
Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?
Because of our perfectly natural dislike of being overwhelmed in our own homeland, we are called blind nationalists and heartless anti-Semites. This charge would be ludicrous were it not so dangerous.
No people on earth have been less “anti-Semitic” than the Arabs. The persecution of the Jews has been confined almost entirely to the Christian nations of the West. Jews, themselves, will admit that never since the Great Dispersion did Jews develop so freely and reach such importance as in Spain when it was an Arab possession. With very minor exceptions, Jews have lived for many centuries in the Middle East, in complete peace and friendliness with their Arab neighbours.
Damascus, Baghdad, Beirut and other Arab centres have always contained large and prosperous Jewish colonies. Until the Zionist invasion of Palestine began, these Jews received the most generous treatment—far, far better than in Christian Europe. Now, unhappily, for the first time in history, these Jews are beginning to feel the effects of Arab resistance to the Zionist assault. Most of them are as anxious as Arabs to stop it. Most of these Jews who have found happy homes among us resent, as we do, the coming of these strangers.
I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow “always been a Jewish land.” Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their “historic claim.” I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!
If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.
Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most—but not all—of the inhabitants of Palestine.
It is significant that the Philistines—not the Jews—gave their name to the country: “Palestine” is merely the Greek form of “Philistia.”
Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly—but not all—the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.
In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.
This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!
Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, “homeland” of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.
Many Mexicans might claim Spain, “homeland” of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the “homeland” of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!
I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid—or just as fantastic—as the Jewish “historic connection” with Palestine. Most are more valid.
In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.
If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country “Arab”, what does?
The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.
May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.
The Jewish “religious claim” to Palestine is as absurd as the “historic claim.” The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.
We are told that we are inhumane and heartless because do not accept with open arms the perhaps 200,000 Jews in Europe who suffered so frightfully under Nazi cruelty, and who even now—almost three years after war’s end—still languish in cold, depressing camps.
Let me underline several facts. The unimaginable persecution of the Jews was not done by the Arabs: it was done by a Christian nation in the West. The war which ruined Europe and made it almost impossible for these Jews to rehabilitate themselves was fought by the Christian nations of the West. The rich and empty portions of the earth belong, not to the Arabs, but to the Christian nations of the West.
And yet, to ease their consciences, these Christian nations of the West are asking Palestine—a poor and tiny Moslem country of the East—to accept the entire burden. “We have hurt these people terribly,” cries the West to the East. “Won’t you please take care of them for us?”
We find neither logic nor justice in this. Are we therefore “cruel and heartless nationalists”?
We are a generous people: we are proud that “Arab hospitality” is a phrase famous throughout the world. We are a humane people: no one was shocked more than we by the Hitlerite terror. No one pities the present plight of the desperate European Jews more than we.
But we say that Palestine has already sheltered 600,000 refugees. We believe that is enough to expect of us—even too much. We believe it is now the turn of the rest of the world to accept some of them.
I will be entirely frank with you. There is one thing the Arab world simply cannot understand. Of all the nations of the earth, America is most insistent that something be done for these suffering Jews of Europe. This feeling does credit to the humanity for which America is famous, and to that glorious inscription on your Statue of Liberty.
And yet this same America—the richest, greatest, most powerful nation the world has ever known—refuses to accept more than a token handful of these same Jews herself!
I hope you will not think I am being bitter about this. I have tried hard to understand that mysterious paradox, and I confess I cannot. Nor can any other Arab.
Perhaps you have been informed that “the Jews in Europe want to go to no other place except Palestine.”
This myth is one of the greatest propaganda triumphs of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the organisation which promotes with fanatic zeal the emigration to Palestine. It is a subtle half-truth, thus doubly dangerous.
The astounding truth is that nobody on earth really knows where these unfortunate Jews really want to go!
You would think that in so grave a problem, the American, British, and other authorities responsible for the European Jews would have made a very careful survey, probably by vote, to find out where each Jew actually wants to go. Amazingly enough this has never been done! The Jewish Agency has prevented it.
Some time ago the American Military Governor in Germany was asked at a press conference how he was so certain that all Jews there wanted to go to Palestine. His answer was simple: “My Jewish advisors tell me so.” He admitted no poll had ever been made. Preparations were indeed begun for one, but the Jewish Agency stepped in to stop it.
The truth is that the Jews in German camps are now subjected to a Zionist pressure campaign which learned much from the Nazi terror. It is dangerous for a Jew to say that he would rather go to some other country, not Palestine. Such dissenters have been severely beaten, and worse.
Not long ago, in Palestine, nearly 1,000 Austrian Jews informed the international refugee organisation that they would like to go back to Austria, and plans were made to repatriate them.
The Jewish Agency heard of this, and exerted enough political pressure to stop it. It would be bad propaganda for Zionism if Jews began leaving Palestine. The nearly 1,000 Austrian are still there, against their will.
The fact is that most of the European Jews are Western in culture and outlook, entirely urban in experience and habits. They cannot really have their hearts set on becoming pioneers in the barren, arid, cramped land which is Palestine.
One thing, however, is undoubtedly true. As matters stand now, most refugee Jews in Europe would, indeed, vote for Palestine, simply because they know no other country will have them.
If you or I were given a choice between a near-prison camp for the rest of our lives—or Palestine—we would both choose Palestine, too.
But open up any other alternative to them—give them any other choice, and see what happens!
No poll, however, will be worth anything unless the nations of the earth are willing to open their doors—just a little—to the Jews. In other words, if in such a poll a Jew says he wants to go to Sweden, Sweden must be willing to accept him. If he votes for America, you must let him come in.
Any other kind of poll would be a farce. For the desperate Jew, this is no idle testing of opinion: this is a grave matter of life or death. Unless he is absolutely sure that his vote means something, he will always vote for Palestine, so as not to risk his bird in the hand for one in the bush.
In any event, Palestine can accept no more. The 65,000 Jews in Palestine in 1918 have jumped to 600,000 today. We Arabs have increased, too, but not by immigration. The Jews were then a mere 11 per cent of our population. Today they are one third of it.
The rate of increase has been terrifying. In a few more years—unless stopped now—it will overwhelm us, and we shall be an important minority in our own home.
Surely the rest of the wide world is rich enough and generous enough to find a place for 200,000 Jews—about one third the number that tiny, poor Palestine has already sheltered. For the rest of the world, it is hardly a drop in the bucket. For us it means national suicide.
We are sometimes told that since the Jews came to Palestine, the Arab standard of living has improved. This is a most complicated question. But let us even assume, for the argument, that it is true. We would rather be a bit poorer, and masters of our own home. Is this unnatural?
The sorry story of the so-called “Balfour Declaration,” which started Zionist immigration into Palestine, is too complicated to repeat here in detail. It is grounded in broken promises to the Arabs—promises made in cold print which admit no denying.
We utterly deny its validity. We utterly deny the right of Great Britain to give away Arab land for a “national home” for an entirely foreign people.
Even the League of Nations sanction does not alter this. At the time, not a single Arab state was a member of the League. We were not allowed to say a word in our own defense.
I must point out, again in friendly frankness, that America was nearly as responsible as Britain for this Balfour Declaration. President Wilson approved it before it was issued, and the American Congress adopted it word for word in a joint resolution on 30th June, 1922.
In the 1920s, Arabs were annoyed and insulted by Zionist immigration, but not alarmed by it. It was steady, but fairly small, as even the Zionist founders thought it would remain. Indeed for some years, more Jews left Palestine than entered it—in 1927 almost twice as many.
But two new factors, entirely unforeseen by Britain or the League or America or the most fervent Zionist, arose in the early thirties to raise the immigration to undreamed heights. One was the World Depression; the second the rise of Hitler.
In 1932, the year before Hitler came to power, only 9,500 Jews came to Palestine. We did not welcome them, but we were not afraid that, at that rate, our solid Arab majority would ever be in danger.
But the next year—the year of Hitler—it jumped to 30,000! In 1934 it was 42,000! In 1935 it reached 61,000!
It was no longer the orderly arrival of idealist Zionists. Rather, all Europe was pouring its frightened Jews upon us. Then, at last, we, too, became frightened. We knew that unless this enormous influx stopped, we were, as Arabs, doomed in our Palestine homeland. And we have not changed our minds.
I have the impression that many Americans believe the trouble in Palestine is very remote from them, that America had little to do with it, and that your only interest now is that of a humane bystander.
I believe that you do not realise how directly you are, as a nation, responsible in general for the whole Zionist move and specifically for the present terrorism. I call this to your attention because I am certain that if you realise your responsibility you will act fairly to admit it and assume it.
Quite aside from official American support for the “National Home” of the Balfour Declaration, the Zionist settlements in Palestine would have been almost impossible, on anything like the current scale, without American money. This was contributed by American Jewry in an idealistic effort to help their fellows.
The motive was worthy: the result were disastrous. The contributions were by private individuals, but they were almost entirely Americans, and, as a nation, only America can answer for it.
The present catastrophe may be laid almost entirely at your door. Your government, almost alone in the world, is insisting on the immediate admission of 100,000 more Jews into Palestine—to be followed by countless additional ones. This will have the most frightful consequences in bloody chaos beyond anything ever hinted at in Palestine before.
It is your press and political leadership, almost alone in the world, who press this demand. It is almost entirely American money which hires or buys the “refugee ships” that steam illegally toward Palestine: American money which pays their crews. The illegal immigration from Europe is arranged by the Jewish Agency, supported almost entirely by American funds. It is American dollars which support the terrorists, which buy the bullets and pistols that kill British soldiers—your allies—and Arab citizens—your friends.
We in the Arab world were stunned to hear that you permit open advertisements in newspapers asking for money to finance these terrorists, to arm them openly and deliberately for murder. We could not believe this could really happen in the modern world. Now we must believe it: we have seen the advertisements with our own eyes.
I point out these things because nothing less than complete frankness will be of use. The crisis is too stark for mere polite vagueness which means nothing.
I have the most complete confidence in the fair-mindedness and generosity of the American public. We Arabs ask no favours. We ask only that you know the full truth, not half of it. We ask only that when you judge the Palestine question, you put yourselves in our place.
What would your answer be if some outside agency told you that you must accept in America many millions of utter strangers in your midst—enough to dominate your country—merely because they insisted on going to America, and because their forefathers had once lived there some 2,000 years ago?
Our answer is the same.
And what would be your action if, in spite of your refusal, this outside agency began forcing them on you?
Ours will be the same.
Permanent Observer Mission
of Palestine
to the United Nations
البعثـة المراقبة الدائمة
لفلسـطين
لدى الأمم المتحدة
Statement by H.E. Ambassador Riyad Mansour, Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations, before the General Assembly Resumed 10th Emergency Special Session on Illegal Israeli Actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 15 January 2009
Mr. President,
I thank you for the urgency with which you have convened the General Assembly to address the grave situation being faced by the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the Gaza Strip, as a result of the military aggression being carried out by Israel, the occupying Power. On behalf of Palestine, I wish to express our appreciation for your efforts in this regard and your consistent, heartfelt messages of support and solidarity with the Palestinian people.
As we have repeatedly stated before this Assembly, the support and solidarity extended to the Palestinian people and their just cause from countries, brothers, sisters, friends, and international and regional organizations from around the world has been invaluable and so essential for the steadfastness and resilience of the Palestinian people over the many long years of oppression, suffering and struggle to achieve their legitimate national aspirations and inalienable human rights, including their rights to self-determination and to freedom.
We are humbled and grateful for such unwavering support and are especially grateful at this time of crisis as we collectively strive to cope with the immense loss and grief and the magnitude of the disaster again being inflicted upon our people by the occupying Power and its illegal and destructive policies and practices. As war rages around them in the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian people continue to look to the international community, with all its capacity and principles and the might of international law, to help bring about an immediate ceasefire, as called for by the Security Council, and bring an end to the Israeli onslaught and the grave injustices, suffering and hardships our people have been forced to endure.
We are anguished by the horrific scenes emerging from Gaza of the brutal killing, injury and dismemberment of innocent Palestinian civilians, including so many children and their families, the displacement of tens of thousands of people, and the vast destruction of homes and infrastructure and the very foundations of Palestinian society in this latest deadly Israeli military campaign against the Palestinian people, now in its 20th day. And, yet, we have not given up hope and we maintain our resolve to bring an end to this human disaster, the latest chapter in a tragic story of a stateless, dispossessed and persecuted people that continues to struggle, appeal and plea for justice and freedom in its homeland.
The strong support and moral and humanitarian response of the international community deepens our convictions that this crisis will soon be brought to an end and that justice will ultimately prevail for our long-deprived and suffering people. We remain firm in our belief in the primacy and rule of international law, including humanitarian and human rights law, and the
115 East 65th Street New York, NY 10065 Tel. (212) 288-8500 Fax (212) 517-2377
purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the fundamental role and
responsibility that it must uphold towards the question of Palestine until the achievement of a just, lasting, comprehensive and peaceful solution. The immediate response by the organs, specialized agencies and the Secretary-General of this U.N. at this critical moment reaffirms the importance of this role and responsibility and is deserving of the support of all Member States.
Mr. President,
Undertaking its central role as the most democratic and representative body of the U.N., the General Assembly has thus convened today in response to appeals from all corners of the globe for serious efforts to be made to bring an end to the senseless violence that has erupted and to stop the carnage and destruction being perpetrated by Israel, the occupying Power, against the defenseless Palestinian civilian population in the besieged Gaza Strip.
We come before this Assembly one week after the Security Council’s adoption of resolution 1860 on 8 January 2009, in which the Council, among several important provisions, clearly called in the immediate stage for “an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire leading to the full withdrawal of the Israeli forces from Gaza” and “the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of vital humanitarian assistance, including food, fuel and medical treatment”.
Resolution 1860 (2009), which was adopted following urgent calls for Council action and after a long series of intense meetings, consultations and diplomatic efforts, including by the Arab Ministerial Committee and Ministers members of the Security Council, constitutes an important, absolutely necessary step towards bringing an end to this crisis, which threatens to further destabilize the region and gravely threatens prospects for future peace and security. Moreover, this action by the Security Council, in accordance with its Charter responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, is vital to the ultimate success of the Egyptian initiative, which was embarked upon last week by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in coordination with the diplomatic efforts of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and the other regional and international efforts underway to resolve the crisis and address its enormous political, security, humanitarian and socio-economic ramifications.
It is imperative that the Security Council and all concerned parties exert the required efforts and work to ensure the effective implementation of this resolution in order to bring and end to all military activities and violence; to address the serious humanitarian and economic needs of the Palestinian civilian population in the Gaza Strip, including with the lifting of the Israeli blockade; to guarantee a durable ceasefire; and to help the parties return from the precipice this crisis has lead us to and back to the path of peace.
Accordingly, we welcome the efforts of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council’s adoption of a resolution on 12 January 2009, which, inter alia, calls for an immediate cessation of Israeli military attacks and demands the withdrawal of the Israeli occupying forces from the Gaza Strip; demands that Israel, the occupying Power, lift the siege imposed on the Gaza Strip and open all border crossings to allow for access and free movement of humanitarian aid; urges all parties to respect international humanitarian and human rights law and to refrain from violence against the civilian population; and decided to dispatch an urgent international fact-finding mission to investigate all violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by the occupying Power.
Moreover, we welcome the timely mission undertaken by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the region, where he is conducting a series of meetings with leaders in the region aimed at promoting respect for Security Council resolution 1860 (2009) with the securing of an immediate ceasefire between the parties and intensifying efforts to provide necessary arrangements and guarantees to sustain such a ceasefire. Further, the Secretary-General has been consistent in his demand that urgent humanitarian assistance be provided without restriction to the suffering Palestinian civilian population in the Gaza Strip.
In this connection, we have been informed that he will also meet with members of the U.N. team in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, who, along with international partner organizations, have been exerting extraordinary efforts to assist the Palestinian people under the most difficult and dangerous of circumstances. We are grateful for the assistance being provided by UNRWA, OCHA, UNICEF, WHO, WFP and other agencies and humanitarian organizations, and we are encouraged by the Secretary-General’s intentions to coordinate and strengthen U.N. efforts and response, including by an assessment of civilian needs in the Gaza Strip both in humanitarian and reconstruction terms as soon as military activities come to a halt.
Thus, our effort here at the General Assembly must be seen as part of the overall, collective international and regional efforts converging to bring about an immediate ceasefire leading to the withdrawal of the Israeli occupying forces from the Gaza Strip and to address the dire humanitarian crisis being faced by the Palestinian people there. The Assembly must add its authority and voice in calling for the immediate implementation of Security Council resolution 1860 (2009) and intensifying international pressure for its respect. The current situation is unacceptable and untenable and cannot be allowed to continue and all efforts must be exerted by all concerned parties in accordance with their legal, political and moral obligations to uphold international law and to ensure its respect by the occupying Power in all circumstances.
Mr. President,
Regrettably, in blatant violation of Security Council resolution 1860 (2009) and despite regional and international efforts, Israel, the occupying Power, continues its military attacks, using excessive, indiscriminate and disproportionate force by all means of heavy weaponry by air, land and sea against heavily-populated civilian areas in the Gaza Strip.
Palestinian civilians – children, women, men, elderly, disabled and entire families – continue to be killed, injured, and displaced by the occupying Power even as we speak. More than 1,000 Palestinians, including at least 400 children and women, have been killed and at least 5,000 Palestinians have been injured, including more than 1,500 children, many critically and dying from their wounds each day. As noted by Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, John Holmes, it is alarming that the number of child casualties has tripled since the beginning of Israel’s ground assault in the Gaza Strip, where children constitute 56% of the population. In addition, since the start of the aggression on 27 December 2008, several humanitarian personnel, including staff of UNRWA, doctors and emergency rescue workers, have been killed and injured by the occupying Power.
Israel also continues to wantonly destroy Palestinian homes, civilian infrastructure and public and religious institutions in the Gaza Strip. Thousands of homes have been reduced to rubble, with many of the victims still buried beneath as rescue workers, including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), continue to be obstructed from accessing the dead and aiding the wounded. Medical facilities and ambulances have also suffered damage or been completely destroyed. Military attacks have not spared water, sanitation and electrical facilities and damage sustained has seriously degraded services, further endangering the health and well-being of the civilian population. Even U.N. schools and facilities have not been immune from Israeli bombardment and, tragically, as we all know, the 6 January military assault on an UNRWA school in Jabaliya refugee camp, where displaced and frightened families had sought shelter, resulted in the killing of 43 Palestinians and the injury of 55 other civilians.
Today, it has been reported that Israel, the occupying Power, has bombed Al-Quds Hospital in Gaza where more than 500 patients were being treated and also bombed the main compound of UNRWA, including by using white phosphorous shells, which have set food warehouses and workshops on fire there. Such barbaric and criminal actions by Israel should be condemned and investigated.
In addition to this condemnable, brutal military campaign against the Palestinian civilian population, Israel also continues imposing other severe measures of collective punishment on the population. The occupying Power maintains its blockade of the Gaza Strip, with the closure of all border crossings, only temporarily opening some crossings in recent days for limited entry of desperately-needed humanitarian supplies. Even after the decision to allow a “humanitarian corridor” for just three hours a day, the occupying Power continues to obstruct humanitarian assistance and all basic and essential goods remain in critically short supply, including food, medicines and fuel. The humanitarian crisis in Gaza thus continues to deepen and hunger, poverty, illness, misery and hardship are pervasive and all aspects of life continue to be impaired, with absolutely no normalcy or stability for any Palestinian mother, father, child or family.
Mr. President,
The reality on the ground is extremely shocking and disturbing, characterized by enormous suffering and pain, widespread panic and fear, and vast devastation and the humanitarian crisis is reaching catastrophic proportions in Gaza. The Palestinian people being completely traumatized and terrorized by the occupying Power, which in flagrant defiance of all norms and principles of international law and human decency continues its onslaught against a people that it has impoverished, starved and imprisoned, leaving them completely vulnerable with no place to flee that is safe from its lethal military campaign.
Israel’s grave breaches and systematic violations of international law are staggering. Since this crisis began, it is without a doubt that a multitude of war crimes have been perpetrated by the occupying Power in addition to the long series of crimes it has committed over the decades against the Palestinian people. International law clearly forbids such brutality – humanitarian and human rights law, particularly the 4th Geneva Convention, prohibit, inter alia, the killing and bodily injury of civilians, reprisals against civilians and civilian objects, wanton destruction of homes and other civilian property, and collective punishment of civilians – and, such actions, willfully perpetrated, constitute war crimes.
An independent investigation of the crimes committed by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Gaza Strip, as called for by the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council, is therefore extremely important and should be acted upon. The perpetrators of such crimes must be held accountable and brought to justice. Moreover, the international community must seriously consider measures for providing protection to the defenseless Palestinian civilian population under Israel’s occupation in accordance with the relevant instruments of international law, particularly the 4th Geneva Convention, which comprises provisions explicitly aimed at ensuring the safety of civilians in armed conflict, including specific provisions for civilians under foreign occupation; the Additional Protocols; the human rights covenants, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; and U.N. resolutions.
Moreover, we reiterate our calls for Israel, the occupying Power, to lift the unjust, inhumane siege and blockade it has imposed on the Gaza Strip. The Gaza Strip’s border crossings should be opened and the occupying Power must ensure the unhindered and safe access of humanitarian personnel and supplies as well as the free movement of persons and goods into and out of the Gaza Strip in accordance with the November 2005 Agreement on Movement and Access in order to alleviate and address the pressing humanitarian and economic needs of the Palestinian civilian population. In this regard, we are cognizant of the need for measures to ensure the sustained opening of the border crossings, as called for in Security Council resolution 1860 (2009), and call for expediting the necessary arrangements in order to provide desperately-needed relief to the population and some modicum of normalcy of life.
Here, I wish to reiterate that, for its part, the Palestinian leadership affirms its commitment to upholding its responsibilities in order to most rapidly and thoroughly address the many critical and urgent issues facing the Palestinian people at this difficult time, including the grave humanitarian, socio-economic and security issues we face under Israeli occupation and the issue of intra-Palestinian dialogue and reconciliation efforts for the expeditious restoration of our national unity.
Mr. President,
The international community must not shy away from using all of the diplomatic and political tools and legal instruments at its disposal to compel Israel, the occupying Power, to end to its military campaign against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip and to end all of its illegal policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. All efforts must be expended to bring Israel into compliance with its obligations as an occupying Power and as a Member State under international law and the U.N. Charter. Impunity must no longer be tolerated for, as we are witnessing, the dangers to our people, our region and beyond are far too great and gravely threaten the prospects for making peace, security and coexistence a reality between the Palestine and Israel and in the Middle East as a whole.
Accordingly, if the current collective effort to secure a durable ceasefire and respect for the other relevant provisions of resolution 1860 (2009) fails, we will then have no choice but to return to the Security Council for adoption of a resolution under Chapter VII with the appropriate measures to force Israel to stop the grave breaches of international law and human rights violations it is perpetrating against the Palestinian people under its occupation.
Thank you Mr. President.
Latest in MindSpring’s blog
|
MindSpring Conferences
