Bangkok--9 Jun--UNISBKK
Speakers stress the urgency of achieving a two-State solution
“Our shared challenge is to begin implementing transformative changes on the ground and to create irreversible momentum towards an Israeli-Palestinian agreement,” United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in a statement at the opening of the United Nations Asian and Pacific Meeting on the Question of Palestine.
The two-day Meeting will focus on “Strengthening international consensus on the urgency of achieving a two-State solution” and will aim at encouraging broad international action, including by Asian and Pacific States and societies, in support of Israeli-Palestinian peace. The Meeting is to be followed on 10 June by the United Nations Public Forum in Support of the Palestinian People.
In a message delivered by Noeleen Heyzer, Executive Secretary, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific and representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Ban said that in Gaza, there was an urgent need for a durable and fully respected ceasefire, prevention of illicit weapons smuggling, reopening of the crossings and progress on Palestinian reconciliation. The encouraging progress by the Palestinian Authority towards improving the security situation in the West Bank had been hindered by routine incursions by the Israel Defense Forces. “The time has come for Israel to fundamentally change its policies in this regard, as it has repeatedly promised to do,” he said.
Triyono Wibowo, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, assured the Meeting that his country would continue to work with the United Nations and Asian and Pacific States and groups in support of the two-State solution. Because a long-protracted process was not in the interest of anyone, he said, “Let us work harder on the demands of peace, and worry less about the intricacies of process. Let us help the parties to focus on the gains of peace, and less on the pains of process. The objective is very promising, and it is within reach.”
The statement by Abdel Rahim Malouh, Representative of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, was read out by Fariz Mehdawi, Ambassador of Palestine to Indonesia, as Mr. Malouh had been denied a travel permit by the Israeli Government.
Mr. Malouh said in his statement that following the Israeli aggression against Gaza and the election of a right-wing, extremist Israeli Government, the situation on the ground had deteriorated and tensions were rising. Despite and because of that dismal state of affairs, “We must be steadfast in our conviction that our collective action, based on international legality and morality, can and will salvage the prospects for peace,” he said. “Without a complete cessation of all settlement activities, Israel’s credibility as a partner for peace will remain in serious doubt and resumption of negotiations will be futile,” he added.
Paul Badji, Chairman, Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, stressed that statements by the Israeli leadership that the conflict could not be resolved but only “managed” and that “economic peace” with the Palestinian was the way to go should be firmly rejected as an attempt to divert attention from the core issue, which was political in nature.
In the opening session, statements were also made by the representatives of Cuba (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Bangladesh, Morocco, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Egypt, Pakistan and India. The representative of the League of Arab States also addressed the Meeting.
Opening Statements
Welcoming participants, PAUL BADJI (Senegal), Chairman of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, said the Meeting was taking place at a time when international public opinion was once again focused on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The devastating Israeli onslaught on Gaza was still on everyone’s mind, not least because of the continuing stifling blockade of the Gaza Strip. In the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the expansion of settlements was going on and violence by settlers against Palestinians was increasing. The construction of the Wall continued unabated.
He said the efforts by the occupying Power to create ever new facts on the ground were in direct violation of Israel’s international obligations and threatened to render the two-State solution of the conflict unattainable. For that reason, the Committee had decided to call particular attention to the urgency of achieving that two-State solution.
There was no alternative to that solution, to the creation of an independent, sovereign and viable Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security with Israel.
TRIYONO WIBOWO, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Indonesia, said the Meeting’s theme focused on the two-State solution, which was a critical issue. The Meeting was also a reflection of Indonesia’s strong commitment to assisting the people of Palestine to fulfil their right to be an independent nation. After the recent onslaught on the Gaza Strip had been halted, Israel had left behind a humanitarian crisis of historic proportions. By simply refusing to open the crossings into Gaza for humanitarian supplies, Israel had ensured that Palestinians would continue to die and suffer. Palestinians were the perpetual victims of Israeli alienation on their own soil, suffering house demolitions, movement restrictions, unemployment, poverty, poor access to healthcare and education and unending violations of their rights.
He said that Indonesia reiterated its condemnation of Israel for its policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It was an important requirement for achieving a solution to the conflict to hold Israel accountable for its crimes against humanity. There could not be two sets of international law, one for Israel and another for the community of nations. It was the responsibility of the international community to find a way to ensure that Israel honour its obligations under international law.
Israel’s willingness to disregard Security Council resolutions, alongside its consistent use of disproportionate military action, must be of great concern to all.
He called on the international community to maintain the necessary commitment towards a solution of the Palestinian question. At the Ministerial Meeting of the New Asian African Strategic Partnership (NAASP) last year, countries in Asia and Africa had devised a programme to provide training for Palestinian diplomats, government officials and entrepreneurs to build Palestinian institutions. The Cairo International Conference held in March in support of the reconstruction of Gaza was another positive indication of commitments of the international community in the search for answers to the question of Palestine.
Indonesia would continue to work with the United Nations and Asian and Pacific States and groups in support of the two-State solution. A long-protracted process was not in the interest of anyone. “Let us work harder on the demands of peace, and worry less about the intricacies of process. Let us help the parties to focus on the gains of peace, and less on the pains of process. The objective is very promising, and it is within reach,” he said.
In a message delivered by NOELEEN HEYZER, Executive Secretary, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, United Nations Secretary-General BAN KI-MOON said the Meeting took place in the context of renewed international efforts to rejuvenate the search for Israeli-Palestinian peace based on the two-State solution and the implementation of prior commitments by both sides. He was encouraged by President Obama’s commitment to that endeavour and supported the initiative to convene an international conference in Moscow. He welcomed efforts of Arab and Muslim countries to advance the Arab Peace Initiative and looked forward to a meeting of the Quartet in the near future.
The Secretary-General said that as there had been almost no progress on implementing Security Council resolution 1850 on the political process, or resolution 1860 on the Gaza crisis, there was an urgent need for a durable and fully respected ceasefire, prevention of illicit weapons smuggling, reopening of the crossings and progress on Palestinian reconciliation. He called on Israel to allow into Gaza fuel, funds and materials that were urgently required for recovery efforts and long-term development initiatives.
The encouraging progress by the Palestinian Authority towards institutions building and improving the security situation had been hindered by routine incursions by the Israel Defense Forces, he said. “The time has come for Israel to fundamentally change its policies in this regard, as it has repeatedly promised to do,” he said, adding that there must be a full settlement freeze in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including from natural growth. “Furthermore, I am extremely worried about intensifying Israeli actions to alter the status of East Jerusalem,” he said.
Mr. Ban said, “Our shared challenge is to begin implementing transformative changes on the ground and to create irreversible momentum towards an Israeli-Palestinian agreement,” with a clear objective: an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian State living side-by-side in peace and security with Israel, and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the region. “Resolving this conflict is fundamental to the secure future of Israelis, Palestinians, the region and the world,” he added.
Mr. BADJI, Chairman of the Committee, said the basic rights of the Palestinian people to their own State within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and the rights of the refugees to return, were a subject that resonated deeply with the countries that had had to go through painful struggles on their own path to national independence. Denial of that right, solemnly promised more than 60 years ago, could not fail but to cause resentment, which stoked the flames of extremism and violence world wide.
He said a certain sense of conflict fatigue had taken hold within the international community. Months after the bloody conflict in Gaza and billions of dollars in assistance pledges later, reconstruction aid remained hostage to politics. Opening all Gaza crossings was a top priority. At the same time, ongoing efforts to heal the intra-Palestinian divisions, facilitated by Egypt, were yet to bring about the desired reconciliation. Any action to alter the status of East Jerusalem was detrimental to the peace process, contravened Security Council resolutions and constituted a violation of international law.
Continuing, Mr. Badji said statements by the Israel leadership that the conflict could not be resolved but only “managed”, and that “economic peace” with the Palestinians was the way to go should be firmly rejected as an attempt to divert attention from the core issue, which was political in nature. Another worrying development concerned the “wholesale” violation of international humanitarian law, especially during the recent Gaza conflict. The Committee would convene a meeting on 22 and 23 July 2009 at the United Nations Office in Geneva to deal with that aspect and to look at results of the international investigations into the events in Gaza.
The Committee viewed with “cautious optimism” the recent steps of the Obama Administration, which signalled a renewed engagement in the region and especially regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he said. The new United States Administration seemed to be more willing to hold Israel publicly accountable, in particular with regard to settlements.
He urged the Meeting to consider ways in which Governments, intergovernmental organizations and civil society could be supportive in moving the peace process forward. The Meeting might wish to consider how States of Asia and the Pacific could effectively contribute to resolving the conflict through their action in national and intergovernmental mechanisms. The objective of the Meeting was to encourage broad international action, including by Asian and Pacific States and societies, in support of a negotiated solution to the conflict based on a shared vision of two States, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.
The statement by ABDEL RAHIM MALOUH, Representative of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Member of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, was read by FARIZ MEHDAWI, Ambassador of Palestine to Indonesia, as Mr. Malouh had been denied a travel permit by the Israeli Government.
In his statement, Mr. Malouh said the urgency of ending the tragedy and injustice imposed on Palestine and her people could not be overstated.
Despite its suffering, the Palestinian people remained resilient in their struggle to realize their inalienable human rights, including their rights to self-determination and to return. Following the Israeli aggression against Gaza and the election of a right-wing, extremist Israeli Government, the situation on the ground had deteriorated and tensions were rising. Despite and because of that dismal state of affairs, “We must be steadfast in our conviction that our collective action, based on international legality and morality, can and will salvage the prospects for peace”, he said.
The international community must find the political will necessary for real progress towards peace, justice, respect for human rights and the promotion of stability and security in the region and beyond, he continued.
Immediate efforts must be undertaken to bring about changes, both politically and physically on the ground, to make the two-State solution for peace a reality. That, of course, required a change in the behaviour of Israel, the occupying Power, to bring it into compliance with international law and with its commitments under the Road Map and previous agreements.
He said the illegal Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip must end immediately. Israel must also cease its raids and arrest operations in the West Bank as well as its illegal settlement colonization campaign, including in East Jerusalem where the colonization drive was most intense and had already caused isolation from the rest of the Territory. “Without a complete cessation of all settlement activities, Israel’s credibility as a partner for peace will remain in serious doubt and resumption of negotiations will be futile,” he said. Israel must also stop construction of the wall and bring a halt to acts of settler terrorism.
The international community, including the Security Council, must uphold its responsibility and concretely act to compel the occupying Power to comply with its legal obligations, he said. If confronted with continued defiance, practical measures were necessary in order to advance the overall goal of a just, comprehensive and lasting peace settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Arab-Israeli conflict as a whole on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242, 338, 1397, 1515, 1850, the principle of land for peace and the Arab Peace Initiative.
Representative’s statements,
JORGE LEON (Cuba), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), said the Movement regretted the lack of progress made, despite increased international efforts to address the major issues and follow-up core positions regarding the question of Palestine. It stressed in that regard the need for intensified and coordinated efforts by the international community to promote a genuine peace process as well to ensure respect for international humanitarian and human rights law, which was key to a peaceful solution.
He said the Movement called on the international community, including the Security Council, to ensure serious follow-up investigations of all crimes and violations committed by Israel in the Gaza Strip and reaffirmed the obligations of the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions with regard to penal sanctions. Condemning Israel’s inhuman and unlawful blockade of the Gaza Strip, the NAM demanded that Israel allow for the immediate and sustained opening of all crossings. It also called for intensification of efforts by the international community, in particular the Security Council and the Quartet, to address the current political and humanitarian crisis.
Reiterating the NAM’s deep concern about the extensive physical, economic and social devastation caused by the Israeli settlements, Wall and checkpoints, he said that illegal colonization campaign was gravely undermining the contiguity, integrity, viability and unity of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and jeopardizing the achievement of the two-State solution. The NAM expressed its grave concern about the situation in and around East Jerusalem, where Israel’s intense colonization campaign was clearly aimed at illegally altering the city’s character and legal status.
It stressed the incompatibility of peace process negotiations with such colonization activities and reaffirmed the many Security Council and General Assembly resolutions demanding cessation of those practices, which were deemed to be null and void and with no legal validity whatsoever.
ANISUL HAQUE (Bangladesh) said his country supported the cause of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to have an independent State of their own with East Jerusalem as its capital without delay. It was the wish of the world that the two peoples, the Palestinians and Israelis, must live side by side in tranquility as they once had before for centuries.
Palestine was the holy land from which three great religions had emanated.
It was a pity that today, that very land was torn by strife. There was, however, enough consensus among the Governments and the peoples of the world to help the Israeli regime to accept the bare minimum of the just rights of the Palestinians.
MOHAMED MAJDI (Morocco) said the Meeting was convened at a time when the current issue went through difficulties because of escalating Israeli obstruction to Palestinians and its refusal to establish a Palestinian State, as well as the increase of settlement operations. Resuming the negotiations and restarting the Middle East peace process had become the most urgent issues in the world. The international community was requested to make more efforts to put an end to the critical situation and to implement international resolutions on restoring peace and security in the region. Morocco would continue to work for the achievement of lasting peace based on the Arab Peace Initiative and the principle of land for peace and in support of Palestinian unity. Utmost attention should be paid to the implementation of the Road Map, Security Council resolutions and other agreements. The special status of Jerusalem must be respected.
PRASITH SAIYASITH (Lao People’s Democratic Republic) said the continued occupation of Palestine was the root cause of violence, unrest and destabilization in the region. Lasting peace would not exist unless statehood for the Palestinians was realized. The two-State solution was the only sustainable solution to the long-lasting conflict. At the current politically delicate juncture, the priority for both sides remained as much as ever the pursuit of that solution. Both parties needed to strive for a peaceful dialogue and meaningful political negotiations, with indispensable international support. The key to a solution, however, was in the hands of the Israelis and the Palestinians.
He said that for the realization of the two-State solution, Israel would first have to freeze settlement activities, withdraw from the West Bank and restore freedom of movement of Palestinians. Action on the ground, together with a genuine readiness to negotiate on all core issues, including Jerusalem, borders and refugees, based on Israel’s existing promises, would be the true test of Israel’s commitment to the two-State solution. On the Palestinian side, steadfast commitments and sacrifices were needed in the reconciliation efforts to heal divisions and achieve the unification of the Palestinian political factions.
MOHAMED HASSAN SHABBO (League of Arab States) said that after the barbaric assault on Gaza, the situation had changed. Actions towards achieving the two-State solution should start immediately. The Arab world had reaffirmed its commitment to peace on the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative and in accordance with the Road Map and the two-State solution.
The Palestinian factions should reconcile their differences and streamline their positions for future negotiations.
He said the new Government in Israel had started by sending negative messages regarding the peace process and putting conditions to negotiations. Concerted efforts had started to extend settlements and to change the character of Jerusalem. The new United States Administration had committed itself to change its focus and content vis a vis the problems in the Middle East. He hoped that the Quartet, the United States and the forthcoming meeting in Moscow would galvanize the will to come to a final solution of the problem as well as support for the Arab Peace Initiative and the two-State solution.
AHMED EL KEWAISNY (Egypt), stressing the importance of establishing a Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital on the basis of the two-State solution, expressed concern at the slow pace of efforts aimed at reaching a comprehensive and just peace. The occupying Power continued to impose a blockade on Gaza, its settlement activities in the West Bank and changing the character of Jerusalem, all of which ruined the hope of the Palestinian people for stability and put the Middle East in a volatile situation. Because the division among the Palestinians had led to difficulties in restoring their rights, Egypt was sponsoring a dialogue between Palestinian factions to heal the rift.
He said the occupying Power must lift its blockade of Gaza and start a serious negotiation process based on the land for peace principle and with reference to all relevant Security Council resolutions. Describing Egypt’s assistance, he said that among other things, his country acted as a huge hub for delivering tons of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip.
AKHTAR ALI SULEHRI (Pakistan) said the plight of the Palestinian people represented a human tragedy that had gone on for too long.
Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip lived in a limbo. A just solution to the crisis must include a viable Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its capital based on the two-State solution. Pakistan supported all peace efforts based on relevant Council resolutions, the Road Map and the Arab Peace Initiative. It strongly condemned Israeli efforts to change the character of Jerusalem, including excavation activities near the Al-Aqsa Mosque in disregard of international law.
MUKTESH PARDESHI (India) said the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was political in nature and could not be resolved by force. Israeli actions in Gaza had not enhanced the political process. He was disappointed that the Annapolis process had not led to a breakthrough. India supported the peace process in all its tracks, based on relevent Security Council resolutions.
India had consistently supported the Palestinian people in realizing their legitimate demands for a viable Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital, living side by side in peace with Israel — a goal which could only be achieved by peaceful means. Calling for an end of settlement activities and sustained easing of movement restrictions, he went on to describe India’s contributions to reconstruction and development.
RAUL ANTONIO ESKILDSEN ARIAS (Panama) said his country supported peace between Israel and the Palestinian Authority on the basis of two democratic States, living in peace and security, and the establishment of an economically viable Palestinian State within the 1967 borders. In that regard, it was necessary that all Palestinian political groups come to an agreement in order to create a strong and united government. Israel must stop the illegal Wall construction and settlement activities in the West Bank. Israel should also allow commercial activities in Gaza. Rocket attacks against Israel must stop as well as punitive Israeli incursions into Palestinian territories.
Two-State solution generous to Israel, expert from Israel says
The United Nations Asian and Pacific Meeting on the Question of Palestine this afternoon heard presentations of four experts, including Israeli and Palestinian, on the theme of “International efforts aimed at achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the question of Palestine.”
A journalist from Israel pointed out that the two-State solution was generous to Israel, as it acknowledged that history could not be undone.
The reason why Israel did not accept that solution was, according to her, because it would threaten Jewish contemporary thinking in Israel as it would leave the future out of control of the hegemonic Jewish authorities.
A Palestinian lawyer stated that the diplomatic community had failed to separate the process of colonization from the process of exercising control over Palestinians. Throughout the period of the peace process from 1993 to Annapolis, the emphasis of the international community had always been on conflict management and not on the root problem of colonial practices and control over territory.
A former member of the United Nations International Commission of Inquiry on Palestine, saying that the violence in Gaza and during the Holocaust as well as the violence of suicide bomber were the product of a pathological state of mind that should be addressed clinically, pointed out recent developments that created possibilities of change, including the 4 June speech by President Obama in Cairo.
The Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations in New York stressed that a simple repeat of positions was not sufficient. To translate international consensus into reality, Israel must be brought into compliance with its obligations, including its obligation to freeze all settlement activities. Lessons from the past implied the necessity of bluntly telling Israel either to abide with the global consensus “or else.”
The presentations were followed by an interactive discussion. The Meeting will resume tomorrow with two more plenary sessions.
Statements by Panel Members
AMIRA HASS, journalist for the Israeli daily newspaper Ha’aretz, said people were often lost in formulas. It was necessary to take the reality out of standard and confusing language. The two-State solution was not just a mantra, she said, but posed a deep historiography of the conflict, different from the one used by the Israelis or the Palestinians. That solution said that Israel was part of the colonialist period. Zionism was both a product of European colonialism but also of the prosecution of the Jews with its culmination in the Nazi industry of murder.
She said the two-State solution was generous to the State of Israel as it was an admission that history could not be undone. The question then was why Israel rejected that generous offer. The reason was that the two-State solution threatened Jewish contemporary thinking in Israel as it would leave the future out of control of the hegemonic Jewish authorities.
It would also mean loosing privileges the Jews had acquired over the years.
As an example, she said Israel was now in control of all water resources and determined how much water was allocated to Jews and Palestinians in Israel and in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The two-State solution required that water would have to be allocated equally, including to Gaza. Another problem was that settlements for many had become the only option for upgrading their economical and social situation. It was difficult to give up such an option, which was ingrained in Israeli mentality.
During the last thirty years, Israelis had developed a powerful security industry, Ms. Hass said. In Gaza, some 1,400 were killed during the recent conflict but only less than hundred by short-range fire. More than 1,000 had been killed from the air, half of them by missiles launched by drones. Israel was now selling drones to Turkey and Russia, allegedly pro-Palestinian States. Young people could go all over the world as security experts. Those examples showed how occupation had become part of the normal life of many Israelis, difficult to give up.
In order to proceed towards a solution, in order to prevent a disaster for Israel, the question must be asked why for 20 years since Oslo, Israel had not used the golden opportunity offered in the two-State solution. The two-State solution was necessary for the sake of the Jewish existence in the region, for the sake of a decent life of Palestinians and for the sake of the future of the whole region.
DIANA BUTTU, a Palestinian-Canadian lawyer based in Ramallah, said diplomatic efforts did not focus on the issues at hand, namely the day to day reality for Palestinians. Using slides, she showed the areas where the population in the West Bank lived and how those areas were interspersed by settlements containing now about half a million Israelis. The two-State solution was difficult to reconcile with all those settlements, she said.
From the perspective of international law, occupation was a legal concept, but nothing in international law said how to end an occupation, she said. The only way occupations ended was through international pressure or because realization on the part of the occupier that the occupation had to end.
Two processes had been going on in the West Bank, one of colonization and one of occupation and control. Over the last thirty years, those two processes had been welded together. Israel claimed that settlements were helpful in maintaining control and security, and the international community had allowed that justification to continue.
Since the Oslo Agreement, colonialism had increased, because the reasoning was that only when the Palestinian Authority was capable of providing security, the colonialist project could be ended. Since the Agreement, the number of settlements had increased and more and more land was being taken. That process was exacerbated by the construction of the Wall on the West Bank.
Ms. Buttu said disengagement from Gaza had shown that settlements could be removed. However, the welding together of the two processes had created a mentality that colonialism was part of Israel. The idea that oneaa dhoi i tohstmth been engrained in mainstream Israeli society.
The diplomatic community had failed to separate the process of colonization from the process of exercising control over Palestinians. The focus instead had been either on security for Israel or on the Palestinian economy. Throughout the period of the peace process from 1993 to Annapolis, the emphasis had always been on conflict management and not on the root problem of colonial practices and control over territory.
Ms. Buttu said that although the tone of the new Obama Administration was very warm, the framework was not changing. Unless there were diplomatic efforts to address the two processes of colonialism and occupation, she feared that the situation would again be “security first.”
Unless there was a recognition of the existence of a system of inequality of power between the two parties, the issue of control over people and the taking of land could not be successfully addressed.
The major challenges facing the international community now were that the framework used in the past had never addressed reality on the ground; that there was a lack of support for the peace process on the part of the Palestinians; and that Palestinians increasingly believed that a solution was no longer possible.
KAMAL HOSSAIN, Senior Advocate at the Supreme Court of Bangladesh and a former member of the United Nations International Commission of Inquiry on Palestine, said the recent devastation of Gaza testified to the extent to which destructive forces were able to obstruct the change of the reality presented by the continuing Israeli occupation of Arab territories. Giving a historical context to the issue as well as of other trends in recent history, including the end of Apartheid, he said change was possible as had been underlined by the 4 June speech of President Obama in Cairo.
He said that many ordinary and decent people in Israel found the violence and home destruction unacceptable. It was a pathological state of mind that brought the kind of violence as exhibited in Gaza, in the Holocaust or in the bulldozing of an American college student trying to defend the home of her host family in Gaza. That same pathological state created the violence of suicide bombers. That pathology should be dealt with clinically.
He said that since 2004 two things had happened. President Bush had said that no decisions could be taken except by bilateral agreement and at the same time had accepted the Israeli argument that there was nobody to talk to on the Palestinian side. Another negative step was the repudiation of the principle of the “inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by war.”
In contrast, what the American President had said on 4 June was catalytic. Quoting extensively from President Obama’s address in Cairo, he said that speech was the beginning of the kind of change that could make the twenty-first century different.
RIYAD MANSOUR, Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations in New York, said that at the current and very critical moment, reiterating positions was not sufficient. The repetition of the international consensus every day since 15 years after Madrid and Oslo had not accomplished the objective of the termination of occupation, dismantling the settlements and allowing the creation of the Palestinian State. If those statements were now going to be repeated, the results would not be
different. The failure of the Annapolis process must be analyzed. The
logical conclusion was that if the obstacles from the past were removed, success was more likely.
He said that to translate consensus into reality, Israel must be brought into compliance with its obligation to freeze all settlement activities. Since the late seventies, tremendous efforts had been exerted to address the illegality of settlement activities, including several Security Council resolutions. However, there had been no will, in the Council or in the United States, to bring about the needed practical pressure to force Israel into compliance.
Fifty countries and international organizations had been summoned to Annapolis where they had been promised that within a year, there would be a peace treaty paving the way for a Palestinian State. There was also agreement that there would be negotiations on final status issues, including refugees, Jerusalem and water. There was also agreement that negotiation had to take place in a good atmosphere. That atmosphere would be created by the parties fulfilling their commitments under the Road Map.
Noting that the Palestinian side had fulfilled almost all its obligations, he said the most important obligation on the Israeli side was to freeze settlement activities, to allow movement of freedom and remove checkpoints form the West Bank and to open Palestinian national institutions in East Jerusalem. Not only Israel did not fulfill its obligations, but it went in the opposite direction. Settlement activities had increased during the negotiations, as had the number of check points.
President Obama had given positive signals, among other things by appointing Mr. George Mitchell to be in charge of the peace process and delivering his speech in Cairo, he said. But in order to succeed, it would make sense to apply the lesson of the past that the obstacle to success was the determination of Israeli leaders not to implement international consensus. That lesson implied the necessity of bluntly telling Israel either to abide with the global consensus “or else”. One could not leave the vulnerable Palestinian people at the mercy of the powerful Israel.
Help was needed from the international community.
He said it was a good signal that for the first time in the history investigations were carried out regarding the conduct of Israel in Gaza.
It was refreshing to see the report of the Board of Inquiry with clear conclusions that Israel had deliberately killed civilians in Gaza, that those were war crimes and that the responsible criminals needed to face justice. Those and other small steps were a significant indication of what must be done by the international community to let Israel comply with the global consensus. If that did not happen, everyone was to blame. Israel was counting the hours until it could say that all peace efforts had failed and that there was no way than “our way,” which would result in tremendous bloodshed.