Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
AS WE APPROACH the 11th anniversary of the outbreak of the second intifada, the Palestine Liberation Organisation’s attempt to gain UN recognition for a Palestinian state has dominated media discussion concerning the Palestine-Israel issue. Countless op-eds and polemics have flooded the inbox of the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign (IPSC), from both those who support and those oppose this move. Perhaps surprisingly to readers of TheJournal.ie, even amongst Palestinians and international solidarity groups, there is no unanimity regarding the initiative.
However, the discussion on the Palestinian side centres not on largely irrelevant Israel-centric questions such as “is this bad for the peace process?” (any peace process is already dead, killed by Israeli intransigence and international inaction) or “are Palestinians showing bad faith by acting unilaterally?” (Israel acts unilaterally on a daily basis). In this debate, there is no questioning the Palestinian right to self-determination – guaranteed by UNGA Resolution 3236 – or the right to declare an independent state.
Rather, the division is of a tactical nature, the general question posed being: Is this, at present, the best road to travel in order to secure the rights of the Palestinian people?
Those backing the plan argue that it will be at least a partial realisation of the dream of the Palestinian people for a state of their own, and allow Palestinians to begin creating their own “facts on the ground” through state-building. They also say it will grant Palestinians greater access to the
mechanisms of international law, and that it is a bold and innovative new diplomatic venture that it is hoped will be a step toward breaking the impasse Palestinians find themselves at.
Serious debate has occurred concerning what statehood might mean for refugees and the Palestinian diaspora
On the other hand, serious debate has occurred concerning what statehood might mean for the PLO as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people”, and a corollary question about the representation of the millions of refugees and their descendants expelled by Israel during the 1948 and 1967 wars of conquest.
There is also circumspection regarding the transparency of this process, a discussion about whether Palestinians will find themselves in a better or worse legal position viz-a-viz international law, and uncertainty as to where it will leave the increasingly successful grassroots anti-apartheid campaign. Still, 65 per cent of Palestinians in the occupied territories support the plan according to a recent poll, although this excludes Palestinian citizens of Israel and diaspora refugees.
Yet, whatever one’s feelings about this particular initiative, regardless of the outcome at the UN, Israel’s decades old occupation is unlikely to end anytime soon – a fact admitted to by the Israeli Ambassador to Ireland on this site last week, when he stated that if statehood is declared “nothing will change on the ground for ordinary Palestinians”. Indeed, for Palestinians the brutality of the occupation will continue, irrespective of whether the UN decides that they live in the “Occupied Palestinian Territories” or the “State of Palestine”.
In 2011 alone, according to UN figures, more than 100 Palestinians have been killed and over 4,200 injured (many during unarmed anti-occupation demonstrations) by Israeli military forces or illegal colonial settlers, while some 380 Palestinian-owned structures have been demolished. According to the prisoner support group Addameer, over 1,680 Palestinians were arrested in the same period. The figures since 2000 are even grimmer: 6,430 killed (1,460 children); 45,000 injured (30 per cent children); 12,160 demolitions; and thousands arrested, of which 5,554 remain imprisoned, including 211 children.
Meanwhile, the unlawful and crippling Israeli siege of 1.5 million people in Gaza continues and Palestinians in the West Bank continue to endure Israeli military law living under a dangerous and humiliating regime of checkpoints, closures and curfews. The construction of illegal Jewish-only
colonial settlements continues apace, and within Israel a raft of anti-democratic measures directed against progressive groups are being passed by what has been called the most rightwing Knesset in history.
A change in the UN designation of the occupied areas is unlikely to have practical effect on Israeli practices
A change in the UN designation of the areas occupied by Israel since 1967 is unlikely to have any practical effect on such Israeli practices. In fact, as things currently stand, Palestinians are denied their already guaranteed UN-mandated rights – the right to self-determination, the right to
freedom of movement, the right to development, the right of residency and the right of return for refugees. Israel is in breach of tens of UN resolutions, and ignores international laws such as the 2004 International Court of Justice ruling that deemed illegal both its land-grab wall and colonial settlements on Palestinian lands.
The IPSC, as an organisation in solidarity with the Palestinian people, does not see our role as intervening in internal Palestinian discussions or advocating solutions based on ‘one’ or ‘two’ states. Palestinians already have enough outsiders telling them what to do. Instead we believe our task is to build support for the just demands of Palestinian people, as crystallised in the 2005 unified call for a campaign of boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel until it ends its occupation of Palestinian lands, ceases its apartheid practices, and complies fully with its obligations under international law.
This call, for a struggle similar to the international campaign that hastened the fall of South African apartheid, has been endorsed by over 170 Palestinian political parties, trade unions, NGOs and civil society organisations.
For those who wish to see a just and peaceful solution to the Palestinian-Israeli question, it is imperative to continue the efforts to apply pressure on the apartheid state of Israel through the BDS movement. Ultimately, the IPSC’s believes that, statehood or no, the struggle for the inalienable
rights – human, political and national – of the Palestinian people will continue until they are secured.
Indeed, this struggle must be intensified regardless of the UN’s decision later this month.
Kevin Squires is a journalist and National Coordinator of the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign.
For those interested in a deeper look at this issue, the IPSC has organised a discussion on the Palestinian statehood bid with John Reynolds (former legal researcher with Palestinian human rights organisation Al Haq) that will take place this Thursday, 15 September, in the Teachers’ Club, Parnell Square, Dublin 1.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
A great deal of the hardship arises from the world’s bully imposing sanctions for decades. They then have the neck to call for freedom.
@Anto Harris: yes yes true
Yes indeed, it always amazes me how people could ever be dissatisfied living under a Communist dictatorship with a very efficient security service who suppress and jail all political opposition and how many Irish people who profess to believe in freedom and democracy see them as ingrates and U.S. dupes for doing so. Funny how Cuba is always great for their holidays but they wouldn’t want to live there! And no, I don’t work for the CIA nor am I on their payroll but if they’re monitoring the Journal comments section then hey, I’m available and I’ve seen all the ‘Bourne’ and ‘Mission Impossible’ movies…
@William Tallon: the US has no moral authority to oppose dictatorships. It has allied with dictatorships for generations. It has allied with some dictatorships only to overthrow them after they have become less useful. The US has supported coups against democracies, and only occasionally against dictatorships, but in the latter only when useful to the US
When it gets involved it’s about power.
@john smith iv: Using that logic then most democratic countries today should just keep quiet about human rights abuses by dictatorships because of their own not too perfect history in that area. You’ve sort of proven my point. You seem to be suggesting that because you believe the US to be morally bankrupt that if it expresses support for people protesting a very repressive dictatorship that automatically makes those protesting extremely suspect and probably US agents or dupes. The bottom line is either you believe Cuba to be a repressive dictatorship and you support the right of its people to demand freedom and democracy or you don’t. I support them. I support freedom and democracy for all people even those in the US…
@William Tallon: I didn’t say “most democratic countries” now did I. That’s your straw man editorialising. I said the US. Nor did I say the protestors were dupes, you inferred that. The bottom line is that US has no moral authority to demand the end of dictatorships it disagrees with while propping up or supporting dictatorships or feudal kingdoms like Saudi Arabia.
@john smith iv: You’re perfectly correct, I mentioned them by way of contextualising and illustrating my point. No ‘strawman’ argument or editorialising. You’ve missed my point or as I think is more likely ignored it. I’ve made what I consider a totally logical inference by the way given your obvious and single-minded antipathy towards all things US which I think has affected you ability to make any sort of unbiased and meaningful point in relation to the current situation in Cuba. You still haven’t said whether you support the right of people in Cuba to protest and demand freedom and democracy. Your silence is interesting…
@William Tallon: well said man.
@William Tallon: When one looks at Cuba it’s unfair to compare the system to European democracies. When Castro took power in Cuba the vast majority of the population was illiterate and extremely impoverished with no medical system. Now illiteracy has practically been wiped out with a high standard of education for all, the medical system is one of the best in the world(despite American pharmaceutical being unable to supply it) and the vast majority of Cubans are happy with the political system despite the shortages they have to endure, mostly because of U.S. sanctions. When one compares life in Cuba to the rest of Latin America one can see the true progress it has made since the revolution . Why are the U.S. soo afraid to lift the sanctions?
@john smith iv: The US doesn’t need moral authority. It’s authority comes from the fact that it spends dollars and blood to exert whatever influence it deems necessary to achieve it’s goals. I am surprised they didn’t take care of Cuba when the Soviet Union fell. They missed the easiest opportunity then, but they are free to deal with Cuba now in whatever way they see fit.
EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell not urge the US to end the sanctions that are arguably the main cause of the economic crisis and shortages. Pretty hard to be prosperous when living under crippling sanctions.
Why does the ….
Ah ya its not like the US have ever interfered in Cuban affairs…. The whole bay of pigs fiasco… The fact Guantanamo bay is held hostage by the US. Castro has survived 634 assination attempts by all accounts…. Then there was the whole USAID sponsored social media outlet run by the CIA. I think I;ll finish with the yearly UN vote to lift US sanctions on Cuba that every nation is the world voted for except the US and Israel…..
The Yanks have been waiting to pounce and put a puppet government in Cuba for the past 60 years.
From Wikipedia.
1952 – 1959 the dictator Batista seized power with support from the United States. Batista suspended the 1940 Constitution and revoked most political liberties, including the right to strike. He presided over a stagnating economy that widened the gap between rich and poor Cubans. He placed most of the main industries including the sugar industry in U.S. hands, and foreigners owned 70% of the arable land. He negotiated lucrative relationships both with the American Mafia, who controlled the drug, gambling, and prostitution businesses in Havana, and with large U.S.-based multinational companies who were awarded lucrative contracts.
Rebels finally ousted Batista on 31 December 1958. Brutal US sanctions followed which are still active today.
Here’s Cuba, shows how dysfunctional it is, why people protest: https://youtu.be/wcseyA2aL8k?t=63
@David Jordan: just some guy walking around shops
@David Jordan: wanting Wexford strawberries in winter
@john smith iv: Is that really all you can garner from that video?
@Alan Watt: Yes because nappies, toilet rolls and ballcocks are seasonal….
@David Jordan: Wouldn’t be so bad if the US would lift the pointless sanctions they’ve been under since long before the Cold War ended. There was a vote to lift the sanctions recently, only two nations voted against, the USA and Israel… Over 180 voted to lift sanctions, that says it all.
@Alan Watt: “wanting Wexford strawberries in winter”
That is very intensive, once of the people interviewed was traveling around Cuba trying to find chemotherapy drugs for his son who has cancer.
@David Jordan: If Europe imposed sanctions here, we wouldn’t be far off that
I guess some influencal sectors of a near by nation wants their casinos and brothels back again.
have your say