Editor’s
Note:
Today we have two short offerings. Most of our
subscriber base is in the US. The world outside American
boundaries has a different view of the Middle East. The
first offering is from the BBC quoting the International
Red Cross. The second offering is from the Council for
the National Interest.
Also, we know that many of you have cluttered email
boxes. That is why we are now offering a way to by pass
the email box and have Viewpoint and other Gopher
Central publications sent directly to yourdesk top. You
can download this simple application and you will never
have a problem with your ISP blocking Viewpoint again!
Here is the link to download the "Gopher". Let it
"gopher" your Viewpoint...
Aid agency slams Israel barrier -BBC News Online
The International Committee of the Red Cross has
condemned Israel's construction of a West Bank barrier
as "contrary" to international law.
The aid agency said the barrier, whose proposed route
cuts into Arab areas, went "far beyond what is
permissible for an occupying power".
Israel says the barrier is designed to stop suicide
bombers.
But Palestinians dispute the barrier's legality and say
the wall is little more than a land grab.
The ICRC's comments come just days before a hearing at
the International Court of Justice in The Hague on the
legality of the controversial barrier.
Israel says the court does not have the authority to
hold hearings on the barrier.
'Outspoken statement'
The ICRC, a neutral, Swiss-based organisation, has been
observing construction of the security fence.
It says that, where the barrier runs through occupied
territory, thousands of Palestinians have been deprived
of access to water, health care and education.
It has also caused extensive damage to Palestinian land
and property, the agency adds.
"The problems affecting the Palestinian population in
their daily lives clearly demonstrate that it [the wall]
runs counter to Israel's obligation under [international
humanitarian law] to ensure the humane treatment and
well-being of the civilian population living under its
occupation," it said in a statement.
"The ICRC, therefore, calls upon Israel not to plan,
construct or maintain this barrier within occupied
territory."
The organisation stressed that it respected Israel's
right to protect itself and the statement did not call
for a halt to building altogether.
But BBC's Imogen Foulkes in Geneva says it was an
unusually outspoken statement from a normally neutral
body.
The Israeli ambassador to international organisations in
Geneva, Yaakov Levy, told the Associated Press news
agency that Israel "regretted" the ICRC's decision to
criticise the barrier.
"There is a danger that the position presented by the
ICRC will be turned into a political tool against
Israel's measures of self-defence," he said.
**********************************************************
The US Needs to Re-engage in the Peace Process for the
Global Good -CNI
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict remains a global human
concern, and for its own self-interest, the United
States needs to re-engage in the peace process. “What’s
good for the Palestinians could be what’s good for the
region and for humanity,” said Hanan Ashrawi in a rare
appearance on Capitol Hill February 12.
Until the United States re-engages, the Israelis will
fill the political vacuum with unilateral actions. Nor
will the United Nations, the European Union, or Russia
move until the “gatekeeper,” as Ashrawi called the U.S.,
becomes involved. The US alone is capable of holding
Israel accountable for its actions and moving the world
on Middle East peace. Perhaps now is the time for a new
alliance for peace in order to jumpstart the resumption
of the peace process.
Her remarks were addressed to a packed committee room on
the Hill at a “public hearing” on “the Middle East in
Election 2004” sponsored by the Council for the National
Interest and the Palestine Center. The Council has
promoted nationwide a new “regional roadmap to peace in
the Middle East,” based on the need for a new alliance
for peace. Join members of CNI in that campaign by
signing a petition to the President:
http://capwiz.com/cni/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=4031776
“On the ground in Palestine, conditions are extremely
critical,” she told the audience. “The war against
terrorism is [providing] a sort of umbrella for all
sorts of violations and suspension of human rights,
civil rights, global rule of law. We’re seeing the
destruction of multilateral international
organizations.”
Globally, it has popularized extremism and absolutist
ideologies as a means to resolve conflict. God has been
brought into the equation not only by Muslims, but now
Christians and Jews. “A strange ideological alliance
between the Christian right on the one hand, the neocons
on the other has been made – strange bedfellows,
speaking the same language as absolutist ideologues – in
our neck of the woods. This kind of language is not
conducive to reconciliation or peacemaking.”
In the meantime, “the Iraq war has confirmed the worst
fears of the Arabs that the U.S. has encouraged
extremism and violence.”
But “peacemaking and Palestine-Israel have been placed
on a back burner,” as the U.S. has engaged in crisis
management, verbal commitments, and de facto, if not
unconscious, accommodation of Israeli measures. The
vacuum, Ashrawi warned, was bound to be filled by the
Israeli unilateralism – preempting negotiations on
permanent status issues including borders that should be
decided by Palestinians and Israelis together.
The U.S. has a role to play “even if it is not entirely
even-handed,” merely for “the politics of self-interest.
It must realize that the Palestinian question is the
focal question, the most emotive question, the source of
instability and militarism and extremism because it is
the most visible expression of injustice and suffering
and grievances and pain that hasn’t been resolved.”
“Israeli behavior on the ground, in the name of the
U.S., has also formed a great liability for U.S.
standing and interest in the region.”
As for the “Road Map,” which the U.S. introduced last
year, the Israelis issued 14 “reservations,” accepting
only those parts the Knesset approved, but insisting
that the Palestinians follow the “implementation” of the
Map, not the text. There was no monitoring of either,
and although the Palestinians complied fully with the
text of the Road Map, the Israelis accused them of not
following the “implementation of the Road Map.”
Throughout it all, the United States displayed a lack of
political will.
“The Palestinians perceive multiple standards,” she
said, “and there are feelings of injustice and
inequality. There is an overall need to release the
region from the grip of war.
Israeli unilateralism is “rampant,” Ashrawi said. In
addition to the wall, “the Israelis are expanding the
settlements, not restricting them; they say they are
tearing down outposts but in fact allow them to be
rebuilt. More and more roads are being constructed.”
Sharon’s proclaimed “unilateral disengagement” is
typical. If he disengages from Gaza, “not a single
Palestinian would not rejoice at seeing settlements
removed – but there can be no unilateral solution, in
which the will of the powerful is imposed on the weak.
Gaza is the most congested area in the world, and its
people remain dependent on jobs in Israel. The
disengagement there must be tied to disengagement from
the rest of Palestine.”
Most of all, disengagement must occur in the West Bank
where the ideological heart of Palestine lies.
As for the barrier that Israel is constructing, she
believed it will separate Israel from Palestine, but
will still be considered an “apartheid wall, [which
will] render any kind of viable solution impossible.”
Ashrawi felt that the time had come to “work
simultaneously on various fronts.” Palestine should
proceed with elections. There is a special need at this
time for legitimacy through elections. There has been a
rapid disintegration of Palestinian institutions. The
country has been undergoing deliberate de-development.
There has been no intervention to prevent it. The
Palestinian Authority is entirely incapacitated, and she
finds a rise in extremism as a result.
She looked forward to the Arab summit next month, but
feared that the Arab states had learned the wrong lesson
from the Iraq war – that their foreign policies should
be based on friendship with the US rather than on the
legitimate needs of their people.
In the question and answer period, Dr. Ashrawi was asked
about a one-state instead of a two-state solution for
Palestine. She replied that while the Israelis showed
their racism in arguing that the Palestinians are a
demographic threat, she stated she believed a two-state
solution was still possible. “But if there is no
political program for either, we may end up with a de
facto one state solution in one or two generations. Or
we may be condemned to perpetual violence.”
*************************************************************************************
Dr. Hanan Ashrawi spoke during a rare appearance on
Capitol Hill on February 12, 2004 during a Public
Hearing on “The Middle East in Election 2004,” sponsored
by the Council for the National Interest and the
Palestine Center. This hearing was the second of ten
public hearings sponsored by CNI and other organizations
on Washington on the “Middle East in Election 2004.”
*************************************************************************************
|