Month: December 2019

Canada Wants to Be ‘Asset for Israel’ at the UNSC

By Hanna Kawas

Canada Palestine Association has compiled a study of Canada’s 2019 voting record at the United Nations on resolutions that document and censure Israeli violations of international law.

There was much fanfare made about Canada’s orphan “yes” vote at the UN General Assembly this year on “The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination” resolution. But in the broader context of the other 17 resolutions calling out Israel’s war crimes, that Canada either voted against (15) or abstained on (2), this lone vote can only be seen as deceptive and hypocritical.

Justin Trudeau, explaining his government’s vote to Canadian Zionists, stated:

“The government felt that it was important to reiterate its commitment to a two-states-for-two-peoples solution at a time when its prospects appear increasingly under threat”.

However, if the Trudeau government was really committed to a “two-states-for-two-peoples solution”, it is inconceivable that at the same time they also voted against:

  1. A resolution to support the work of the “Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People” that affirms the UN “has a permanent responsibility towards the question of Palestine until the question is resolved in all its aspects”;
  2. The “Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine” resolution that calls “on Member States not to recognize any changes to the pre-1967 borders, including with regards to Jerusalem”;
  3. “The Syrian Golan” resolution that “Demands once more that Israel withdraw from all the occupied Syrian Golan to the line of 4 June 1967 in implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions”;
  4. “Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources” resolution;
  5. The resolution that condemns the “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan” and reaffirms the “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force”; and
  6. The resolution concerning “Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem” that expresses “grave concern about the continuing systematic violation of the human rights of the Palestinian people by Israel”.

And finally, why would Canada vote against a resolution to uphold the rights of “Persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities”, unless it supports Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the West Bank and the “Greater Israel Project”?!

Some observers have speculated that Canada’s lone vote was motivated by Trudeau’s desire to obtain a seat on the UN Security Council. Over a year ago, then Foreign and now Deputy PM Chrystia Freeland was quoted as follows during a visit to Israel:

“She also mentioned Canada’s current bid for one of 10 non-permanent seats on the UN Security Council for 2021-2022, which she hoped would allow Canada to serve as an ‘asset for Israel and… strengthen our collaboration’.”

So, this is what Canada plans to do if it gets sufficient votes for a seat, be an “asset for Israel”?

Canada is relying on the votes, and possible lobbying, of some Arab reactionary regimes to get the backing required for the Security Council seat; one example is Jordan.

Just last month during a visit, “Jordan’s King Abdullah II told Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that the Middle Eastern kingdom supports Canada’s bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council”. This was according to Jordan’s ambassador to Canada, Majed Alqatarneh, who also said Jordan “believes it is important that Canada have a seat on the Security Council”.

Canada also seems to be counting on the support of certain diplomatic circles from the US; former U.S. ambassador to Ottawa, Bruce Heyman stated:

“For me, today, when the U.N. General Assembly is all together, a Canadian seat on the U.N. Security Council is more important than ever”.

We tell Mr. Trudeau that instead of your objective of getting a seat at the UN Security Council, you may end up with a seat in front of the ICC. If the “two-states-for-two-peoples solution…prospects appear increasingly under threat”, it is because of Canada’s (and others) unconditional support for Israeli occupation, war crimes, and apartheid.

Published by The Palestine Chronicle

Canada’s Vote at UN 2019

In addition to Canada’s orphan “yes” vote at the UN General Assembly this year on “The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination” resolution, Canada voted against (15) or abstained on (2) resolutions calling out Israel’s occupation, war crimes and human rights violations.
The lone vote can only be seen as deceptive and hypocritical.

(The UN resolutions database is not fully updated; if needed, please click on the link on “Canada” under any resolution and go to “committee report” for further info.)

  1. A/RES/74/10 Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People 92 in favour to 13 against including Canada, with 61 abstentions.
  2. A/RES/74/11 Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine 147 in favour to 7 against including Canada, with 13 abstentions.
  3. A/RES/74/12 Division for Palestinian Rights of the Secretariat 87 in favour to 23 against including Canada, with 54 abstentions
  4. A/RES/74/13 Special information programme on the question of Palestine of the Department of Global Communications of the Secretariat 144 in favour to 8 against including Canada, with 14 abstentions.
  5. A/RES/74/14 The Syrian Golan 91 in favour to 9 against including Canada, with 65 abstentions.
  6. A/RES/74/75 The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East 152 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, United States), with 24 abstentions.
  7. A/RES/74/83 Assistance to Palestine refugees 169 in favour to 2 against (Israel, United States), with 9 abstentions (Cameroon, Canada, Guatemala, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Vanuatu).
  8. A/RES/74/84 Persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities 162 votes in favour to 7 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, United States), with 11 abstentions.
  9. A/RES/74/85 Operations of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East  167 votes in favour to 6 against (Canada, Israel, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, United States), with 7 abstentions (Australia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Guatemala, Nauru, Rwanda, Vanuatu).
  10. A/RES/74/86 Palestine refugees’ properties and their revenues 163 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, United States), with 12 abstentions.
  11. A/RES/74/87 Work of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories 81 in favour to 13 against including Canada, with 80 abstentions.
  12. A/RES/74/88 Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan 157 in favour to 7 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, United States), with 15 abstentions.
  13. A/RES/74/89 Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem 157 in favour to 9 against (Australia, Canada, Guatemala, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, United States), with 13 abstentions.
  14. A/RES/74/90 The occupied Syrian Golan 157 in favour to 2 against (Israel, United States), with 20 abstentions including Canada. GA/12228
  15. A/RES/74/137  “A global call for concrete action for the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action” 135 in favour to 9 against (Czech Republic, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, United Kingdom, United States), with 43 abstentions
  16. A/RES/74/139 The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination 167 in favour including Canada to 5 against (Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru and the US) with 11 abstentions.
  17. A/RES/74/208 Oil slick on Lebanese shores 162 in favour to 7 against including Canada, with 7 abstentions.
  18. A/RES/74/243 Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources 160 in favour to 6 against (Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, United States), with 15 abstentions.

What is behind Canada’s “orphan vote” at the UN?

by Marion Kawas

Last month, the Canadian government changed its vote at the United Nations Third Committee on a resolution entitled “The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination”, from a “no” vote to a “yes”. That vote was maintained today at the UN General Assembly when it came up for final ratification. However, this single yes vote, or “orphan vote”, is just one of the 20 votes that Canada casts on resolutions regarding Israeli violations of human rights and international law, and support for Palestinians. On all other votes, Canada so far has stuck to its decade-old tradition of steadfast support for Israel at the UN by either voting against or abstaining on these resolutions.

If the Trudeau government really believed in the resolution they just voted “yes” on, why has this not translated into a change on at least some of their other votes as well? Why have they insisted on altering only this vote and going out of their way to assure the Zionist lobby that nothing else will change? Is it political opportunism, and if so, what are the motives?

There has been a lot of speculation that Canada is doing this to try and gain a seat on the UN Security Council in 2020. That analysis does fit with the hype that accompanied the initial vote change, that presented it as something significant and worthy of extended media coverage. Even though it was just a single vote and it was also made abundantly clear from the beginning that no other votes would change. But if it is a Security Council seat that is in play here, who are the advisers or other international players that have assured the Trudeau government that changing just this one vote will suffice? That this will be enough to garner support of sufficient members of the UN when the time comes? That the stink of hypocrisy that floats over changing only this one vote and absolutely no others will be brushed aside?

Along with the Security Council seat, other analysts have suggested the influence of being in a minority government as a factor. And the highlighting of the hypocrisy of the Liberals during the recent election on this issue of their UN voting record by the #IVotePalestine campaign may also have struck a nerve.

It may well be a combination of all of the above and even more that has not yet come to light.

All we can say for sure is that Canada changed one vote, and nothing else. Not only has the overall voting record at the UN remained identical, but Trudeau’s statements on other issues, like the recent protest at York University, have been the predictable regurgitation of the Zionist narrative.

It is important, however, to recognize that the Canadian government can stand up to the Israel lobby when it so wishes and when it suits its interests. It’s just that this behaviour, on the rare occasions that it occurs, is not and has never been predicated on any concern for Palestinian human rights or aspirations, but rather on purely imperial and self-centred motives.

We are left with only one conclusion – that Canada has not changed its policy on Palestine. Period. Although all of us in the solidarity movement are desperate for, and would be uplifted by, a genuine and serious change in Canada’s relentless anti-Palestinian tirade, this is not it.

It is flawed to claim that something is a good step in the right direction, unless it actually is followed by other similar steps on the same path. Otherwise it is simply a one-off exception, and activists need to understand why it is happening and what is the agenda. Liberal politicians in Canada are well-known for playing with the rights and demands of the Palestinian people, and this would not be the first time that such crass opportunism has happened.

Whether Trudeau is desperate for the legacy of the Security Council seat, or is using the tragedy of what the Palestinians suffer on a daily basis to prove he can stand up to Trump, or is trying to cement his standing in the midst of a shaky minority government, it is unconscionable to use the Palestinian people and their over 70 years of dispossession as pawns in his personal chess game. And that is not something for which he deserves any praise.

Article on Mondoweiss

Anti-Palestinian Racism is rampant in aftermath of York Student Protest!

(The coverage of our statement and other updates on Palestine Chronicle).

Last month, Palestinian students and their supporters at York University were thrust into the spotlight after holding a protest against an event that brought former Israeli soldiers to campus. What happened during that evening and the ensuing aftermath have been an eye-opening expose on how the Zionist lobby works to discredit and falsely smear Palestinian activists as “violent” and “anti-Semitic”.  A master class in how alarmist hyperbole, mixed with a dash of blatant fabrications, and then repeated often enough, can become accepted “fact”.

Students Against Israeli Apartheid SAIA-York and the other groups on campus should be commended for not only standing strong despite all the invective thrown at them, but also for forcing the parameters of the follow-up discussion to be broadened. The position of the university administration has changed since the initial reaction, although their false parity of penalizing both SAIA and the Zionist club on campus and their insistence on forced “mediation” is akin to telling Rosa Parks to sit and negotiate with the KKK.

However, York has now also been obliged to call for an independent inquiry into what happened, following a strongly worded letter from Amnesty International. We are certain that if there had not been such significant pushback since day one from so many diverse student and community groups, the university would have proceeded with sanctioning only SAIA and the pro-Palestinian protestors.

We hope that this investigation will deal with the behaviour of Herut Canada and how their Toronto leader, as early as November 22, stated that her security organizer had invited not only the Jewish Defense League, but also “Jewish motorcycle groups” who came out and provided “protection” for the event. Are we to believe that York University, or any post-secondary institute in Canada, approves of student groups bringing members of a motorcycle gang on campus for event security? We can only imagine the howls of indignation if SAIA had invited an “Islamist motorcycle group” (if one existed) to help them with security at their protest.

In fact, one of these biker groups mentioned by the Herut coordinator, Lauren Isaacs, is The Riders of the Covenant. Their FB page states the following: “The ROC seek to unite active, proud motorcycle riders and members of the public in using their combined influence to promote and protect the democratic, Judeo-Christian, civilized western societies way of living.” Really?! This is what York University stands for?

You would expect York University administration to clearly disassociate themselves from such blatant racism, and also denounce those who brought such forces onto campus. But no, they are busy focusing on their phony “facilitated mediation” and bragging about their “commitment to inclusion, respect and diversity”.

Multiple accounts of what happened on November 20th have been published that discredited the Zionist claims; but both the corporate media and politicians, especially PM Justin Trudeau, are maintaining the narrative that it was the student protestors that were “violent” and “anti-Semitic”. Just this past week, Trudeau insisted on repeating his smears during a ceremonial Menorah lighting on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. Lets reflect for a minute on how this seamless transition between a religious ceremony and an attack on students for exercising their democratic rights is considered acceptable. In fact, Trudeau also used the same occasion to declare how his government’s “enduring friendship with Israel remains”, after receiving criticism for his orphan vote at the United Nations Third Committee last month.

And the media. First the fabrications by the Jerusalem Post about who chanted what at the protest and then further inflammatory headlines and articles by the Toronto Sun, part of the PostMedia conglomerate. Both the Post and the Sun were forced to put revisions on at least one of their stories about what happened, and Canada Palestine Association has now submitted a complaint to the National NewsMedia Council about the Sun reporting.

What happened that night at York, and what followed and will still follow, is a critical test for Palestinian solidarity activism in Canada. The Zionist lobby is clearly becoming increasingly desperate and aggressive in its efforts to discredit and remove the Palestinian voice. This is a watershed moment for all activists – either we stand strong together or be prepared to weather the consequences, perhaps for years to come.

The Canadian media and Canadian politicians, including the PM, are as guilty as the Zionist and pro-Israel lobby in promoting anti-Palestinian racism. We in Canada Palestine Association tell all of them that racism against Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims is as repugnant and offensive as any other form of racism.