Canada’s Betrayal of the Palestinian Refugees

We will Regain our Rights
“We Will Regain Our Rights”

By: Hanna Kawas

Zionism is a settler colonialist movement that not only committed genocide against the indigenous people of Palestine, it also uprooted them from their homeland.

My experience as a Palestinian refugee started when I was in my mother’s womb, as Zionist terrorist groups chased my parents out of Yafa (Jaffa) in 1948 where my father was working and my mom was about to deliver their first child. They fled to go live in our hometown of Bethlehem. We were displaced again, a second time, after the Israeli aggression of June 5, 1967. Those pictures of young and old going across what was then called the “Allenby Bridge” was my lived experience.

Since I was a young man, I always dreamed and hoped that I will return to live in my hometown where I was born and raised. In diaspora I still hold on to the deed to our family property in Bethlehem, passed down to me from my grandfather Elias. The simple reason I am not there is that Israel refuses to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their ancestral land and properties, in violation of UN resolution 194. Further relating to my situation, Israel also refuses to allow “Persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities” to return, again according to a UN resolution that is passed annually with a large majority. Canada has also consistently voted against this specific resolution, even though Canada’s stated foreign policy hypocritically claims that “Canada does not recognize permanent Israeli control over territories occupied in 1967 … The Fourth Geneva Convention applies in the occupied territories and establishes Israel’s obligations as an occupying power…”

Israel not only blocks Palestinian refugees from returning, but according to a recent report, studied how to push them out in the first place (otherwise known as planned ethnic cleansing):
“Newly-uncovered documents reveal how Israel established the ‘Professors Committee’ in the days following the occupation to devise policies to pacify the Palestinians and make them leave the West Bank and Gaza permanently.”

I expect such arrogant flaunting of UN resolutions from the supremacist regime Israel that uprooted my people and committed genocide against my nation. But far more upsetting and dehumanizing are the positions of Canada, that played and continues to play a pivotal role in Palestinian dispossession.

The Balfour declaration gave initial British support and the green light for Zionist colonization. Following are just two examples of Canada’s early support to this movement; accordingly, Canada carries direct and moral responsibly for the Palestinian refugee tragedy.

• The late Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King who “was effusive with praise for Zionism when he addressed the Ottawa convention of the Zionist Federation of Canada on 4 July 1922…he applauded Britain efforts (Balfour Declaration) in aid of the Zionist cause.” (Canada and the birth of Israel, David J. Bercuson, page13.

• Lester B. Pearson, Canada’s under secretary of state, was instrumental in ensuring the passage of the U.N. Partition Resolution in 1947 and Supreme Court of Canada Justice, Ivan C. Rand, was a central figure in drafting it… “The Zionists were so grateful to Canada and to Mr. Pearson for the part he played in the whole process that they called him ‘the Balfour of Canada’.” Report of the Canadian Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs published June 1985, page 49.

On May 11/1949, Canada co-sponsored the U.N. General Assembly resolution 273(111) to admit Israel as a state to the U.N. That resolution stated: ” Recalling its resolution of 29 November 1947 (the Partition Plan) and 11 December 1948 (the Right of Return), and taking note of the declaration and explanation made by the representative of the government of Israel before the ad hoc Political committee in respect of the implementation of the said resolutions (my emphasis), the General Assembly … decides to admit Israel into the membership of the United Nations.”

Israel never implemented the Partition Plan nor the Right of Return. Clearly seventy years later, Canada never cared about the implementation of these resolutions, it only cared about admitting Israel to the UN and implementation of the Zionist agenda.

Since the Nakba of 1947/1948, Canada has not missed an opportunity to liquidate the Palestinian Right of Return. Its main objective has always been to “resettle” Palestinian refugees; its contributions to the UNRWA were and are politically motivated, and have always been in the service of western imperial designs. As early as March 25, 1955, before the House of Commons, Leader of the Conservative Opposition John Diefenbaker clearly stated:
“… certainly there is no sorer spot than these camps which, as one visits them and leaves them, cannot help but impress one with the awfulness of the situation in which these people find themselves. The minister mentioned Canada’s contribution, and I think that is one contribution that does leave an impression upon the people who receive it. In addition, it is building a bulwark against the spread of communism in these areas

Eventually realizing that Canada should “cover its tracks” on its policy of resettling Palestinian refugees, the Canadian Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs’ “Report on Canada’s Relations with the countries of the Middle East and North Africa” (June 1985, under the heading “Refugees”, page 115) stated: “The committee would not like to see Canada introduce a ‘designated class’ program for Palestinians as this would be perceived as a political gesture, and Canada’s intentions might be misunderstood in that politically sensitive part of the world.”

This duplicitous policy has continued in the intervening years; here are two examples of the recurring theme of “resettling” Palestinians with a Canadian connection:

• On Jan. 18/ 2001, Agence France Presse(AFP) reported that Palestinian demonstrators in Balata refugee camp near Nablus denounced Canada and Australia for their offer to RESETTLE the Palestinian refugees, and that they burned an effigy of then Foreign Minister John Manley during this protest.

• And most recently, on Sep.4, 2019 the Lebanese paper Al Akbar reported that Canada “has reached an understanding with the United States that it will receive 100,000 Palestinians: 40,000 from Lebanon and another 60,000 from Syria.” Sources in Lebanon were quoted as saying that part of the Trump administration’s ‘Deal of the Century’ aims “to resettle between 75,000 and 100,000 Palestinians in Lebanon and displace the rest to more than one country.” Understandably, the Liberal Canadian government denied it.

Some voices in the Palestinian and Arab community are trying to white-wash the record of the governing Liberal party on Palestinian refugees by highlighting the example of their continued financial support to UNRWA.

This position was also advanced by Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) when they issued a “2019 Elections Guide” which includes their evalution of major Canadian parties on 13 subjects including “Support for Palestinian Refugees”. They gave the Liberal party a “B+” on this subject, with this explanation:
“Harper had also cancelled its funding to UNRWA. Under the Trudeau government, however, this funding has been reinstated. While the Liberals have so far maintained their funding commitments to UNRWA, they have done little to work toward a permanent solution for Palestinian refugees. It is for this reason that the Liberals received a B+.”

Such a position woefully minimizes the dangers of the voting pattern of the Canadian government under the Liberal Party at the UN General Assembly, votes that accurately demonstrate their true position on Palestine. In fact, for the last four years, that pattern was remarkably similar to the Conservative Party “Shameful Record on Palestine”.

Liberal MP Anthony Housefather even bragged about the Liberal record saying: “We have voted against 87% of the resolutions singling out Israel for condemnation at the General Assembly versus 61% for the Harper government…” (Details on the voting records of Harper and Trudeau governments here.)

It is wrong to ignore the Canadian government’s political betrayal of Palestinian refugees as if our cause is simply a charity one. The Palestinian people rejected the Trump’s administration’s $50 billion because it was meant to liquidate national rights. Financial aid to Palestinians is a positive thing only when it is does not accompany the sabotage of their inalienable rights.

The Liberal government’s commitment of $110 million to the UNRWA over four years should not be allowed to buy loyalty to a government that does not miss an opportunity to support Israel and works at every turn to liquidate our legitimate rights and struggles. The Palestinian Right of Return is not for sale the same way Palestine is not for sale!

Finally, as the immortal Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish concluded in his masterpiece “Identity Card”: “Beware, beware of my hunger and anger”.

Published in Palestine Chronicle

Another version published in Mondoweiss

Canada’s Shameful Record on Palestinian Refugees

Canadian Voting Pattern on Palestinian Refugees by the Harper and Trudeau Governments at the UN 2013-2018
Organized by subject heading

Assistance to Palestine refugees

Canadian vote at the UN (under Harper)
A/RES/68/76 (2013), 173 in favour to 1 against ( Israel) with 8 abstentions including Canada
A/RES/69/86 (2014), 163 in favour to 1 against (Israel) with 10 abstentions including Canada

Canadian vote at the UN (under Trudeau)
A/RES/70/83 (2015), 167 in favour to 1 against (Israel) with 11 abstentions including Canada
A/RES/71/91 (2016), 167 in favour to 1 against (Israel) with 9 abstentions including Canada
A/RES/72/80 (2017), 162 in favour to 1 against (Israel) with 12 abstentions including Canada
A/RES/73/92 (2018), 163 in favour to 2 against (Israel, United States) with 13 abstentions including Canada

Persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities

Canadian vote at the UN (under Harper)
A/RES/68/77 (2013), 170 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 6 abstentions
A/RES/69/87 (2014), 165 in favour to 7 against including Canada with 6 abstention

Canadian vote at the UN (under Trudeau)
A/RES/70/84 (2015), 164 in favour to 7 against including Canada with 7 abstentions
A/RES/71/92 (2016), 166 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 6 abstentions
A/RES/72/81 (2017), 158 in favour to 7 against including Canada with 10 abstentions
A/RES/73/93 (2018), 155 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 13 abstentions

Operations of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East

Canadian vote at the UN (under Harper)
A/RES/68/78 (2013), 170 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 6 abstentions
A/RES/69/88 (2014), 166 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 6 abstentions

Canadian vote at the UN (under Trudeau)
A/RES/70/85 (2015), 169 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 5 abstentions
A/RES/71/93 (2016), 167 votes in favour to 6 against including Canada with 5 abstentions
A/RES/72/82 (2017), 162 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 7 abstentions
A/RES/73/94 (2018), 159 in favour to 5 against including Canada with 12 abstentions

Palestine refugees’ properties and their revenues

Canadian vote at the UN (under Harper)
A/RES/68/79 (2013), 172 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 5 abstentions
A/RES/69/89 (2014), 165 in favour to 7 against including Canada with 6 abstentions

Canadian vote at the UN (under Trudeau)
A/RES/70/86 (2015), 167 in favour to 7 against including Canada with 4 abstentions
A/RES/71/94 (2016), 165 in favour to 7 against including Canada with 5 abstentions
A/RES/72/83 (2017), 159 in favour to 7 against including Canada with 9 abstentions
A/RES/73/95 (2018), 156 in favour to 6 against including Canada with 14 abstentions

IHRA Definition is an Assault on the Palestinian Community

null
Update:
In a vote of 6-5 (the dissenting 5 were all NPA councillors), the … Read more

null
Update:
In a vote of 6-5 (the dissenting 5 were all NPA councillors), the Vancouver City Council did not adopt the motion and referred it to committee for recommendations on how to combat all forms of racism. Councillor Michael Wiebe was quoted as saying that “we need a policy that tackles all forms of racism, including white supremacy. It’s too important to get this wrong.”
For detailed background on the campaign and the vote, check the Mondoweiss article:
In victory for activists, Vancouver city council votes against adopting IHRA antisemitism definition
By Marion Kawas.
——————————–
The following letter was sent today to Vancouver City Councillors and Mayor, regarding an upcoming and dangerous motion to adopt the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism. We have been moved and encouraged by the grassroots opposition to this motion from a broad cross-section of people in Vancouver, and encourage everyone to send an email to Council or sign up to be a speaker (instructions here). A special thanks to COPE, who have endorsed the campaign against the motion and asked everyone to help in defeating it. Join us to tell Vancouver City Council to not set “…a precedent as being the first municipal council in Canada to be openly complicit in chilling free speech, eviscerating the Palestinian people’s narrative and promoting anti-Palestinian racism.”

Dear Councillor:

I am writing to you as a Canadian Palestinian and the chairperson of Canada Palestine Association-Vancouver. I have lived much of my adult life in Greater Vancouver after first immigrating here in 1974, and like the rest of my community, have struggled to live in dignity while navigating and going beyond the difficulties of immigrant life. My daughter and granddaughter were both raised here, and currently reside in East Vancouver.
I’m asking you to oppose the motion, ‘Combatting Antisemitism in Vancouver’, by councillor Kirby-Yung, coming before council on July 23. This motion if passed will make us feel unwelcome in this city and tell us our voices are not valued.
As Palestinians, most of us are not here by choice; we have been dispossessed from our ancestral homeland and forced to find refuge wherever we could. We have been cast to the four corners of the world; my own extended family has members in multiple countries. I hold the deed to our family’s property in Bethlehem, my birthplace; but due to Israeli policies that are supported by Canada, in flagrant violation of the UN resolution reaffirmed annually, I am not allowed to live there. Why? Because I am a Palestinian Christian and a 1967 war refugee. This motion if passed will tell me that I am not allowed to criticize the very ideology, Zionism, that resulted in the dispossession of my family and my nation; that is both unfair and equally racist in itself.
You may have been led to believe that this motion will aid in the struggle against anti-Semitism. What you may not have heard is that this motion will also end up contributing to another form of racism, anti-Palestinian racism. It is flawed to claim that you are fighting against one form of racism by reinforcing another one; we must unite to fight against all forms of racism.
You may have also been told that this is just a “non-legally” binding motion but it has been made clear that passing this motion is just the beginning of a process. Bnai Brith has already put on record that the Canadian government’s initial adoption was a good first step, but must be followed by enforcement protocols. “We will be looking for concrete actions, however, to give its implementation substance and meaning. B’nai Brith will be writing to (Pablo) Rodriguez and his colleagues to reiterate our specific ideas on how that can be done.”
This is the same B’nai Brith that slandered me, along with my Jewish friend Sid Shniad, in its 2016 yearly report on Antisemitic Incidents (Academic Antisemitism section), and completely misrepresented what was said at a joint workshop we presented in October 2016. The workshop was part of a broader Genocide Conference at SFU Vancouver Campus and was delivered to a full house, despite pressure to have it cancelled. This is just one local example of erroneous judgement on what constitutes anti-Semitism and demonstrates how legitimate political discourse about Israel is targeted.
As the BC Civil Liberties Association noted in their opposition to the IHRA definition: “We fear that if adopted, the IHRA definition will serve to severely chill political expressions of criticism of Israel as well as support for Palestinian rights.”
Most of our community is already terrorized by anti-immigrant, anti-Palestinian or anti-Muslim rhetoric. Some are even hesitant to admit their heritage to others, afraid that it may hinder their job prospects or relationships. Passing this dangerous and unnecessary motion will only further that alienation; what a crime that a child has to see their parent hide from the world who they are and where they came from. Not from shame, but from fear.
If this IHRA definition is passed by Council, and Palestinians in the future are told to limit or dismiss their lived history, then our worst fears have been realized. Vancouver City Council will then go down in history as setting a precedent as being the first municipal council in Canada to be openly complicit in chilling free speech, eviscerating the Palestinian people’s narrative and promoting anti-Palestinian racism.

Hanna Kawas
Chair, Canada Palestine Association

Is Cuba normalizing settler colonialism in Palestine?

null
New articles in Mondoweiss and Palestine Chronicle
“Cuba ShouldRead more

null
New articles in Mondoweiss and Palestine Chronicle
“Cuba Should Not Normalize with Israeli Settler Colonialism”
By Hanna Kawas & Marion Kawas

With sadness and outrage, we recently learnt from the Israeli press about the visit of the Jewish National Fund (KKL-JNF) delegation to Cuba.
At the beginning of 2018, we became aware of some incidents indicating that Cuba might be on the road of normalizing relations with Israeli apartheid. Out of respect for Cuba’s image, and the rift this might cause with the progressive Palestinian struggle for liberation and its supporters, we pursued our concerns privately with a letter addressed to Cuban officials. Although we did not receive even an acknowledgment of our letter, we were not aware of any further normalization actions since that time. Until now.
With this latest news about Cuba normalizing with the most racist Zionist institution, the JNF, that was responsible for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, the theft of their land and destruction of their habitat and environment, we feel compelled to release the letter we sent on January 31, 2018 under the title “Expanding Cuba-Israel Relations”.

——————————-
Dear Friends:

As long-time supporters of Cuban-Palestinian relations and admirers of the example and spirit of the Cuban people and their revolution, it is with a heavy heart that we are forced to write this letter. We are approaching you privately about this issue, rather than publicly, out of concern for the wellbeing of the progressive movement and our common struggles. In October, 2017 Israeli Culture Minister Miri Regev (who is a documented neofascist) was reported as travelling to Cuba, the first Israeli cabinet minister to do so since 1973. This strange news forced us to do more research which revealed a distressing and disturbing trend in the last few months of new expanding Cuban-Israeli cultural and business relations. Along with Regev’s trip, most of these fall into the category of being “the first of its kind” in four decades or longer.

For example on the cultural front:
In early November, Cuba’s famed Lizt Alfonso Dance Company gave four sellout performances at the Tel Aviv Opera House, followed by concerts in Ashdod, Jerusalem, and Haifa. It was the first cultural visit of its kind to Israel in four decades. Cuba’s famous Buena Vista Social Club also made a tour of Israel in late December, 2017.

And on the business front:
On Nov. 9, the Israel-Latin America Chamber of Commerce held a “Doing Business in Cuba” seminar in Tel Aviv. Attended by 40 or so Israeli business executives, the three-hour briefing, presented in Hebrew, was a prelude to the planned visit to Cuba of an Israeli trade delegation this December. And indeed the Israeli trade delegation made their trip to Cuba Dec. 5-7, 2017 where according to CamaraIsrael:
“The Israel-Latin America Chamber of Commerce, for the first time in its history, sent a delegation of businessmen to Cuba. The delegation was received by the Cuban official bureau at a festive ceremony and a business seminar with the government officials at the National Hotel.”
We are also aware that former Israeli general and war criminal Rafael Eitan, who has had private business interests in Cuba for over 20 years, has been credited with helping to facilitate this new state-to-state Cuban-Israeli exchange.

We are sure you know about the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement that calls for both a cultural and business boycott of Israel. We know that the Oslo accords and the behaviour of the current “Palestinian Authority”, that dropped the anti-colonialist struggle from its agenda, has set the bar low, very low, regarding what kind of support is needed. And we realize that the impact of the economic blockade on Cuba, as well as the recent damage from Hurricane Irma, has been devastating. But we also know that Cuba and its people have a long history of principled positions even when such decisions are difficult or carry a pricetag.
The picture at the top of this letter is from the December 2017 trade delegation visit and is a chilling visual for all progressives. We are aware that Cuba’s position on the political front is always supportive of the Palestinian cause, but as the beacon of progressive action in Latin America, we urge you to ensure that Cuba’s deeds on all fronts line up with your political support as it did with the anti colonialist struggles in Southern Africa. We beseech you, in the name of the Palestinian struggle, in the name of the unity of two steadfast peoples, to investigate these recent actions and take steps to ensure that such exchanges are not repeated and go no further. Please do not develop any ties with what the late and beloved Fidel Castro in 2014, when referencing Israel, called a “new, repugnant form of fascism”.

In Solidarity,
Hanna Kawas, Chairperson
Canada Palestine Association

Ohad Naharin…Real Solidarity starts with BDS!

Ohad Naharin – Charity is not Solidarity!
By Marion Kawas

Recent articles… Read more

Ohad Naharin – Charity is not Solidarity!
By Marion Kawas

Recent articles in the Israeli media have highlighted a controversy surrounding renowned Israeli choreographer Ohad Naharin, former artistic director of Batsheva and recently also connected with Ballet BC in Canada.
He made comments on Israeli military radio leading up to a fundraiser for the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, which he was promoting. And although his comments are not new, the reaction to them by current Culture Minister Miri Regev and other right-wing Israelis was more virulent than in the past. So, this new brouhaha might be based more on the growing dichotomy within Israeli politics, and between liberal Zionists and the more extremist Zionists. (And a quick note to Miri Regev, who is threatening to withdraw Israeli state funding for presumably the Batsheva dance company and others who don’t pass the “cultural loyalty” test, please go ahead.)
Ohad Naharin, to sum up, criticizes the occupation and says he WOULD support BDS if he felt it would help Palestinians or end the occupation. But before the Haaretz headline of “Israeli top dancer accused of supporting BDS..” gives one renewed hope, read what the article also quoted him saying on May 26, 2019:
“The Batsheva Dance Company often faces BDS protests and demonstrations when it performs abroad. I’ve always said and I’ll continue saying that this doesn’t help the Palestinians and won’t result in anything,” Naharin said.
“I explicitly said I don’t support BDS, but I can relate to its agenda against the occupation. It’s pretty sad, a lot of energy is invested in a boycott that doesn’t help promote a solution to ending the occupation,” Naharin said.
“I didn’t voice support for BDS, but rather against the occupation. I’ve said that many times before and in even harsher terms,” Naharin added.
So lets unpack this trend of liberal Zionists (and other artists) who claim to support Palestinians but refuse to honour the one request Palestinian civil society has made of them. But of course, like all good liberals, they know better than the oppressed indigenous people what is needed and what is the right tactics and strategies. Mandatory to this approach is also to pledge money to an organization that gives one the cover of not just talking the talk but in this case, allegedly dancing the dance.
Two years ago, leading activist groups in North America called out Naharin on precisely these points in a statement issued by Adalah NY, regarding the tour of the Israeli Batsheva Ballet Company. They told him that his comments originally gave people hope but then his actions did not follow through. They told him that as an international figure, he could make a difference. They noted: “Brand Israel is an effort to show ‘Israel’s prettier face,’ as stated by Arye Mekel of Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Unfortunately, your inaction is part of what has allowed for the most right-wing government in Israel, now supported by the most right-wing government in the United States. With the oppression of the Palestinian people growing even worse than before, it is time to take a principled position by no longer allowing your government to use your name to whitewash occupation.”
And then recently he became involved with Ballet BC and is one of several Israeli choreographers connected with that dance company. Is it just a coincidence that in January of this year, for the first time ever, Ballet BC went to Israel and performed in Tel Aviv? If one really believed in helping the Palestinians, could his influence not have been used to dissuade other performers from going on inaugural trips to Israel at this critical juncture? Could he not have spoken out about what a dangerous precedent this was? Or like all good liberals, he would tell us this “building bridges” through music and dance is somehow going to benefit the most vulnerable Palestinians?
Here are a few simple points for such famous artists who could actually do something significant and take a stand for Palestinian rights. One, charity is not solidarity. Two, you do not know better than the people living under the boot of Israeli oppression what is needed for their liberation. This is the worst kind of supremacism. You are not entitled to tell even the smallest child in Gaza or Khan al-Amar or a refugee camp what is good (or not good) for them. If you can’t support the one non-violent tactic of BDS that has been requested of you, then step aside and don’t tell us how you want to help the Palestinians. As a person of privilege and resources, the minimum needed is to honour the Palestinian picket line. Otherwise, Mr. Gaga, get off the stage and let more genuine voices speak about solidarity with Palestinians.

Published in Palestine Chronicle under the title:
Ohad Naharin, Charity Is Not Solidarity!