Open Letter to Solicitor General of Canada Re: Banning of Palestinian Groups

Today, six B.C. groups sent the following letter to the Honorable Wayne Easter, Solicitor General of Canada, regarding his announcement last week about the banning of three Palestinian organizations. They stated: “We…denounce this biased and politically motivated announcement, the timing of which…was highly questionable.” The groups were Canada Palestine Association, International Solidarity Movement-Vancouver, No One Is Illegal-Vancouver, Palestine Community Centre, Palestine Solidarity Group and Stopwar.ca. Please find more relevant articles below about the banning of Muslim and Palestinian groups.

Dear Mr. Easter,

The recent banning by the Canadian government of three Palestinian organizations, including the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), is just the latest example of this government’s support for Israeli aggression, occupation and injustice against the Palestinian, Arab and Muslim peoples. It is also an extension of the U.S. anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim policies that have been implemented since September 11, 2001.

We, as groups that support Palestinian rights, denounce this biased and politically motivated announcement, the timing of which, just before a governmental transfer of power, was highly questionable. We believe that such a move will most likely increase the hatred in the Middle East toward the western world. Western governments, led by the U.S., are already perceived as being interested in only controlling the region and its resources, and as callous powers that are imposing despotic dictatorships on the people of the Middle East, dictatorships that are acting as puppets for the West with no regard to human rights, democracy or freedom.

The banned organizations are part of the Palestinian liberation movement, recognized not only by the UN, but also by the majority of world public opinion. These organizations, despite differences in tactics, are part of the Palestinian struggle for freedom, liberation and democracy and two of them are long-time members of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

While 59 per cent of European public opinion considers Israel the main country on the planet that threatens world peace, the Canadian government rewards Israeli aggression by striking at the “enemies” of Israel. The Canadian government is also continuing its economic support of Israel through the Canada-Israel free trade agreement, and the financial support and tax-deductible status the Zionist organizations enjoy and use, even though this helps the illegal settlements.

The political support of the Canadian government is long standing, goes back to even before the creation of the state of Israel, and is well-documented at the UN where Canada, alongside the U S, always protected Israel from any meaningful resolution that would hurt it economically or politically. These policies are motivated by the self-interest of our government’s politicians, who, in this respect, would seem to have no regard for international law, human rights or morality.

Israel, since before its official inception, has recruited Canadians (against Canadian Law, the Foreign Enlistment Act, and under the noses of successive Canadian governments) to go and participate in the killing of Palestinians and Arabs.

Some Canadian Zionist papers even boast about this and give recruitment figures. Israeli death squads have assassinated people, including Canadians, all over the world. The Israeli Mossad has used Canadian passports and Israeli agents have posed as Canadians to recruit Palestinian informants and collaborators.

Israel, its security agencies, its military and the settlers are the ones who should be put on the terrorist list, if Canadian foreign policy is indeed evenhanded. Amnesty International has charged Israel with “war crimes” in its recent actions in the Rafah area of Gaza. Where is our government’s action to respond to these outrages?

The Palestinians and their children are being terrorized daily, their homes and fields are being destroyed, their leaders are being murdered without any due process and their lands are being stolen. Israeli warplanes and tanks are attacking Palestinian civilian areas, killing the civilian population, including young children. Collective punishment is terrorism, building the Apartheid Wall is terrorism. So who should be on the terrorist list?

The Canadian government’s banning of these organizations gives a license to de-legitimize the Palestinian struggle and its Canadian support base. This will lead to further persecution and fear amongst Canadian supporters and escalate the racism, stereotyping and unwarranted arrests against many Palestinian and Arab-Canadians.

These Canadian government policies will endanger the strategic interests of the Canadian people for generations to come and do a disservice to international law and human rights. We, as organizations concerned for justice for the Palestinian people and for peace in the region and the whole world, urge the Canadian government to stop going down the path of McCarthyism at home and of supporting aggression, occupation and human rights violations abroad.

We also pledge our support to the just struggle of the Palestinian people for freedom and self- determination, and pledge to expose the Canadian government’s immoral and inhuman stand against the Palestinians to the Canadian public.

See also our Open Letter to the Canadian Prime Minister Regarding the Banning of Moslem Organizations on Dec. 11, 2002


September 7, 2002, published in the National Post author Stewart Bell
Ottawa to ban Palestinian group
Follows Jewish lobbying: Cabinet to double number of entities covered by terror law

The federal Cabinet is expected to outlaw a Palestinian militant group and up to a half-dozen other terrorist organizations under its new anti-terrorism law this fall, the National Post has learned. The names of as many as seven terrorist groups slated for legal sanctions were expected to be approved by ministers in Ottawa over the next few weeks, making it illegal for them to operate in Canada. It is not known which Palestinian group is to be added to the list but the most likely candidates are Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). All are hardline Islamic terrorist organizations that have dispatched suicide bombers and gunmen into Israel to kill civilians. Their aim is to destroy Israel through a relentless campaign of random violence.
The decision will likely anger Muslim extremists but will be welcomed by Canadian Jewish organizations, which have appealed to Ottawa in recent weeks to put the main instigators of Palestinian terrorism on the list. The Canadian government passed an anti-terrorism law last December that allows it to produce a list of what it calls “entities knowingly engaged in terrorist activity” whose operations are banned under the Criminal Code. But so far only al-Qaeda and six affiliated Islamic terrorist groups have been put on the list: Egyptian Al Jihad, Algerian Armed Islamic Group, Vanguards of Conquest, Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, Salifist Group for Call and Combat and al-Ittihad al-Islam.

Canada’s most prominent Jewish organizations want the list expanded to include Palestinian groups that target Israel and Jews around the world. “There is certainly as much proof of terrorist activity attached to groups such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, PFLP and the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade as there is for al-Qaeda,” said David Matas, senior legal counsel for B’nai Brith Canada.

“In fact, these groups boast openly about their atrocities.”

Lawrence MacAulay, the Solicitor-General, announced the first round of designations on July 23, saying he wanted Canadians to be fully aware that the organizations were engaged in terrorism. “People might happen to be dealing with these entities and not be aware that they are terrorist groups. What we’re saying today is these are terrorist groups. They’re listed under the Criminal Code. If you deal with them, assist them in any way, you’re breaking the law and we’re going to come after you.” Officials say the process of placing terrorist organizations on the list is time-consuming; a stack of documentation several feet high is required to justify each of the designations.
Federal agencies involved in national security compile reports on terrorist groups and forward them to the Solicitor-General, who then brings them to Cabinet for approval. Each report forwarded to Cabinet is said to be as long as 70 pages, with thousands of pages of appendices. The Post has requested copies of the reports under the Access to Information Act but the government has said they cannot be released because they are Cabinet confidences. Those named on the list face criminal sanctions. Anyone who knowingly participates in activity that enhances the group’s ability to conduct terrorism could be arrested and prosecuted. Those named on the list could also have their property and assets seized.

While a Palestinian group is among the next batch going forwarded, it is possible delays could hold up the process. The government wants each of the designations to be carefully backed up by detailed documentation in case the Cabinet decisions are challenged in court. The designation of al-Qaeda has not been challenged but those sympathetic to Palestinian militant groups might try to stop Canada from outlawing such groups as Hamas.

Although Canada has not yet outlawed any Palestinian groups, it has ordered banks to freeze the assets of several anti-Israeli groups, including Hamas, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, PFLP and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. But Ottawa has frozen the accounts of only the military wing of the terrorist group Hezbollah, drawing complaints from Jewish groups who argue there is no distinction between the armed and political wings of the organization. Hamas and other Palestinian groups have some support among militant Muslims in Canada, including on university campuses. The Post reported last month that the Web site of a Concordia University Muslim student group was providing a platform for the justification of Palestinian suicide terrorism. The material was removed after a complaint from B’nai Brith.

The Post also reported that intelligence information collected by the FBI indicated that Hamas had been collecting money in Canada since the early 1990s. Several prominent Muslim organizations with offices in Canada have solicited donations to the Holy Land Foundation, a Texas charity shut down by U.S. authorities last year for allegedly financing Hamas.

© Copyright 2002 National Post


December 12, 2002, published in the Globe and Mail. author Jeff Sallot
Hezbollah ban attacked as biased Canadian Arabs say Israeli settlements should also be seen as type of terrorism

Angrily reacting to a ban on the Lebanese group Hezbollah, Canadian Arabs say the government should also outlaw fundraising for Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory. “Illegal Israeli settlements and destruction of Palestinian villages are terrorism against the Palestinian people,” Mazen Chouaib, the executive director of the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations, said yesterday.

The Jewish National Fund, B’nai Brith Canada and other groups that support the Israeli settlements should be subject to the same kind of restrictions on activities now faced by Hezbollah, he said. Mr. Chouaib said the ban on Hezbollah will stigmatize Canadians of Arab and Muslim background and make them feel like “criminals or second-class citizens.

” Facing intense pressure from the Canadian Alliance in Parliament and national Jewish lobby groups, the government reversed course and outlawed fundraising and all other material support for Hezbollah under antiterrorism laws. Until yesterday, the government restricted activities in support of only the military wing of the group. Ottawa allowed Hezbollah’s political wing to raise money in Canada for schools, clinics and other social services in war-ravaged southern Lebanon. Solicitor-General Wayne Easter said yesterday that Hezbollah has been raising large sums in Canada that have not all gone to charitable work. Mr. Easter also announced a ban on Aum Shinrikyo, the Japanese doomsday cult responsible for a 1995 poison-gas attack on the Tokyo subway, and the Kurdistan Workers Party, which attacked Turkish and Greek government offices in Canada in 1999. Mr. Easter was unable to cite examples of any activities in Canada by supporters of Aum Shinrikyo, the first group banned by Ottawa that is not based in the Middle East. The federal law is intended to combat terrorism globally, not just in Canada, Mr. Easter noted.

Yesterday’s announcement brings to 16 the total number of groups banned under the government’s new antiterrorism law since July. Conviction for assisting a banned group can bring a prison term of up to 10 years. Mr. Chouaib said it has always been a myth that Hezbollah raised large sums in Canada. The reality is that many Canadians of Lebanese descent send small sums directly to family members back

home and donations to schools and orphanages in their old villages, he said. “Hezbollah has no branches, representatives or fundraising activity in Canada,” Mr. Chouaib said. By contrast, Mr. Chouaib said, Jewish groups openly support Israeli settlers who have been responsible for destroying Palestinian villages. There is no valid comparison, B’nai Brith lawyer David Matas said. People can debate whether or not building Israeli settlements in Gaza and the West Bank is a good policy, but these are not the acts of terrorism contemplated in the new federal law, Mr. Matas said.

B’nai Brith’s lawsuit against the federal government may have forced Ottawa’s hand, Mr. Matas said. B’nai Brith sought a Federal Court order to require Ottawa to disclose its files on Hezbollah. Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham said Canada is reversing its policy on Hezbollah because of recent calls by the group’s leader for suicide bombings. He previously said Canada would deal with the Hezbollah political wing as part of the elected Lebanese parliament.

Ori Tannenbaum, an Israeli whose father was reportedly kidnapped by Hezbollah more than two years ago, appealed to the federal government to apply pressure to the Lebanese government to locate and free his father.


This is how the Canada government changed its policy into classifying the Hezbollah as a terrorist group. Not only was Canada pressured by a lawsuit from the B’nai Brith of Canada, it was also deceived by media reports. A journalist named Sayed Anwar, reporting from Jerusalem for the Washington Times wrote that the Hezbollah sheik Nasrallah said some nasty things like: “Suicide bombings should be exported outside Palestine”, and “I encourage Palestinians to take suicide bombings worldwide, don’t be shy about it.” The ominous quotes were picked up and reported widely in the Canadian media.

The Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister, Bill Graham, quoted them often as the reason for the government making a policy shift in declaring the Hezbollah as a terrorist group. But the problem is that sheik Nasrallah never made those comments and the reporter “Sayed Anwar” simply does not exist. In fact, “Sayed Anwar” is really the zionist Paul Martin, who writes from London, England, not Jerusalem. He has written many anti-Palestine propaganda pieces under the fraudulent name of “Sayed Anwar”, never revealing that it was a pseudonym.
Sometimes, the Washington Times would carry stories by both Anwar and Martin in the same issue. Paul Martin was exposed several months ago and one can check the exposure on the internet in politically incorrect websites. A pity the Canadian mainstream media and the government bureaucrats never found out in time.

After the announcement on the policy shift was made, Neil Macdonald reported the “Sayed Anwar” fraud on the CBC’s The National. Transcripts are shown below, for the video clip, click here.


Transcript host Peter Mansbridge, December 11, 2002, CBC TV, The National
Ottawa put Hezbollah on list of banned organizations
What was said by Hezbollah’s Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah

PETER MANSBRIDGE: Tonight. Banned.

BILL GRAHAM (Minister of Foreign Affairs): We will be sending a signal to Hezbollah.

MANSBRIDGE: After months of pressure, Ottawa has put Hezbollah on its list of banned organizations. Why now? Eric Sorensen reports from Ottawa. Neil MacDonald is in Beirut. Intercepted and released. A ship carrying North Korean missiles is straining relations between the US and a Mideast ally. One hundred million dollar scam. Did Enron trick Revenue Canada and walk away with the cash? And order of battle.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: What you’re seeing is a classic military build-up.

MANSBRIDGE: Twelve years after taking on Iraq, the United States looks poised to strike again. How will it wage war this time?

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: In a way, we’re trying to use huge military invasion forces to produce a coup d’etat.

MANSBRIDGE: A feature report.

ANNOUNCER: “The National.” From the Canadian Broadcasting Centre, here is Peter Mansbridge. Ottawa put Hezbollah on list of banned organizations

PETER MANSBRIDGE: Good evening. It is a controversial policy decision. Slap a complete ban on the Lebanese group Hezbollah. Today the federal government made the move, outlawing the group in Canada. Ottawa has been under pressure to act for months, so why the change now? What was the catalyst? In essence, the decision was driven by an incendiary quote attributed to the leader of Hezbollah. That quote, however, is questionable, the source suspect. That investigative story from Neil MacDonald in a moment. First, though, here is Eric Sorensen with the ban and the battle to get it imposed.

ERIC SORENSEN (Reporter): The latest in a series of pressure tactics turned out to be overkill. Ori Tannenbaum, his father reportedly held captive by Hezbollah, arrived from Israel to press Ottawa to ban the pro-Palestinian group. The government had already done so two hours earlier.

WAYNE EASTER (Solicitor General): This decision is made on the basis of sound criminal and security intelligence information and in no way is due to political pressure from anywhere.

SORENSEN: But there had been pressure from the Canadian Alliance in the House of Commons to B’nai Brith in the courts. Today the Jewish lobby group dropped its lawsuit to have Hezbollah outlawed.

FRANK DIMANT (B’nai Brith Canada): Canadians as a whole do not want terrorists operating in this country. It was the voice of Canadians that made the difference in this case.

SORENSEN: Three groups – Hezbollah, Aum Shinri Kyo which carried out the serin gas attack in Tokyo, and the Kurdistan Workers Party which launched attacks mainly in Turkey – have been added to a list that now total sixteen organizations. It is illegal to belong to or to aid the groups banned under Canada’s new anti-terror law. Until today, Ottawa had only banned Hezbollah’s military wing, which had been linked to such acts as the US marine barracks bombing in Lebanon. Hezbollah’s social political wing was allowed to operate and raise money in Canada for education and charities. Ottawa re-assessed after Hezbollah leader Sheikh Nasrallah was recently quoted calling on Palestinians to take a terror campaign worldwide.

BILL GRAHAM (Minister of Foreign Affairs): It was clear from the leaders comments the other day that, in fact, it was not distinguishing itself from terrorist activities.

SORENSEN: The Minister of Foreign Affairs says Ottawa’s decision sends a message about terrorism and inciting terrorism.

GRAHAM: I think it will be sending a signal to Hezbollah that its affirmation of the use of terrorism as an international instrument is not acceptable.

SORENSEN: But others say Nasrallah’s rhetoric is nothing new and accused Ottawa of looking for an excuse to take action. This Arab community spokesperson says Ottawa simply caved in to political pressure.

RAJA KHOURI (Canadian Arab Federation): It’s unfortunate to see a major policy such as this one shift based on political considerations as opposed to real security concerns.

SORENSEN: As for the impact of the ban, one Arab group says it will block the charitable work done by Hezbollah, but the Canadian Jewish Congress says what will be blocked is fundraising for military activities. They may both be right. Eric Sorensen, CBC News, Ottawa. What was said by Hezbollah’s Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah

PETER MANSBRIDGE: Well now to that crucial quote, the one that helped kickstart the change in Canadian policy and attributed to Hezbollah’s Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah. The CBC’s Middle East correspondent Neil MacDonald went to Beirut to investigate what was said and what was not. Here’s his revealing report.

NEIL MACDONALD (Reporter): This unremarkable cleric enjoys legendary status in the Arab world. The man whose fighters drove Israel out of Lebanon. Israel and its supporters, though, regard Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah as a cold-blooded terrorist and say his own words have now provided the proof. Certainly the quotes attributed to him last week and reported widely in most Canadian media were ominous. “Suicide bombings should be exported outside Palestine”, he was reported to have said. “I encourage Palestinians to take suicide bombings worldwide, don’t be shy about it.” Canadian Jewish groups and their allies immediately pressed their demand that Canada classify Hezbollah as a terrorist group. Ottawa resisted doing that, given that Hezbollah also runs a social network with projects like this one which retrains and offers work to disabled Lebanese. Hassan Nasrallah’s heavily reported new quotes merely had an impact. The only problem is there is simply no evidence Hassan Nasrallah ever made a speech promoting global suicide attacks. There is no record of such a speech here, and there would be. It was not broadcast on Hezbollah’s television station, as was reported. Hezbollah, which vigorously publicizes Nasrallah’s every word, says the remarks were never uttered and the Canadian embassy in Beirut has tried and failed to document the quotes. The story originated not in the Middle East but in London, with this man. Paul Martin freelances for “The Washington Times,” a right wing newspaper owned by the Unification Church. He cannot back up the quotes his story attributes to Nasrallah. Nevertheless, he believes he understands Nasrallah’s true agenda.

PAUL MARTIN (The Washington Times): Nasrallah said we look at America as the enemy of this nation. He then adds, we will fight the enemy or them anywhere and everywhere and says that we need to work on the culture of suicide missions.

MACDONALD: There is nothing new in Nasrallah’s support for Palestinian tactics in the occupied territories and in Israel. Just recently, Nasrallah praised Palestinians he says are, quote, “willing to sacrifice themselves fighting Israel with whatever weapon”, suicide bombs included. But, says Hezbollah legislator Mohammed Raad, Nasrallah has specifically instructed that Hezbollah’s fight with Israel is military in nature and not to be taken outside the region. Raad says “The Washington Times” story about exporting attacks as part of a propaganda orchestrated by America’s pro-Israel right wing. Indeed, there does seem to be a theme to “Washington Times” stories. Earlier this year, the paper ran a report by a reporter named Sayed Anwar accusing Palestinian Muslims of raping, executing and extorting Christians in Bethlehem. When the story was questioned, Sayed Anwar turned out to be a fictitious name. A composite for Paul Martin and two of his researchers. Martin refused to discuss that incident on camera. Ottawa now knows that the Nasrallah quotes in the “Washington Times” about exporting suicide attacks were almost certainly never uttered. Of course what this all really boils down to is the old question of what constitutes terrorism. Is Hezbollah a national liberation movement or, as Israel and its supporters maintain, a murderous global menace? To a great many people in this part of the world, to label Hezbollah a terrorist organization is to choose sides in the defining conflict of the Middle East, an intensely political decision for any government. Neil MacDonald, CBC News, Beirut.


December 13, 2002 The Electronic Intifada by Nigel Parry False
Washington Times report convinces Canada to ban Hezbollah


November 14, 2003, The Ottawa Citizen, by Janice Tibbetts
Three Palestinian groups added to blacklist
Organizations blamed for hijackings of cruise ship, airliners

Three Palestinian groups were blacklisted yesterday as terrorist organizations, bringing to 34 the number of groups banned by the Canadian government. The three groups are the Palestine Liberation Front, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, General Command. All seek to destroy Israel and form an independent Palestinian state.
“The government of Canada has determined that these entities knowingly engaged in terrorist activity,” Solicitor General Wayne Easter said in a statement. “Any person or group that is listed may have its assets seized or forfeited.”

Under the 2001 Anti-Terrorism Act, the federal cabinet is allowed to keep a list of terror groups whose activities are deemed criminal. Being listed makes it a crime to participate in these groups, contribute to them or assist in their activities. The federal government describes the 42-year-old Palestine Liberation Front as “a small, armed splinter group” linked to the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
“During its most active period, it is known to have conducted several high-profile attacks, including the operation for which it is best known, the October 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro,” says the solicitor general’s website. The Italian cruise ship was hijacked in the Mediterranean Sea by four hijackers, armed with guns and explosives. They killed one passenger, disabled American Jew Leon Klinghoffer, and demanded the release of 50 Palestinians held in Israeli prisons.

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) is blamed for hijacking an El Al flight en route from Rome to Tel Aviv in 1968, and more recently, car bombings and suicide bombings in Israel, and the assassination of Israeli tourism minister Rehavam Ze’evi. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, General Command’s activities also include an airline hijacking in the 1970s.

© Copyright 2003 The Ottawa Citizen


November 13, 2003, Canadian Press
Canada adds three Palestinian groups to list of outlawed terror organizations

The federal government has added three Palestinian groups to its list of terrorist organizations banned from operating in Canada. The Palestine Liberation Front, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the PFLP-General Command all “knowingly engaged in terrorist activity,” Solicitor General Wayne Easter said in a news release Thursday. There are now 34 groups listed under Canada’s
Anti-Terrorism Act, meaning they are banned from activities in Canada. “The assessment process for more listing continues,” Easter added. Listed organizations may have their assets seized, and anyone belonging to or having dealings with them faces penalties ranging up to 10 years in jail.

The controversial Anti-terrorism Act was born out of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. Groups can appeal for removal from the list by applying to the Solicitor General’s office.

© Copyright 2003 The Canadian Press

Open Letter to Minister of Foreign Affairs Bill Graham

By John and Elizabeth Beeching

October 7, 2003
Hon. Bill Graham Minister of Foreign Affairs
House of Commons Ottawa,
Ontario, K1A 0A6

Mr. Bill Graham,

I was shocked to learn at a meeting October 4, 2003 that over 94,000 volunteer have gone to Israel to join their armed forces according to the Jewish Western Bulletin A link on the web site indicates that 278 or 3% are Canadians. The Foreign Enlistment Act, 1967 was enacted after the start of the Spanish Civil War 1936-1939. My brother was jailed, I believe, under that act because he went to Spain in 1936 in support of a duly elected democratic government. Why has your government not applied this act to the 278 Canadians enlisted in a foreign army?

I quote here from my information about the Act, which I feel is relevant. Your staff can verify.

“2. (d) “Illegally enlisted person” means a person who has accepted or agreed to accept any commission or engagement, or who is about to quit Canada with the intent to accept any commission or engagement, or has been induced to go on board a conveyance under a misapprehension or false representation of the service in which such a person is to be engaged with the intention or in order that such person may accept or agree to accept any commission or engagement contrary to the provisions of this Act;

“5. If any person induces (emphasis mine) any other person to quit Canada, or to go on board any conveyance within Canada under misrepresentation or false representation of the service in which such a person is to be engaged, with the intent or in order that such person may accept or agree to accept any commission or engagement in the armed forces of any foreign state at war with a friendly state, such person shall be guilty of an offence under this Act.”

The English language is famous for allowing multiple interpretations of a document. I cannot believe, however, your government would resort to such a tactic to defend an army clearly in defiance of United Nations resolutions and International Law. You have the power to stop this injustice and order those Canadian citizens to return home.

We will Cc this letter to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and others.

John and Elizabeth Beeching

Open Letter to Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell

By Hanna Kawas

Larry Campbell
Mayor of Vancouver

Dear Mr. Mayor:

We received your invitation to participate in the nomination process for the 2003 Cultural Harmony awards; we regret that we will not be able to participate due to our opposition to one of the signatories on the invitation, Mr. Erwin Nest, Chair of Special Advisory Committee on Cultural Communities.

Mr. Nest is a well known advocate of hard-line Zionism, which discriminates against the Palestinian people inside and outside Israel. When he was the Executive Director of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Pacific Region in 1987, he tried to “muffle” the Voice of Palestine on Coop Radio 102.7 FM, the community radio station in Vancouver (see www.voiceofpalestine.ca under history, Province Article). He also sent an official letter of complaint to the CRTC. All of his allegations were baseless, and the proof is that Voice of Palestine is still on the air and celebrated its 16th anniversary just this month.

To build united communities, the city should look for people (from all faiths) who promote understanding, peace with justice and treat all fellow humans as equals.

If you are interested in people that promote such concepts (again from all faiths), we can supply you with many names.

We think it is offensive and outrageous to have a Zionist that advocates and supports Israeli racism and war crimes against the Palestinian people as a chair for a committee on cultural communities. We fail to comprehend how the presence of such a person on any city committee “promotes cultural sensitivity” and we feel you may not realize the immediate alienation this appointment invokes amongst many Arab and Moslem Vancouverites.

We, along with many peace-loving Canadians including Jewish Canadians, oppose Israeli apartheid practices and all those who support them, because they contribute to prolonging the suffering of the Palestinian and Arab people and also because they stand as an obstacle to a just peace in the Middle East.

If you want to know why we strongly oppose dealing, dialoging or associating with such representatives, please see our website www.cpavancouver.org ,follow “statements” and check the following two articles: CJC Chair misleads the public, and Is it Liberalism or Normalization?

We regret that a progressive city council, such as yours, still has Mr. Nest as an advisor. We are sure that council would be outraged if an advocate of South African Apartheid or any other kind of racist proponent was in any capacity associated with Vancouver. We urge you and council to reconsider the appointment of Mr. Nest, and to take into account the chilling effect his appointment has on other cultural communities.

Yours truly,
Hanna Kawas
Chairperson, Canada Palestine Association
Host, Voice of Palestine, Vancouver
C.C. Heather Deal Chair, Vancouver Board of Parks & Recreation

CJC Chair Misleads Public

Statement by Canada Palestine Association and Arab Palestine Association

Recently, in an article titled “Still much on CJC’s Plate”, the chair of the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), Pacific Region, Nisson Goldman was quoted as saying:

“Congress has done a good job of meeting with the leadership of the Palestinian and Muslim communities in British Columbia, he said, though he regrets that more members of those communities have not attended some of the events organized to bring them together with Jewish British Columbians.” (Jewish Western Bulletin JWB, June 6, 2003)

We in the Palestinian community and in the Palestinian support movement would like to clarify the following points.

We are not aware of any meetings (official or otherwise) between either the leadership of the Palestinian community and the CJC or between any of the Palestinian support organizations and the CJC. If an individual Palestinian met with the CJC, then it was nothing more than that – an individual who represented only him/herself and not our community. We cannot speak for the leadership of the Muslim community, although we think if such meetings do occur they should be public, especially to the communities of those involved and should not be kept secret behind closed doors.

Furthermore, to claim that the purpose of some of the events the CJC had organized was to bring Palestinians and Muslims together with “Jewish British Colombians” is totally misleading. It implies that there is a problem between Palestinian and Muslim Canadians on the one hand, and “Jewish British Columbians” on the other. We in the Palestinian community and in the Palestinian support movement have never had a problem with Jewish Canadians. Actually more “Jewish British Columbians” than Palestinian and Muslim British Colombians are involved in Palestinian support activities locally.

What we do have a problem with is Israeli occupation, Israeli war crimes and Israel’s Apartheid policies and practices against the Palestinian people. We also have a huge problem with Canadian Zionists (Jewish, Christians, Muslims or non believers) who support Israel financially, politically and militarily, including sending Canadian assassins to participate in war crimes against the Palestinian civilian population.

Zionism has been using Jews and Judaism to carry on its settler colonialist project in Palestine and has been trying to dispossess the Palestinian people from their homeland, identity and dignity for the past 100 years. By attributing to all Jews everywhere, every crime and atrocity the Zionists commit against the Palestinians, the Zionist movement is guilty of contributing to the growth of anti-Semitism, which in the final analysis serves the Zionist project.

In a crude attempt to justify his personal failure as a regional chair of the CJC and the failure of Zionism as an ideology, Goldman blames his woes on the Canadian left whom he accuses of alienating “Jewish people”. As if the left does not include Jewish Canadians or as if Jews are not Jews unless they are Zionists and support Israeli Apartheid practices!!

He also blames his failure for not having a “more effective Israel campaign within the general population” on the lack of “the necessary resources”; and “Pro-Palestinian activism is well organized and well funded , he said, and that has had a very effective impact on the discussion here in Canada (our emphasis).” JWB June 6/2003

While we are flattered by his testimony to our organizational skills and his admission of our “very effective impact on the discussion here in Canada”, we would like to state that we do not receive any money from any government (including the Canadian government), institution, company or trade union. Our finances come solely from our Canadian supporters and our strength lies in the righteousness of the Palestinian cause and its internationalist and humanist dimensions.

Finally we would like to state our position:

  • We will not meet, hold a dialogue with, or communicate with any kind of Zionist representatives (except in certain cases and then only publicly to debunk their bankrupt arguments).
  • Those who support Israel should realize that they are directly responsible for every atrocity, human rights violation and act of dispossession that has been carried out against the Palestinian people.
  • We feel that to meet with them at this point in history is a betrayal of the aspirations and inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. It also absolves Israel’s supporters from their responsibility in the crimes against humanity and reduces the conflict to “just another point of view”.
  • Nobody should ask us to endorse our enslavement, legitimize our oppression and accept our dispossession.

It is imperative on the Zionists to change their inhumane ways towards others and especially the Palestinians who have been the direct target of their chauvinist, exclusionist and supremacist project. To save their humanity, Zionists need to admit and recognize:

  1. The original sin committed against Palestine and the Palestinians in 1948.
  2. The Palestinian right of return to all of historic Palestine, as per U.N. Resolution 194.
  3. The necessity to treat Palestinians as equal human beings inside Palestine, Israel and wherever they reside.
  4. And abolish all discriminatory and racist laws in Israel that exclude Palestinians with Israeli citizenship just because of their religious background.

Only then can the healing process begin.

Whatever reason prompted Mr. Goldman to claim that he had “done a good job of meeting with the leadership of the Palestinian” community, we affirm that his claim is neither factual nor honorable.

Hanna Kawas Chairman, Canada Palestine Association
Khalid Barakat President, Arab Palestine Association

Whose Interests Will the Abrogation of the ROR Serve?

By Hanna Kawas (in response to Elias Tuma)*

We are witnessing a calculated campaign of highly publicized attacks on the Palestinian Right of Return (ROR), aimed at confusing, demoralizing, terrorizing (physically and politically) and frustrating the Palestinian refugees and people with the sole purpose of forcing them to abrogate this right. It started with the Camp David “generous offer” and continued with Palestinian advocates such as Sari Nusaybeh, pushing to drop the ROR if Israel met other conditions, as if we are in a Bazaar, and as if what is on the line is vegetables to be traded and not inalienable rights for human beings.

This intellectual debate reminds me of the debate inside the Palestinian resistance movement after the 1973 war about being realistic and accepting the notion of the two state solution with a Palestinian state in the 22 per cent of what was left over from historic Palestine. It also reminded me of the debate that took place after the first US war on Iraq in 1991, which led to the Madrid conference and then to the Oslo process. That process led the Palestinian people to what we are witnessing now at this pivotal juncture of our history.

I always hoped that well-meaning Palestinian intellectuals and leaders generated these debates, positions and then actions, with the intention of advancing the Palestinian peoples aspirations towards achieving their inalienable rights. However, whatever the intentions, the results were clearly otherwise. Furthermore, these two examples took place at certain stages where the US-Israeli strategies for the Arab World were facing a crisis.

The first one was at the height of the Palestinian resistance movement in Lebanon, after regrouping in the wake of the Black September 1970 defeat in Jordan at the hands of the US-Israeli-Jordanian reactionary axis. It also followed a major war in 1973, where Israeli invincibility was shattered. So instead of building on these struggles and victories, we saw the defeatist Arab leaders taking over and cheaply selling the blood of the Arab martyrs, as in the case of Anwar Sadat in Egypt. On the Palestinian front, the introduction of the project to create the “mini state” on the West Bank and Gaza led to a debate about changing the strategies and tactics of the Palestinian liberation movement. The people who introduced this debate claimed that due to the October War, the balance of power had shifted, victory was near and Israel was going to be forced by the two superpowers to drop the Zionist project. (As if Zionism that lives on expansion, racism and seeks hegemony over the entire Arab world was going to surrender its role voluntarily as a US military base in the region and submit to the wishful thinking of a few Arab “intellectuals” and their backers in Moscow.)

This debate was futile and demoralizing and led to the weakening of the Palestinian liberation movement. So instead of building on the achievements of the people and their heroic fighters to weaken the enemy – the US and Israel – it gave these forces a reprieve till they found better objective conditions (the Lebanese civil war and then the 1982 invasion) to try and finish the job they started in September 1970. And, as with todays debate on the ROR, the debate over the “mini-state” happened at a time when there was no real offer on the table, no chance to implement whatever decision was reached from this lengthy and diversionary process.

The second example was the Madrid conference and the Oslo accords which came as a result of a double crises for the US-Israeli project: the US showing its true face to the Arab people during the first war on Iraq and the heroic struggle of the Palestinian people in the first Intifada.

Instead of building on the popular Arab outrage regarding the US war crimes against the Iraqi people, and the achievements of the six year long Palestinian Intifada (not to mention the escalating resistance to the Israeli occupation of South Lebanon), the Palestinian leadership opted for a fast solution that depended mainly on the goodwill of the enemy and reducing the conflict to a personal and not a historic and collective basis. The Palestinian leadership decided to terminate all forms of Palestinian struggle for the sake of a weak interim agreement with major tactical and strategic concessions. By doing so they, objectively, helped save the US and Israel from their dilemmas as a result of the war on Iraq, the Intifada and the Israeli losses in South Lebanon.

Aside from leaving the most important and crucial issues to be discussed in five years time (indefinitely), following are some of the mistakes the Palestinian leadership committed during this process.

  • Recognizing Israel before it defined its borders and without mutual recognition of a Palestinian state.
  • Recognizing Israel without any reference to the stolen Palestinian land that Israel sits on, and without a mechanism to return stolen properties that the Israeli custodian is still holding. A genuine peace would have a mechanism to compensate and return these properties to their original owners or their descendents.
  • Not clearly spelling out the Palestinian position on the Israeli settlements during the Oslo process – even Sadat succeeded in forcing Begin to accept the freeze on settlements during the Camp David negotiations.
  • Abandoning the armed struggle as a tactic and a strategy without a clear guarantee from the Israeli side of not using its superior military power against the Palestinian “sovereignty” and Palestinian civilians. This could have been implemented by positioning UN peacekeeping forces on the borders of the recognized Palestinian state.
  • Adopting the Oslo accords in the Palestine National Council (PNC) and annulling the PLO charter in the same session under pressure from Netanyahu and Clinton.

This session was held under Israeli occupation, with the Israeli gun held to the heads of the PNC members.

(We should thank Ariel Sharon for annulling the Oslo accords because what the PNC agreed on – under the Israeli gun and with the American carrot – was a strategic abandonment of our historic rights.)

The new debate on the ROR comes under similar conditions as existed during the two examples I mentioned. The second Intifada is in its third year, the US for the first time in the history of the Israeli-Arab conflict is saying publicly where they stand without any concern for the ramifications to its Arab puppet regimes, the US and Israeli economic crises are at their worst in the last decade, and the continued aggression on Iraq and the upcoming US war are in defiance of overwhelming world public opinion.

So instead of drafting a programme to escalate the Intifada and to build a wide Arab front to challenge the existing US control and stop further hegemony over Arab resources and markets, some of the Palestinian and Arab intellectuals and leaders are competing with each other in trying to gain recognition and favour with the US and Israel. Others are blatantly trying to sell us the US-Israeli plans.

Within this backdrop falls the attack on the ROR in an attempt to liquidate it under the guise of recognizing reality.

Mr. Elias H. Tuma’s article “The draft constitution for a state of Palestine II” is not only an attack on the ROR, it is also a distortion of facts and a misrepresentation of the Palestinian refugees and their sufferings, struggles and aspirations.

My objective here is not to defend the draft Palestinian constitution, but rather to defend the ROR.

I made my position clear about this constitution in a message I sent to the Palestine representative to Canada Dr. Baker Abdel Munem on Jan. 30, 2003. I wrote the following:

“To draft a Palestinian constitution on the orders of the U.S. is a BIG and FATAL mistake. To draft a constitution before even having a viable state is wrong. Israel has been a state for the last 54 years and still does NOT have a constitution. Why? Not only because it does not want to define itself as a Jewish state and show the world what it is truly is, an autocratic state, a theocracy and not a democracy, but also because it would not have to define its borders. This draft constitution is part of a conspiracy to split the Palestinian people on the hope that we will never achieve a secular democratic state, or any state for that matter.”

It is also worth mentioning that the Israeli government has already declared that they could live with article 32 in the draft constitution on the Palestinian ROR.

Aluf Benn wrote in the Israeli paper Haaretz on March 4, 2003 that Israeli “government sources do admit the article concerning refugees is relatively easy for Israel to accept, since it does not refer to a mass return of refugees to Israel.”

The analysis of Mr. Tuma is based on the premise that “Under no foreseeable circumstances will Israel allow more than a token number of refugees to return to their pre-1948 villages or towns.” According to Mr. Tuma, even taking a vague position on the ROR, without a mechanism of implementing it “does not seem to be favorable to the refugees. On the contrary, it tends to complicate their problem by seeming to allow their current conditions to continue for an indefinite future.”

Also our growing number is a problem for us, according to Mr. Tuma. ” The problems facing the refugees relate to their numbers – The larger the number of refugees, the more difficult it is to negotiate their repatriation to their homes, or to resettle them elsewhere” Even if we forego our ROR, according to him our resettlement is becoming a problem.

Mr. Tuma shows lots of “concern” for us and says that, we, “The Palestinian refugees have already sacrificed two generations by waiting for a viable political-economic solution that has not been forthcoming.” This is one of the most outrageous statements I have ever heard in my lifetime.

It is we “the Palestinian refugees … who sacrificed two generations by waiting”. It was not Israeli ethnic cleansing and the western support for it that sacrificed us for the sake of their selfish interests in controlling the Arab region at any cost of human life and dignity.

For Mr. Tuma’s information, the Palestinian people did not “wait … for a viable political-economic solution”; we have been struggling since the inception of the Zionist settler colonialist project. Although they destroyed our livelihood, over 400 villages and towns, and uprooted us from our homeland, we have never stopped resisting and making our voices heard all over the world.

Mr. Tuma also asks of us as refugees to recognize reality and adopt the following:

“The most promising option, therefore, for the Palestinian refugees is to recognize the inability of the leadership to achieve a viable collective political settlement in the near future, and to individually act in their own self-interest. It is for them as individuals to seek homes wherever they can. In such homes they can become self-reliant productive citizens”.

Why can the Palestinian refugees not do the above i.e. become productive and self-reliant citizens to the best of their capabilities and still fight for the ROR, both individually and collectively. Mr. Tuma wants us to drop our internationally recognized right and to seek “individually” our “own self-interest”. He wants us to forget the injustices committed against us and give the thieves (the west and Israel) a certificate of good conduct and absolve them of their crimes against us. It is the logic of defeatism. Perhaps more energy should be spent on demanding that the Zionists abrogate the Israeli Law of Return because of the successful Jewish integration in many countries.

In fact, the Palestinian refugees have always sought homes wherever they can, although these homes have never been safe for us even in North America. The dilemma for the West and Israel is that the majority of us have never considered our second homes as permanent ones.

Mr. Tuma harps on the “self-reliant productive citizen” and in other places he accuses us, the refugees, of surviving “virtually on charity from other countries”. He adds, “Regardless how hard UNRWA tries to render aid as free of stigma, such aid is charity just the same.”

He should realize that this aid is not charity, it is but a small faction of the compensation we are entitled to. Also when we have the chance, and when the countries we live in allow us to work, we are as productive as any other people. What UNRWA distributes is a pittance of the billions from the western exploitation (theft) of our Arab resources. If the west wants to be truly charitable, please give us our rights – no more, no less.

Mr. Tuma, we have studied and understand history. We know that we cannot drop our rights and then ask for them a decade or a century later. The North American Native nations are a prime example: a number of them never ceded their territories and this is why they are now successful in many of their land claims. Even slaves did not accept their “destiny”.

We are not against any Palestinian who drops his/her ROR, this does not mean though that we are going to respect them.

Mr. Tuma goes on to doubt the resolve of the Palestinian people and the legitimacy of their cause, and accuses the Palestinians of being cowards. He says: ” These groups, as well as individual leaders, would be afraid of being tainted as traitors were they to recognize reality and agree to any compromise solution, unless ‘forced’ to do so. The lack of courage and the absence of unity among the Palestinians, and the almost complete marginalization of the refugees from decision-making, have been major obstacles in the way of a compromise solution.”

Mr. Tuma, your reality is not our reality. Although you talk about “marginalization of the refugees from decision-making”, at the same time you do not respect the feelings nor the decision of the majority of the Palestinian refugees in their endeavors and struggles to realize the ROR. If it is not the sentiment of the majority of Palestinians- refugees or otherwise- to firmly support the ROR, why should the leadership ” be afraid of being tainted as traitors”. Further, it is slanderous to accuse the Palestinians of “lack of courage”. This is an insult to those who were martyred, to those who were permanently disabled and to those who lost everything while confronting the Zionist colonialist project in Palestine, let alone to the Palestinian refugees who have endured the treason and seemingly endless collaboration of some Arab and Palestinian “leaders” and “intellectuals”.

Mr. Tuma then goes on to discredit the work of Al-Awda and states:

“However, Al-Awda leaders are efficient in holding meetings, issuing statements, and adding to the rhetoric that has little influence on the life or future of the refugees-except probably in making them feel good for the moment. Al-Awda’s statements have little prospect of being taken seriously.”

In another part of his article he also alleges that the refugees are being “misled by the sterile rhetoric of well-meaning but helpless agencies”. It would seem that he is also referring here to Al-Awda.

As a member of Al-Awda, let me make clear the following points:

  • Al-Awda is not misleading the refugees. Most of its members consider themselves as part of the Palestinian refugees, and if anything, they will not mislead themselves.
  • Al-Awda is empowering all the Palestinian people and not only the refugees and is a counter-balance to those who dream to sell out our rights and aspirations.

If anything is “sterile rhetoric”, it is the argument that betrays, questions and tries to delegitimize an internationally recognized right such as the ROR.

Mr. Tuma insists on slandering the Palestinian people and their sacrifices and struggles by stating: “In fact their victim mentality, passed from one generation to another, must have been demoralizing and wasteful of any political influence they might have been able to acquire.”

The last 100 years of our struggle is a concrete witness to Mr. Tuma’s falsehoods. Our political influence is growing and this is why the sole superpower, the US, spends so much time and resources to try to liquidate our struggles.

If anything is demoralizing, self-centered and defeatist, it is the following statement for Mr. Tuma:- “The most promising option, therefore, for the Palestinian refugees is to recognize the inability of the leadership to achieve a viable collective political settlement in the near future, and to individually act in their own self-interest.”

If the current Palestinian leadership is unable “to achieve a viable collective political settlement in the near future”, that does not mean to surrender nor does it mean we are not recognizing reality. All it means is that the conditions for our victory are not yet ripe. Perhaps we might need new leadership, we might need a new programme for liberation (at present we do NOT have even a Charter since the PNC abrogated it in their last session), we might need to mobilize, and we might need to weed out defeatism from our ranks.

But we certainly do not need to drop a sacred right that the last three generations sacrificed many things for it, including their lives, the most precious commodity on earth.

Finally Mr. Tuma concludes by trying to deceive us, as we were deceived after the 1973 war. He states:

“The draft constitution of a state of Palestine should be a living document that empowers the Palestinians. It should be a guiding light toward their freedom and growth. And it should promise only what is feasible and helpful to encourage creativity, independence, and achievement by the individual and the community. But above all else, it should help the constituents to recognize what is possible and what is not, face reality, and have the courage to deal with it.”

If we want “to recognize what is possible and what is not … and have the courage to deal with it”, then here is what we should have the courage to face:- a viable and sovereign “state of Palestine” is not in the cards at present, it is simply not possible at this stage considering the expansion of the illegal Jewish settlements, the expropriation of more Palestinian land and the existing “balance of power”. Accordingly, a draft constitution now is irrelevant and diversionary at best and dangerous at worst, as is evidenced by the divisive debate that has ensued. Mr. Tuma is the one who should “face reality, and have the courage to deal with it” for the rosy picture he is trying to paint for us is only a mirage (as if renouncing the ROR will magically solve the refugees’ burdens). It is also wishful thinking on anyone’s part that Palestinians will again fall for these tricks, including the truncated Palestinian state that George Bush and Tony Blair are promising us.

The only realistic option for us right now is to intensify our struggle on all fronts, the fight for ending the brutal Israeli occupation, the struggle for the right of return, the struggle for equality and democracy within Israel and the defense of the Palestinian refugees human rights wherever they sought refuge.

The struggle will continue till justice is served.

* Read Mr. Elias H. Tuma’s article here: THE DRAFT CONSTITUTION FOR A STATE OF PALESTINE (Page 450)