Category: Media Watch

Letters to the editor from Canada Palestine Association members addressing Palestine in the news.

Canadian company financing Israel-UAE collaboration

In June of this year, the story of how Dubai Ports World was helping to squash opposition to the Israeli Zim shipping company in a small Canadian town caught the interest of many progressives worldwide. Lest anyone think this was an isolated incident, Canadian media recently highlighted another saga of Canada-UAE-Israel partnership.

This time around, former Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper is taking centre stage as the head of the advisory committee to Toronto-based AWZ Ventures. According to a CBC article, “AWZ Ventures finances Israeli surveillance technology systems, including facial recognition and crowd detection systems and services that deliver comprehensive information on individuals in real time.”

The media focus now is that AWZ Ventures is facilitating the sale of this “technology to the United Arab Emirates — a country with a troubling human rights record”. (No mention of Israel’s “troubling human rights record”, mind you.)

Again, as with the Zim story, the finer details are bizarre. Not only does AWZ Ventures have former Mossad, CIA and MI5 figures on its advisory board, it is also opening a subsidiary in the UAE. And heading up this new subsidiary with be the former Canadian diplomat and representative to the Palestinian Authority, Katherine Verrier-Fréchette.

The new company, aptly dubbed AWZ Horizons, will also be helping to promote the sale of this Israeli technology “to other countries in the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia, and countries in North Africa.” This seamless transition from Canadian diplomatic envoy to high-level cybersecurity merchant speaks volumes about the “neutrality” of Canadian foreign policy.

AWZ Ventures itself is an interesting study. Along with the notable international figures, Richard Fadden, former director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service works for the company. And former Conservative cabinet minister Stockwell Day is also reportedly involved.

Fadden, one of the few who was quoted by Canadian media, said: “A lot of this technology is useful in fighting terrorism and that was my main interest,” he said. “Some of the technology that has been developed helps develop a sense of what’s going on, on the one level on social media, so you can accumulate information…”

In July of this year, AWZ Ventures also entered into an official partnership with the Israeli Ministry of Defense and its Directorate of Defense Research and Development (MAFAT) and launched Awz X-Seed. The goal of this new spin-off will be to invest in “pre-seed” and “inception” stage companies in Israel developing innovative security technologies. According to Stephen Harper at the time: “Together, Awz and MAFAT will uniquely evaluate and develop early-stage technologies, creating a model that is unmatched anywhere.”

It was also noted that the “Portfolio companies will further benefit from Awz Ventures’ business development offices in Canada, the US, and UAE that will support the companies in expanding their global client base.”

So, to sum up, a Canadian-based company with an advisory board headed by a former Canadian PM and full of former spies, is marketing Israeli cybersecurity and surveillance technology to dictatorial Arab regimes. And even partnering with the Israeli government to help develop more of the same.

The detrimental use of these technologies has been well-documented in recent years, the most notable case being a possible link in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Journalists and human rights activists, including from Amnesty International, have reportedly been targeted by repressive governments with the aid of these Israeli surveillance tools.

However, the media parameters that focus only on the sale of these Israeli technologies to despotic regimes are flawed. The Israeli government’s
“troubling human rights record” is also relevant, and the fact that their security and defense innovations are field-tested on Palestinians and Arabs is well-known. And Israel’s abuse and torture of Palestinian prisoners is also well-known, as was evidenced by the recent treatment of the Gilboa 6 after being re-captured.

As the Dubai 2020 Expo is finally underway, with an Israel pavilion spearheaded by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we must be clear on who is powering and financing this unholy alliance of Israeli apartheid and Arab reactionary regimes. Western governments and capital interests are fully complicit in these violations of Palestinian and Arab human rights.

(Article by Marion Kawas, that was published in Mondoweiss).

Vancouver rally (June 2021) to support #BlocktheBoat and Shut Down Zim

CBC Insists on Erasing Palestinian National Identity

The following letter was sent on September 10, 2020 to the CBC Ombudsman requesting an official review of CBC’s flawed explanation of its language guide on Palestine. The Ombudsman has already confirmed that the review will happen, noting the results will be made public on his website.

Dear Mr. Jack Nagler,
CBC Ombudsman

We have received the more detailed reply regarding CBC’s language guide on Palestine from Paul Hambleton, Director of Journalism Standards. We understand many people received a very similar response with identical points defending CBC’s insistence on not using the word “Palestine” except in very rare circumstances (i.e. part of a name). Even in that, CBC management could not adhere to its own policy when Mr. Hambleton referred to the Palestinian Liberation Organization rather than the Palestine Liberation Organization in his reply.

We are not satisfied with this response and are requesting the Ombudsman Office to launch a review of this case.
Frankly, the more CBC explains this biased policy the more convoluted their verbal gymnastics seem to become. They have now shed more light on the relevant clause that started the whole fiasco and led to The Current apologizing on air for referring to Palestine, rather than the Palestinian territories. The full clause has fastidious detailing of when not to use the word Palestine; one cannot refer even to pro-Palestine supporters, they can only be pro-Palestinian. And when referring to historic Palestine, one must use the term “British Palestine” if talking about the period of British colonial rule after WW1.

Even if one puts aside CBC’s argument on Palestine not yet being a “sovereign country”, why this obsession with removing any usage of the word Palestine in nearly all other contexts, including generic or historic ones? The “British Palestine” reference seems particularly ridiculous and archaic in post-colonial times.

Here are some documented historic facts:
a. In 1896, the founder of Zionism, Theodor Herzl wrote in his book “The Jewish State”: “In Palestine (our emphasis) … we shall be for Europe a part of the wall against Asia, we shall serve as a vanguard of civilization against barbarism.”
b. In 1897, the First Zionist Congress listed as some of the aims of the movement: “Zionism strives to create for the Jewish people a homeland in Palestine (our emphasis) secured by public law. The congress contemplates the following means to the attainment of this end:
The promotion on suitable lines of the colonization of Palestine (our emphasis) by Jewish agricultural and industrial workers…”
c. The British Balfour Declaration that adopted and legitimized Zionism stated: “His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine (our emphasis) of a national home for the Jewish people…”
As demonstrated, Palestine existed and was referenced as such before and during the colonial British Mandate on Palestine, the official name of which explicitly recognized Palestine. For CBC to claim that it should now be referred to only as “British Palestine” is not just dishonest, misleading and a fabrication of history, it also adopts the narrative of the Zionist movement that denies the existence of Palestine and its people.

As CBC seems to fully understand that language is an important component of defining issues, we assume that they also understand that their policy makes them complicit in trying to eradicate Palestine’s national identity. This has long been a pillar of the Zionist project, which goes to great lengths to ensure that the Palestinian struggle is not framed as a national struggle against settler-colonialism.

Mr. Hambleton stated: “We think it would be misleading to state or imply that “Palestine” is a sovereign country (which is substantially different from having “non-member observer status” at the United Nations). We also think it would be inappropriate for the CBC to unilaterally declare that Palestine suddenly exists (where are its negotiated borders?)…”

We should inform CBC that Israel has never officially demarcated its “borders” (negotiated or non-negotiated), so by this logic, it is inappropriate for CBC to use the term Israel.

Although CBC does state the term “occupied territories” is preferred to “disputed territories”, most of their language guide nonetheless refuses to frame the Palestinian and Arab struggles as national ones against a foreign occupying power. The language guides also notes, after acknowledging that the Golan Heights is “occupied territory”, that this is territory “which Israel and Syria are at odds over”. “At odds over” – really? This is not the kind of precise language that Mr. Hambleton repeatedly insists CBC wants to use when reporting on these issues. The Golan Heights is not only occupied territory, it is also illegally annexed territory, and should not be represented as a “territorial squabble”.

In response to our question on how this language guide was developed, Mr. Hambleton stated that amongst other criteria, it was based “on research and interviews conducted by CBC foreign correspondents (including interviews with Israeli and Palestinian experts inside and outside the Middle East)”. He does not specify which “Palestinian experts” were interviewed or if they were even Palestinian. We would like him to clarify who these experts are because we seriously doubt any Palestinian or knowledgeable objective expert on Palestine and its history would have agreed to such restrictions on referencing the Palestinian national struggle.

It is interesting to compare CBC’s approach to language around Kosovo. Although each situation is unique, surely there are universal principles that should guide CBC’s policies. Kosovo is not a member of the United Nations in any capacity, it is recognized by fewer countries in the world than the state of Palestine, yet CBC is happy to use the proper term Kosovo in its reporting. The only difference we can see is that the Canadian government has officially recognized Kosovo, but not Palestine. Although CBC’s mandate states it has administrative and programming independence from the Canadian government, this doesn’t seem to be the case. Their website states: “This principle of ‘arm’s length’ relationship between the CBC and government is critical to the Corporation’s independence.” This “arm’s length relationship” doesn’t seem to have held up well. Shouldn’t we just acknowledge that our national broadcaster implements the foreign policy of successive Canadian governments in its reporting? A foreign policy that resulted in Canada twice losing out on a seat at the UN Security Council, a foreign policy that desperately is in need of a review, a foreign policy that has isolated Canada internationally. CBC could better serve people in Canada by discussing these issues rather than just simply reflecting the defunct foreign policy of the day.

Finally, we strongly believe that CBC is promoting the Zionist narrative, and the official Canadian position in support of that narrative; in doing so, this makes CBC complicit in the dispossession and genocide of a whole nation and its people. It is a sad and supreme irony that the program in which CBC enforced these biased policies and denied the existence of Palestine was titled “the themes of colonialism and resource extraction”.

Regards,
Hanna Kawas, Chair
Canada Palestine Association

Updated article in Canadian Dimension: CBC Doubles Down on Erasing Palestine

Why I oppose Canada’s bid for the UN Security Council seat

(The following letter was recently sent to all UN Ambassadors from Canada Palestine Association chairperson, Hanna Kawas. The vote for non-permanent UNSC seats is set to happen June 17, 2020.)

June 12, 2020

Dear UN Ambassadors:

I am a Christian Palestinian refugee from Bethlehem who can’t return to my hometown because of my identity and because Israel refuses to implement the UNGA resolution regarding “Persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities”. I am also the chairperson of the Canada Palestine Association. I am writing to urge you to NOT support Canada’s bid for a seat on the UN Security Council.

My late father sent a letter to the United Nations in 1948 following the dispossession of our people, appealing to the UN members at that time for justice, peace and equality. I am making one last effort in his name to speak to the conscience of this international body.

It came to my attention that Marc-André Blanchard, the Canadian UN Ambassador, sent you a letter dated June 10, 2020 stating that “Canada has long supported the creation of a Palestinian state…”. This is a blatant falsehood and reminds me of the treatment our native brothers and sisters have endured from the white settler colonialists.

On the personal level:

  • Canada, under the current Liberal government has voted for the past FIVE years against “Persons displaced as a result of the June 1967 and subsequent hostilities” resolution. Voting against this resolution is personal and affects me directly. I have with me the deeds for my grandfather’s property in Bethlehem and still I can NOT go and live in my ancestral home. The only real explanation for such a vote by Canada is that it supports Israel’s ethnic cleansing of the West Bank and subsequently supports the “Greater Israel Project”.
  • The Canadian government refused to enshrine Bethlehem, Palestine as my birthplace on my passport. I refused to accept such a denial of my identity, so I stayed stranded in Canada for nineteen years without the ability to travel. Finally, four years ago, the passport office offered to put Bethlehem, West Bank as my birthplace, which I accepted begrudgingly.

On the collective level:

  • If the Canadian government supports “the creation of a Palestinian state”, why did it vote last year AGAINST seven U.N. resolutions that affirm the “two-state” solution and call for ending the illegal occupation that has lasted for 53 years? And why does Canada vote against the other resolutions at the U.N. that uphold Palestinian human, national and refugee rights?
  • The response of the Canadian Foreign Minister François-Philippe Champagne to U.S. President Trump’s “deal of the century”, that gave the green light to Israel to annex the West Bank was: “Canada recognizes the urgent need to renew efforts toward a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and will carefully examine the details of the U.S. initiative for the Middle East peace process”; it seems to this moment he is still “examining” it.
  • Only after the Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory wrote “Canada missing in action on Israel’s proposed annexation of the West Bank”, and after 58 former Canadian diplomats and politicians signed a “letter calling on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government to show stronger resistance to a proposed Israeli annexation”, only then did Canadian PM Trudeau pay lip-service to opposing the Israeli planed annexation.
  • On the International Criminal Court (ICC) Canada’s Foreign Ministry stated: “Canada’s longstanding position is that it does not recognize a Palestinian state … In the absence of a Palestinian state, it is Canada’s view that the Court does not have jurisdiction in this matter under international law”. Meanwhile, the Canadian UN Ambassador tells you in his letter that “Canada has long supported the creation of a Palestinian state…”
  • The Canadian government adopted the IHRA definition. Many people in Canada, of all faiths, oppose the IHRA definition because “7 of the 11 examples refer not just to Jewish people, but to the state of Israel, a deliberate rhetorical strategy to label criticism of Israel and of Zionism antisemitic.”
  • The Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA) allows for the sale and false labelling of illegal settlement products in Canada. Even after the Federal Court of Canada ruled that “product of Israel” labels from wines made in West Bank settlements, in the occupied Palestinian territories, are “false, misleading and deceptive”, the Canadian government appealed this ruling. The Canadian government has refused to abide by the 2016 UN Security Council Resolution 2334, calling on member states to “distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied in 1967.”
  • Canada gives tax deductible status to the Jewish National Fund JNF which supports settlements projects in the West Bank, including Canada Park that was built on the ruins of three Palestinian towns occupied in 1967.
  • Many Zionist organizations get tax deductible status from the Canadian government including the “Lone Soldier” organization that sends “soldiers” to fight with the Israeli military committing war crimes against the Palestinian people. It is worth noting that earlier this year the Canadian ambassador to Israel held an event “to show the appreciation and care felt by the embassy” for those mercenaries.
  • The Canadian government, under direct instruction of the Israeli lobby groups, put the major Palestinian resistance organizations struggling against Israeli occupation, on their “Terrorist List”. The previous Liberal government reaffirmed this list on Nov. 21 2018.
  • On November 2, 2018, then Foreign Minister 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’.”

Canada has empowered Israel economically and militarily; in addition to the Free Trade agreement and the tax deduction for Zionist organizations, here are a few other examples:

  1. The exhaustive study entitled “Canadian Pension Plan (CPP) Investments in Corporations Supporting Israel’s Military, Police, Surveillance and Prison-Industrial Complex” Part 1 Part 2  
  2. Another study detailing “Canadian Military Exports to Israel: Aiding and Abetting War Crimes in Gaza (2008-2009)”
  3. Canadians can invest in Israeli Bonds tax free with their Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP), Tax-Free Savings Account (TFSA) and Registered Educational Savings Plan(RESP), among other plans.

Finally, Article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.” In addition to Canada not abiding by this article, it is directly empowering Israel’s violations of international and humanitarian law.

Please don’t reward Canada for supporting and enabling Israel’s ethnic cleansing, war crimes, apartheid and genocide. I call on you in the name of my father, who died without being able to return to live in his beloved homeland, to not support Canada’s bid for a UNSC seat.

Sincerely,

Hanna Kawas,
Chairperson, Canada Palestine Association

Why we oppose Canada’s bid for the UN Security Council
Article by Hanna Kawas and Marion Kawas, June 15, 2020

This Letter was also tweeted by PLO Department of International Relations

See the reaction of Andrea Niklaus, the Canadian representative to the PA:
“[W]e wanted to flag a tweet posted last night on the PLO Public Diplomacy account, which shares/quotes an article by the Canadian-Palestine Association against Canada’s UNSC bid. … We’ve seen some negative comments on our UNSC-related posts on our mission accounts in recent days, but this is the first we’ve seen such messaging amplified from an official Palestinian account. FYI, Ramallah [Canada’s diplomatic post in the West Bank] has inquired with a contact at the PLO as whether this represents their official position on Canada’s candidacy, and they promised to look into it and get back to us.”

Canadian Hypocrisy and the UN Security Council Seat

By Marion Kawas

Recently, a strong movement has coalesced opposing the Canadian government’s attempt to gain a seat on the UN Security Council (UNSC). Although progressive groups and individuals have been laying the foundation for this issue since late 2019, it has been thrust into the national spotlight in the last month with various petitions, statements and media coverage in the #NoUNSC4Canada campaign.

For Palestinian activists, this call to refuse to reward the Trudeau government is welcome. Since 1947, Canada has played a negative role at the U.N. regarding the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. From Lester B. Pearson, dubbed the “Balfour of Canada” for his part in preparing and passing the infamous Partition Plan, to the more recent 15 years of anti-Palestinian voting at the UN General Assembly, and all the “refugee resettlement” plans in between, it is fitting that the Canadian government is held accountable at this forum.

Canadian complicity is not just limited to UN votes. From refusing to label Israeli settlement products as such, to branding legitimate pro-Palestinian protest as “anti-Semitic” and smearing the BDS movement, to increasing the scope of the Canada Israel Free Trade Agreement – all of this falls into Canada’s “ironclad” support for Israel (to quote Deputy PM and former FM Chrystia Freeland).

The Chrystia Freeland that reportedly told an audience in Israel well over a year ago that Canada could be “an asset for Israel” on the UNSC. We can only speculate what that would entail, but we can state with certainty it won’t have anything to do with defending the basic human rights of the Palestinians or calling out and denouncing Israel’s institutionalized racism.

Last weekend, PM Justin Trudeau attended an anti-racism rally in Ottawa and scored a photo-op as he “took a knee”, supposedly to show his government’s seriousness in fighting racism and police brutality. However, for many communities, the gesture was worse than hypocritical, it was insulting. For all those who have been on the receiving end of the Canadian government’s racism, be it the Wet’suwet’en and other indigenous people in Turtle Island, be it the marginalized communities of colour in major cities, or the Palestinian people struggling for dignity, they are all well aware of the systemic racism that permeates official Canadian policy.

Palestinians know well the duplicity of Canadian officials. In November, 2019, Trudeau showed his anti-Palestinian racism by rushing to falsely slander student protestors at York as “anti-Semitic” when they challenged the presence of Israeli military reservists on campus. York student activist Moe Alqasem explained:

“We have consistently seen the hypocrisy of the Prime Minister (Justin Trudeau). Trudeau, like other politicians jumped to smear and condemn Palestinian students at York without knowing any of the facts. He has recently taken a knee in a protest that was supposed to be in solidarity with Black people. It’s a performative act, if Trudeau or his government truly cared about Black people then they would be taking measures to ensure their safety and well-being. If he truly cared about Human Rights, then we would have seen a different reaction from him towards the Palestinian students and human rights activists at York University.”

And most recently, after taking weeks to express an opinion, Trudeau finally spoke out about Israel’s new annexation plans. He even claimed to “deplore” them, but he didn’t deplore them enough to consider sanctions against the Israeli government. Even though Canada currently has sanctions against 19 countries (9 of them in the Arab region), so it is a tactic the government is familiar with.

As noted by the Canada Palestine Association chairperson in a statement following Trudeau’s comments:

“If the Canadian government is genuine in this belated expression of opposition to Israel’s illegal policies, then the absolute minimum expected is to impose sanctions on the Israeli government until it respects international law. Actions speak louder than words!”

And by actions, Palestinian activists are looking for concrete steps to curb Israeli war crimes, not glossy photo-ops or hollow gestures and statements. Especially when those statements only seem to be made at the most opportunistic times and are clearly self-serving.

The Canadian government is well aware that it is vulnerable regarding its position and voting record on Palestine at the UN. After all, it is one of the 6 “permanent members” of the Israel Fan Club that overwhelmingly votes, year after year, to disregard Palestinian rights (along with the U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau). Following letters sent to UN ambassadors through the #NoUNSC4Canada campaign, the Canadian representative felt compelled to send his own letter on June 10th extolling all the things Canada has allegedly done to support Palestinians. As predicted when it happened last November, he bragged about Canada’s single “orphan vote” supporting the resolution on Palestinian self-determination at the UNGA, as proof that Canada can “adapt to changing dynamics” and defend the “two-state solution”. So, a solitary Yes vote in 8 years is supposed to be enough to compensate for the anti-Palestinian assault Canada has indulged in at the UN?

PM Trudeau’s obsession with gaining a UNSC seat, which seemed simple desperate vanity a year ago, has now become much more odious. The Canadian government shocked social and environmental groups by running roughshod over indigenous rights with the militarized Wet’suwet’en standoff for the sake of a pipeline. Then, this same government insisted on supporting Juan Guaido and the attempted “soft coup” in Venezuela. And in February of this year, they sent a letter to the ICC advising against proceeding with war crimes charges against Israel, because Canada “does not recognize a Palestinian state”.

So when arguing for a UNSC seat, Canada says that it has “long supported the creation of a Palestinian state”. But to the ICC, they bluntly say they don’t recognize a Palestinian state. Many people in Canada are fed up with such diplomatic hypocrisy.

And for those who want to wax poetic about the “good old days”, a reminder that one of the final acts Canada engaged in last time it was on the Security Council was to help scuttle an international force to protect Palestinians in the occupied territories.

Canada abstained on a critical resolution at the UN Security Council in December, 2000 that called for sending an international protection force to shield the Palestinian civilian population from Israeli war crimes. This Canadian position was in accordance with the dictates of the US-Israeli policy that opposed such a force. The resolution got eight votes, but it needed nine member states out of fifteen to vote for it in order to be passed. Canada’s abstention helped to defeat the resolution, and accordingly made Canada complicit in the subsequent atrocities against the Palestinians.

This is the record of successive Canadian governments, both at the United Nations and at home. This is a record of shame that should never be rewarded. And for all those who have suffered from this hypocrisy and betrayal, it is personal.

(A version of this article first appeared in the Canadian Dimension.)

Western hypocrisy is empowering Israeli annexation!

There is a recent surge of official voices in the West that are alarmed at the agenda of the new Israeli coalition government. Many western liberal governments are offering slightly more than their usual token objections to Israeli policy, including some European threats of sanctions if Israel implements its new annexation plans.

Is all of this because of concern for the human rights of Palestinians? Or concern for the “rule of law” that they are so fond of referencing?

Or is it because they know that formal Israeli annexation of new chunks of the occupied Palestinian territories will be the final blow to the moribund “two-state solution”? A mirage that for over a quarter of a century has legitimized and fueled the status quo of Israeli settler colonialism and continuing ethnic cleansing, but with “plausible deniability” for many international players.

Once this new annexation is implemented, even though it is really only a legalization of what already exists on the ground, then the “two-state” carrot can no longer be dangled in front of Palestinian and Arab eyes as any type of legitimate approach.

Since the signing of Oslo in 1993, this flawed approach has been a bonanza, not just for successive Israeli governments, but also for many others. How many countries have increased and normalized diplomatic and military cooperation with Israel; how many governments have increased free trade agreements with Israel, in the process blessing the fruits of an illegal occupation; and how many have been able to dismiss legitimate Palestinian resistance and grievances under the ruse of negotiations over the illusory and promised but never delivered “two-state” future?

Annexation by any other name…is still annexation.

All the while in these last 27 years, Israel has at least tripled the number of illegal settlers, pushing Palestinians off their lands, crippling Palestinian agriculture and development, and then killing or injuring Palestinians who dare to protest. All with the blessing of the international community as long as some lip-service is paid to the mantra of the “two-state” solution. As long as one adds some sentence at the end of a press release committing to a “negotiated settlement based on two states”, then support of Israeli military brutality can carry on unexcused.

Not that any of this should come as a surprise. Back in 1992, even before the Oslo Accords were on the table, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was blunt in stating the purpose of such endless negotiations. According to the NY Times, he was quoted “in a published interview…as saying he wanted to drag out peace talks with the Palestinians for a decade while vastly increasing the number of Jewish settlers in Israeli-occupied territories”.

And even if we accept the hypothesis that some analysts are now putting forward that the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority were misled and duped by these Israeli-US schemes, we have to ask: For 27 years?? Perhaps five years, after which the promised Palestinian state was supposed to be implemented. But over a quarter of a century?? Even the late Yasser Arafat finally realized the strategic error involved in the quagmire of the Oslo Accords, a realization that many would argue cost him his life in 2004.

And its not as if there weren’t already precedents for US deception regarding the Palestinian movement. In 1982, then US special envoy Philip Habib guaranteed the safety of people in the refugee camps if the PLO agreed to leave Beirut. Written notes stated: “We also reaffirm the assurances of the United States as regards safety and security…for the camps in Beirut.” And we all know the tragedy that quickly followed, the Sabra and Shatila massacre, where over a thousand unarmed Palestinian men, women and children were butchered and driven out of their homes yet again.

All those now finally finding their voices to criticize Israel’s new annexation plans should know that their words ring hollow, unless they are backed up by significant and concrete steps to hold Israel accountable. The absolute minimum would be sanctions on the government and state of Israel until it respects international law. Imposed immediately! Anything less is just naked deception, aimed at keeping Palestinians under the boot of Zionist colonization permanently.

By Marion Kawas

This article was published in the Palestine Chronicle under the title:
Western Hypocrisy has Empowered Israeli Annexation