Ayoon wa Azan
Jihad el-Khazen Al-Hayat - 13/04/07//
In New York, Darfur is the most important issue in the world, or at least this is what the resident or visitor sees and hears. From subway tunnels to the streets, there are thousands of posters talking about 'genocide' and 400,000 people killed, with advertisements in the newspapers and on television. The lobby to save Darfur claims that it comprises 180 organizations representing 130 million Americans, and its aim is to pressure the Congress and the administration to stop this 'genocide' and punish the Khartoum government.
Darfur is a terrible humanitarian disaster that should not be played down. I am not doing that myself. However, the UN itself said that 200,000 were killed and that what had been committed there were war crimes, not genocide.
I choose to believe the UN, not the lobby to save Darfur, because this lobby is just the Israel lobby nicknamed. The goal is to divert attention from Israel's crimes, or the catastrophe of the war in Iraq.
The US war on Iraq has killed, according to a medical estimate, 655,000 Iraqis. That is, more than three times the dead in Darfur, and perhaps five times if we believe the higher estimate of nearly a million victims. Yet, we do not see posters in New York for the Iraqi victims, nor read about 'genocide' or a call to punish the war cabal on charges of genocide, or at least for committing war crimes.
Today, I pick up on what I said yesterday. The US media tycoon in Iraq is exposed, and the distinguished and capable US press did not resist the war in Iraq as it did over Vietnam. It did not try to expose those responsible for it, as we saw done in the Watergate scandal. The reason, at least in my personal opinion, is that the victims were Arabs and Muslims.
In Darfur, the victims are Muslims. There are 200,000 Muslims killed by Muslims. This lobby, whether of Israel or Darfur, does not defend them. It just makes use of them as a smokescreen to obscure the other crimes stretching from Palestine to Iraq. The Israeli lobby, after all, has been very active in the pursuit of war and still defends it; i.e. still supports killing the youth of the US in an unjustified war to protect Israel's security.
Thus, the US press is not interested because the victims are Arabs and Muslims, and the lobby prevents any in-depth discussion and diverts the attention from the crimes committed every day in Palestine and Iraq.
If there is anyone who questions the influence of the lobby, the AIPAC annual conference last month has provided a sufficient answer, as it attracted senior administration figures and the Democratic opposition at the same time. Vice President Dick Cheney delivered a speech entitled 'The United States and Israel: Tradition and Transcendence'. He stressed that the US "would remain unflinching and steadfast", while the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), reiterated that the US stands with Israel, now and forever. In short, the lobby announced that half of the members of the Senate and half the members of the House participated in the annual conference, which heard the words of a hundred US officials and guests, as well as some Israelis, such as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, via satellite, and Foreign Minister Tzibi Livne who was present.
I argue that the official Israeli lobby, i.e. the Jewish lobby AIPAC, does not represent US Jews. It is led by an extremist minority of war advocates, while the majority of US Jews are moderate liberals who always lean toward peace. The US presidential elections are undisputable evidence of this. During President George Bush's two campaigns, in 2000 and 2004, no more than 20% of US Jews supported him. In other words, 80% of them voted against the most pro-Israeli US President yet, and this is the highest proportion for an ethnic or religious group in the US elections.
I believe that the lobby is on the way toward paying the price for its fanaticism and for not being representative of the majority of the US Jews. While campaign financing silences candidates, blogs are free from such influence. And there are now many blogs that challenge the lobby, refute its falsehoods and extremism, and enjoy huge popularity. But such issue needs pages to be dealt with properly. I will suffice by saying that many among the leaders of the campaign against the lobby are liberal US Jewish bloggers, who have started to record some remarkable success. This is especially the case after the lobby went too far and began to accuse Jews of anti-Semitism just because they oppose the violations of Israel.
I would not lay the responsibility for the Iraq war on only the lobby, as the US press, particularly the great liberal part of it, is responsible before anyone else. I refuse to believe that newspapers such as the 'New York Times' have failed to find out about the forged Niger uranium letters, or cover the fabrication story as they had done with Watergate. On the other hand, a young Italian woman journalist discovered the forgery easily by herself. The forgery was confirmed by Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). I also do not believe that the US press did not see clear and flagrant errors in Bush's State of the Union address on January 28, 2003, or in the then Secretary of State Colin Powell's speech in front of the UN Security Council on February 5, 2003, a speech Powell himself said, some time later, was the lowest point in the history of his political career.
Members of Congress stood and clapped a great deal for Bush, and the US press published praises about Powell's speech. If the shortfall had come from the Arab press, which is negligent by nature, I would have accepted their excuse. But the US press is smarter than to be tricked, and has its traditions and its freedoms that would have made it easier to expose the crime of the war, if it had wanted to. I will continue this topic in a few days.
http://www.j-khazen.blogspot.com/
Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UN. Show all posts
Friday, April 13, 2007
Friday, March 23, 2007
Gaza continues to be an imprisoned society, says UN rights envoy
Gaza continues to be an imprisoned society, says Dugard
Submitted by Tarique on Fri, 2007-03-23 05:56. Muslim World News
Geneva, March 23 (NNN-KUNA) UN Special Rapporteur for the situation of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) John Dugard said that Gaza is an imprisoned society and the prisoner has made several military incursions.
Dugard told the Human Rights Council Thursday that elements of colonialism and apartheid are both prelevant in Israeli practices against the Palestinian people and noted that colonialism and apartheid are contrary to international law.
He added that there are similarities between apartheid of the former regime in South Africa and now in the OPT exercised by Israel.
Israel has learnt the lesson of apartheid by not showing their apartheid practices but the results are the same regime of oppression.
Dugard noted that more than 460,000 Israeli settlers live in the West bank and East Jerusalem.
He questioned whether the International Court of Justice has an advisory opinion on this unlawful state.
In his report submitted to the Council, Dugard argued in favour of a new advisory opinion from the International Court of justice on Israel's occupation of the Palestinian Territories.
He said, in his new report, that it must be remembered that the United Nations requested four advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice to guide it in its approach to South Africa's occupation of South, West Africa/Namibia.
"In these circumstances a request for another advisory opinion warrants serious consideration," he stressed.
The Special Rapporteur poses several questions like what are the legal consequences of a regime of occupation that has continued for nearly 40 years.
He said clearly none of the obligations imposed on the occupying power are reduced as a result of such a prolonged occupation. But what are the legal consequences when such a regime has acquired some of the characteristics of colonialism and apartheid, he said.
"Does it continue to be a lawful regime. Or does it cease to be a lawful regime, particularly in respect of measures aimed at the occupants' own interests.
"And if this is the position, what are the legal consequences for the occupied people, the occupying power and third states. Should questions of this kind not be addressed to the International Court of Justice for a further advisory opinion?
"It is true that the 2004 Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory has not had the desired effect," Dugard said.
Following his visit to the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and Israel from Dec 1 to 8 2006, Dugard said that the Occupied Palestinian Territory is of special importance to the future of human rights in the world.
"Human rights in Palestine have been on the agenda of the United Nations for 60 years; and more particularly for the past 40 years since the occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in 1967.
"For years the occupation of Palestine and apartheid in South Africa vied for attention from the international community. In 1994, apartheid came to an end and Palestine became the only developing country in the world under the subjugation of a Western-affiliated regime.
"Herein lies its significance to the future of human rights," he added.
There are other regimes, he said, particularly in the developing world, that suppresses human rights, but there is no other case of a Western-affiliated regime that denies self-determination and human rights to a developing people and that has done so for so long.
"This explains why the OPT has become a test for the West, a test by which its commitment to human rights is to be judged. If the West fails this test, it can hardly expect the developing world to address human rights violations seriously in its own countries, and the West appears to be failing this test," he noted.
The EU, he added, pays conscience money to the Palestinian people through the Temporary International Mechanism but nevertheless joins the United States and other Western countries, such as Australia and Canada, in failing to put pressure on Israel to accept Palestinian self-determination and to discontinue its violations of human rights.
The Quartet, he said, comprising the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and the Russian Federation, is a party to this failure.
"If the West, which has hitherto led the promotion of human rights throughout the world, cannot demonstrate a real commitment to the human rights of the Palestinian people, the international human rights movement, which can claim to be the greatest achievement of the international community of the past 60 years, will be endangered and placed in jeopardy," stressed Dugard.
Submitted by Tarique on Fri, 2007-03-23 05:56. Muslim World News
Geneva, March 23 (NNN-KUNA) UN Special Rapporteur for the situation of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) John Dugard said that Gaza is an imprisoned society and the prisoner has made several military incursions.
Dugard told the Human Rights Council Thursday that elements of colonialism and apartheid are both prelevant in Israeli practices against the Palestinian people and noted that colonialism and apartheid are contrary to international law.
He added that there are similarities between apartheid of the former regime in South Africa and now in the OPT exercised by Israel.
Israel has learnt the lesson of apartheid by not showing their apartheid practices but the results are the same regime of oppression.
Dugard noted that more than 460,000 Israeli settlers live in the West bank and East Jerusalem.
He questioned whether the International Court of Justice has an advisory opinion on this unlawful state.
In his report submitted to the Council, Dugard argued in favour of a new advisory opinion from the International Court of justice on Israel's occupation of the Palestinian Territories.
He said, in his new report, that it must be remembered that the United Nations requested four advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice to guide it in its approach to South Africa's occupation of South, West Africa/Namibia.
"In these circumstances a request for another advisory opinion warrants serious consideration," he stressed.
The Special Rapporteur poses several questions like what are the legal consequences of a regime of occupation that has continued for nearly 40 years.
He said clearly none of the obligations imposed on the occupying power are reduced as a result of such a prolonged occupation. But what are the legal consequences when such a regime has acquired some of the characteristics of colonialism and apartheid, he said.
"Does it continue to be a lawful regime. Or does it cease to be a lawful regime, particularly in respect of measures aimed at the occupants' own interests.
"And if this is the position, what are the legal consequences for the occupied people, the occupying power and third states. Should questions of this kind not be addressed to the International Court of Justice for a further advisory opinion?
"It is true that the 2004 Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory has not had the desired effect," Dugard said.
Following his visit to the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and Israel from Dec 1 to 8 2006, Dugard said that the Occupied Palestinian Territory is of special importance to the future of human rights in the world.
"Human rights in Palestine have been on the agenda of the United Nations for 60 years; and more particularly for the past 40 years since the occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in 1967.
"For years the occupation of Palestine and apartheid in South Africa vied for attention from the international community. In 1994, apartheid came to an end and Palestine became the only developing country in the world under the subjugation of a Western-affiliated regime.
"Herein lies its significance to the future of human rights," he added.
There are other regimes, he said, particularly in the developing world, that suppresses human rights, but there is no other case of a Western-affiliated regime that denies self-determination and human rights to a developing people and that has done so for so long.
"This explains why the OPT has become a test for the West, a test by which its commitment to human rights is to be judged. If the West fails this test, it can hardly expect the developing world to address human rights violations seriously in its own countries, and the West appears to be failing this test," he noted.
The EU, he added, pays conscience money to the Palestinian people through the Temporary International Mechanism but nevertheless joins the United States and other Western countries, such as Australia and Canada, in failing to put pressure on Israel to accept Palestinian self-determination and to discontinue its violations of human rights.
The Quartet, he said, comprising the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and the Russian Federation, is a party to this failure.
"If the West, which has hitherto led the promotion of human rights throughout the world, cannot demonstrate a real commitment to the human rights of the Palestinian people, the international human rights movement, which can claim to be the greatest achievement of the international community of the past 60 years, will be endangered and placed in jeopardy," stressed Dugard.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Situation of Palestinian Refugees: "Worse than ever"
Report, Electronic Intifada, 21 March 2007
DUBAI, 21 March 2007 (IRIN) - The decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict lies at the heart of 21st century world affairs, with numerous nations, international organisations and NGOs involved on both sides.
The United Nations has long played a role in the conflict, on both political and humanitarian levels. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) was established for the specific purpose of providing assistance to the Palestinian refugees the war created.
Today, UNRWA is the main provider of basic services - education, health, relief and social services - to more than 4.3 million registered Palestinian refugees in the Middle East, predominantly in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.
In the absence of a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem, the UN General Assembly has repeatedly renewed UNRWA's mandate, most recently extending it until 30 June 2008.
Karen Koning AbuZayd, a US national, was appointed Commissioner General of UNRWA on 28 June 2005, having been deputy commissioner since 2000 and having previously worked 19 years for the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR).
Q: Do you see the recent kidnap attempt and shooting at John Ging, director of UNRWA’s field office in Gaza, as a turning point in the way the agency will conduct its operations in the occupied Palestinian territories?
A: No, I hope not because our services are very much needed in the oPt and we do want to carry on with our work. We do have to evaluate how much we do with our international staff, how we can continue. We’re in discussion with the [oPt] government, which is helping us quite a lot, and so we have to see how that plays out and what they do about it.
Do remember that we have in Gaza alone about 9,000 local staff, Palestine refugees themselves, who will of course keep our basic services going – health, education and social services. But to do extra things, to have the international staff there, we have to be sure that we’re going to be safe and secure.
What is your general assessment of the humanitarian crisis in the West Bank and Gaza? Is it worse than ever before?
It is worse than ever. Our emergency appeal this year for 2007 is US $246 million – that’s just the UNRWA part of the CAP. This is higher than it was at any time during the intifada [Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation], which means that the needs are much greater [now] than they were during the intifada. And that’s mainly because of the boycott of the Palestinian Authority over the past year.
So we’re hoping now, with the National Unity Government having come into being [sworn in on 17 March], that there will be a change on the part of the international community – at least some of it – to lighten this boycott and to begin to deal with this government, and to give people their salaries back. Because there are all those people who have been working for nothing for a year. So we’re hoping there’ll be a change.
But the EU and US said they do not accept the new Palestinian unity government as it is. It doesn’t seem as if there will be any change with that respect.
What we have understood is that they are prepared to deal with some members of the government. They’re not boycotting the whole government and so maybe some things can be worked out. And I know that the EU is trying very hard to bring in more money, as they did last year, more money than in the past.
But of course that’s not the same as getting the economy actually working again, opening up the border points, getting things working – the economy as well as the humanitarian situation.
What are some of the logistical difficulties UNRWA faces in providing humanitarian relief in the occupied Palestinian territories with regard to border crossings and checkpoints? Can you elaborate?
Yes, well this is quite severe, particularly in Gaza where the whole of the Gaza Strip is closed off and we’re dependent on one commercial crossing [Karni Crossing], which is open sometimes and open for some hours sometimes.
The Rafah Crossing for people, of course, is very rarely opened and the crossing for other people – businessmen and internationals - through Erez is difficult.
On the West Bank side, as you may have heard many times, there are at least 530 checkpoints, roadblocks, the wall [Israeli separation barrier] continues to expand, the settlements continue to grow and it’s extremely difficult to go even from one village to another in the West Bank.
So we operate under great handicap which makes us very much less efficient and costs us a lot more money than we’d like to spend on these things.
What would you say is the most critical humanitarian need of the Palestinians in the occupied territories?
I would say being able to get the economy back on track, being able to let people work and get their salaries and being able to move goods so the businesses can start again.
Right now, the World Food Programme and ourselves feed the refugees and non-refugees, many humanitarian organisations brought in more money last year to give relief assistance but the people are very keen to work and to take of themselves and that’s what we’d like to see.
Is UNRWA getting the funds it needs to achieve its objectives?
No, we get the money – our donors are very generous, very good at giving us the money for the basic services – education and relief for the most vulnerable. But UNRWA’s been around for 58 years now and a lot of the refugees have been around for the same amount of time with their same houses or same schools.
We have a serious problem with the decline in our standards of our schools, our health clinics. Our schools are double-shifted, our doctors see 100 patients a day so we really need to have money to build up the infrastructure and we need more money every year because there are more refugees every year.
Is the mass exodus of Iraqis to neighbouring countries, particularly Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, having an impact on the Palestinian refugees already in those countries and their access to your services?
No, not really. They are the ones who have access to our services and also of the host governments. The Syrians and the Jordanians are extremely generous to the refugees. Many of them are citizens and are treated as citizens.
In Lebanon, we have a new approach by the government to let us improve the conditions in the camps and let refugees work in more occupations. So I would say that they’re not particularly affected except by the rising prices in the countries where these Iraqi refugees are going to where things are getting more difficult all round.
What is the perception of the United Nations in the occupied Palestinian territories, with regard to the perhaps blurred line between the UN’s political and humanitarian arms?
I think that UNRWA has always been very special among the Palestinians and known as being part of them because we have all over the region 27,000 staff who are Palestine refugees. Of course, because they know that we are there to help them and so on, we are appreciated by the community and that certainly helps the UN generally.
Even throughout this intifada there have been so many UN agencies that have come in that people understand very well the difference between the humanitarian and the political and they will blame the nations that make the political decisions but they don’t so much blame the UN. I would say that we are more appreciated in the oPt than in many other parts of the world, in fact.
What is your vision of how the decades-old Palestine refugee dilemma can be resolved?
This is a political issue. It’s not a humanitarian issue. The refugees are one of the final status issues – as we call them – that will be solved when there is a peace process that finishes and creates a Palestinian state.
At that time, UNRWA is keen to implement whatever the political actors decide. We will be there to work on whatever choices the individual refugees make. It’s very much a principle of refugee business that the individual refugee must make the choice about his future and we would want that to happen before we acted.
This item comes to you via IRIN, a UN humanitarian news and information service, but may not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or its agencies. All IRIN material may be reposted or reprinted free-of-charge; refer to the copyright page for conditions of use. IRIN is a project of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
Related Links
United Nations Relief and Works AgencPublishy
 |
| Karen AbuZayd (Emmanuel Dunseath/IRIN) |
The United Nations has long played a role in the conflict, on both political and humanitarian levels. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) was established for the specific purpose of providing assistance to the Palestinian refugees the war created.
Today, UNRWA is the main provider of basic services - education, health, relief and social services - to more than 4.3 million registered Palestinian refugees in the Middle East, predominantly in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan.
In the absence of a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem, the UN General Assembly has repeatedly renewed UNRWA's mandate, most recently extending it until 30 June 2008.
Karen Koning AbuZayd, a US national, was appointed Commissioner General of UNRWA on 28 June 2005, having been deputy commissioner since 2000 and having previously worked 19 years for the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR).
Q: Do you see the recent kidnap attempt and shooting at John Ging, director of UNRWA’s field office in Gaza, as a turning point in the way the agency will conduct its operations in the occupied Palestinian territories?
A: No, I hope not because our services are very much needed in the oPt and we do want to carry on with our work. We do have to evaluate how much we do with our international staff, how we can continue. We’re in discussion with the [oPt] government, which is helping us quite a lot, and so we have to see how that plays out and what they do about it.
Do remember that we have in Gaza alone about 9,000 local staff, Palestine refugees themselves, who will of course keep our basic services going – health, education and social services. But to do extra things, to have the international staff there, we have to be sure that we’re going to be safe and secure.
What is your general assessment of the humanitarian crisis in the West Bank and Gaza? Is it worse than ever before?
It is worse than ever. Our emergency appeal this year for 2007 is US $246 million – that’s just the UNRWA part of the CAP. This is higher than it was at any time during the intifada [Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation], which means that the needs are much greater [now] than they were during the intifada. And that’s mainly because of the boycott of the Palestinian Authority over the past year.
So we’re hoping now, with the National Unity Government having come into being [sworn in on 17 March], that there will be a change on the part of the international community – at least some of it – to lighten this boycott and to begin to deal with this government, and to give people their salaries back. Because there are all those people who have been working for nothing for a year. So we’re hoping there’ll be a change.
But the EU and US said they do not accept the new Palestinian unity government as it is. It doesn’t seem as if there will be any change with that respect.
What we have understood is that they are prepared to deal with some members of the government. They’re not boycotting the whole government and so maybe some things can be worked out. And I know that the EU is trying very hard to bring in more money, as they did last year, more money than in the past.
But of course that’s not the same as getting the economy actually working again, opening up the border points, getting things working – the economy as well as the humanitarian situation.
What are some of the logistical difficulties UNRWA faces in providing humanitarian relief in the occupied Palestinian territories with regard to border crossings and checkpoints? Can you elaborate?
Yes, well this is quite severe, particularly in Gaza where the whole of the Gaza Strip is closed off and we’re dependent on one commercial crossing [Karni Crossing], which is open sometimes and open for some hours sometimes.
The Rafah Crossing for people, of course, is very rarely opened and the crossing for other people – businessmen and internationals - through Erez is difficult.
On the West Bank side, as you may have heard many times, there are at least 530 checkpoints, roadblocks, the wall [Israeli separation barrier] continues to expand, the settlements continue to grow and it’s extremely difficult to go even from one village to another in the West Bank.
So we operate under great handicap which makes us very much less efficient and costs us a lot more money than we’d like to spend on these things.
What would you say is the most critical humanitarian need of the Palestinians in the occupied territories?
I would say being able to get the economy back on track, being able to let people work and get their salaries and being able to move goods so the businesses can start again.
Right now, the World Food Programme and ourselves feed the refugees and non-refugees, many humanitarian organisations brought in more money last year to give relief assistance but the people are very keen to work and to take of themselves and that’s what we’d like to see.
Is UNRWA getting the funds it needs to achieve its objectives?
No, we get the money – our donors are very generous, very good at giving us the money for the basic services – education and relief for the most vulnerable. But UNRWA’s been around for 58 years now and a lot of the refugees have been around for the same amount of time with their same houses or same schools.
We have a serious problem with the decline in our standards of our schools, our health clinics. Our schools are double-shifted, our doctors see 100 patients a day so we really need to have money to build up the infrastructure and we need more money every year because there are more refugees every year.
Is the mass exodus of Iraqis to neighbouring countries, particularly Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, having an impact on the Palestinian refugees already in those countries and their access to your services?
No, not really. They are the ones who have access to our services and also of the host governments. The Syrians and the Jordanians are extremely generous to the refugees. Many of them are citizens and are treated as citizens.
In Lebanon, we have a new approach by the government to let us improve the conditions in the camps and let refugees work in more occupations. So I would say that they’re not particularly affected except by the rising prices in the countries where these Iraqi refugees are going to where things are getting more difficult all round.
What is the perception of the United Nations in the occupied Palestinian territories, with regard to the perhaps blurred line between the UN’s political and humanitarian arms?
I think that UNRWA has always been very special among the Palestinians and known as being part of them because we have all over the region 27,000 staff who are Palestine refugees. Of course, because they know that we are there to help them and so on, we are appreciated by the community and that certainly helps the UN generally.
Even throughout this intifada there have been so many UN agencies that have come in that people understand very well the difference between the humanitarian and the political and they will blame the nations that make the political decisions but they don’t so much blame the UN. I would say that we are more appreciated in the oPt than in many other parts of the world, in fact.
What is your vision of how the decades-old Palestine refugee dilemma can be resolved?
This is a political issue. It’s not a humanitarian issue. The refugees are one of the final status issues – as we call them – that will be solved when there is a peace process that finishes and creates a Palestinian state.
At that time, UNRWA is keen to implement whatever the political actors decide. We will be there to work on whatever choices the individual refugees make. It’s very much a principle of refugee business that the individual refugee must make the choice about his future and we would want that to happen before we acted.
This item comes to you via IRIN, a UN humanitarian news and information service, but may not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or its agencies. All IRIN material may be reposted or reprinted free-of-charge; refer to the copyright page for conditions of use. IRIN is a project of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
Related Links
Caterpillar has been singled out by the United Nations for complicity in human rights abuses in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
Synod urged to follow ACC steer on Palestine, Caterpillar
The Church of England should follow the recommendation of the Anglican Consultative Council and vote to divest from companies supporting Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine during its General Synod this weekend, campaigners will say at a fringe meeting at York University on Friday (8 July).
The Church of England’s Ethical Investment Advisory Group has been examining whether the £2 million of shares currently held in Caterpillar are consistent with the Church’s ethical investment policy, which prohibits investment in arms companies or companies making ‘weapons platforms’ such as naval vessels or tanks. Caterpillar has been singled out by the United Nations for complicity in human rights abuses in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. As detailed in War on Want’s recent ‘alternative report’ on Caterpillar, thousands of Palestinian homes and vast swathes of agricultural land have been destroyed by the Israeli military using armoured Caterpillar D9 bulldozers. Caterpillar bulldozers have also been used in the construction of Israel’s Separation Wall, ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice one year ago, in July 2004. War on Want campaigners will urge the Anglican Communion to follow the example of the Presbyterian Church (USA), which decided last year to implement a process of divestment from companies, such as Caterpillar, which benefit from Israel’s military occupation of Palestine. They were joined by the United Methodist Church on 11 June this year. Nick Dearden, Campaigns Officer at War on Want, said: “Israel continues to defy international law with its actions in Palestine, and each new day of the occupation sees more Palestinians condemned to poverty and despair. We call on the Church of England to follow last week’s decision by the Anglican Consultative Council and vote now to divest from companies supporting the military occupation of Palestine. Actions not words are needed if we wish to see justice for the Palestinian people.”
1) The Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) unanimously passed a resolution on 22 June 2005 commending its member churches to consider divestment from companies supporting the occupation of Palestine; see www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/articles/39/75/acns3996.cfm 2) War on Want is holding a fringe meeting at the Church of England’s 2005 General Synod in York, at 6.45pm on Friday 8 July 2005, to discuss the Church’s response to last week’s ACC resolution. The fringe will take place in Goodricke College Room 20 (G/020), University of York. For details of the fringe call Joe Zacune on 0781 3526980. 3) For more details or further comment, contact War on Want campaigns officer Nick Dearden on 07932 335464 or John Hilary, Director of Campaigns and Policy, on 07879 641848.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)