by Rhonda Spivak
The following are questions given to Michael Ignatieff, the leader of Canada’s Liberal Party who was in Winnipeg during an interview on April 24th, and his responses. The questions and answers are reproduced here not necessarily in the order they were asked.
LOCAL-ABORIGINAL URBAN RESERVE IN TUXEDO
SPIVAK: Do you think there should be an urban aboriginal reserve in Tuxedo [Winnipeg South]?
IGNATIEFF: I can’t comment on that directly. I need to talk to the Chiefs, I need to talk to the community leaders a bit more before I wade in there. You know there’s some issues there that I think I need to think about more before I get drawn in.
IRAN
SPIVAK: What do you think of the approach of the Obama administration in dealing with Iran so far? First it tried dialogue, but now it has backed away from that ?
IGNATIEFF: I don’t think rapprochement is possible with the Ahmadinejad regime and I can’t believe that that’s the objective of the Obama policy. My sense of the Obama policy is [that it is designed to] contain the regime, isolate the regime, and deter the regime and that I think would be the core of a Canadian policy.
Now the issue is moving towards targeted sanctions, targeted in the sense that they target the core elements of the regime and try and avoid harming civilians in Iran. The thing that we have to get right is that there are a lot of people in Iran not only discontented with the A regime but seeking to move against it so if you are going to have a sanctions regime it’s got to target the regime and not cut off the legs of the civilian resistance to the regime and that’s the balance that Canadian policy and international policy has to follow. But, there can be no dealing with this regime. It just not an acceptable member of the international community
SPIVAK: How can sanctions target the regime without hurting Iranian civilians?
IGNATIEFF: I think there’s no question that we can target... the Revolutionary Guard, we can target some of the international holding companies that hold regime assets. [Liberal MP]Irwin Cotler has done wonderful work in thinking about that and marshalling international condemnation of the Iranian regime and also marshalling the instruments of international law to condemn the country for incitement to genocide. That’s been the core of Irwin’s campaign against Iran and it has my full support.
KAIROS
SPIVAK: What do you think about the Harper government’s defunding of KAIROS ?
[On November 30, KAIROS received notice from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) that its project proposal for 2009-2013 had been declined, on the basis that its program did not fit CIDA priorities. In December 16, Jason Kenny Minister of Citizenship and Immigration said to the Global Forum to Counter Anti-Semitism in Jerusalem that “ We have defunded organizations, most recently, like KAIROS, who are taking a leadership role in the boycott [of Israel.]”
IGNATIEFF: I think there’s something gone badly wrong when a coalition of church groups that has a an established reputation for working in developing nations and doing good decent work is suddenly defunded by a Conservative government. I think it’s a bad decision, and we can’t understand its rationale. We think that KAIROS does good work and we would review the file again and see if whether our impression in opposition is right which is that these guys are going good work, let them get on with it.
FUNDING OF UNWRA FOR HUMANITARIAN FOOD AID ONLY
SPIVAK: What do you think of the Harper government’s decision to stop Canada’s core funding of the United Nations Works and Relief Agency [UNWRA] in 2009. Instead of providing funds to general education or health programs by UNWRA in UNWRA’s general account, Canada specifically earmarked all Canadian funds towards food aid for Palestinian refugees.
IGNATIEFF: UNWRA has a 50-60 year record of providing for Palestinian refugees. I know that there is criticism that... they’ve lost their impartiality, they’ve become too controlled by Palestinian elements. So I ‘m aware of the criticisms of UNWRA but I would frankly want to review that decision if we were in government. I think UNWRA is a delivery mechanism for people in need, and I’d want to review that decision... I obviously don’t want don’t want Canadian money going to militants, I don’t want Canadian money supporting political extremism but equally I don’t want us to deny legitimate aid to,you know, civilians in need.
[For more on this issue of the shift in Canadian funding of UNWRA, see Rhonda Spivak’s article in the Jerusalem Post, Jan 13, 2010 reprinted here at the very bottom.]
PALESTINIAN JUSTICE SYSTEM AND PALESTINIAN STATE
SPIVAK: In January 2010, Canada announced it would be focusing its efforts on funding the Palestinian justice system, including building courthouses in Ramallah and elsewhere in the West Bank? What do you think of that direction in Canadian policy?
IGNATIEFF: When I was last in Jerusalem I talked to some Canadian officials who were involved in Palestinian policing and heaven knows the Palestinian justice system needs all the help it can get and its police and security systems need all the help they can get so these are long standing commitments of Canada and we would again support them provided that there are no ties to militant extremism, provided these are building capacity for legitimate Palestinian institutions.
SPIVAK: What do you think of the stated intention of the President of the Palestinian Authority Salam Fayyad to declare a Palestinian state unilaterally by the summer of 2011?
IGNATIEFF: The conditions for recognition for a Palestinian state are very complicated... I’m not going to be drawn into anticipating what Salam Fayyad may or may not do, or what the Palestinians may or may not do.
I’ve always been clear that I believe in a two state solution. I don’t believe Israel can be secure unless its got a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, that can operate as a state, that has a monopoly of the means of force, that lives in peace with Israel and engages in economic partnership with Israel.
So, that’s where I think this has to end and I think that’s where this has to go, but there has to be an orderly process by which Palestinian statehood is achieved and that involves good faith negotiations with the Stare of Israel next door.
ON ISRAEL APARTHEID WEEK
Ignatieff made the following statement which appeared in the National Post in regard to Israel Apartheid Week:
“On university campuses across the country this week, Israeli Apartheid Week will once again attempt to demonize and undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state. It is part of a global campaign of calls for divestment, boycotts and proclamations, and it should be condemned unequivocally and absolutely.
Apartheid is defined, in international law, as a crime against humanity. Israeli Apartheid Week is a deliberate attempt to portray the Jewish state as criminal.
The activities planned for the week will single out Jewish and Israeli students. They will be made to feel ostracized and even physically threatened in the very place where freedom should be paramount -- on a university campus.
Let us be clear: criticism of Israeli government policy is legitimate. Wholesale condemnation of the State of Israel and the Jewish people is not legitimate. Not now, not ever.
The very premise of Israeli Apartheid Week runs counter to our shared values of mutual respect and tolerance, regardless of nationality, race or creed. It is an attempt to heighten the tensions in our communities around the tragic conflict in the Middle East.
On behalf of the Liberal party of Canada and the Parliamentary caucus, I urge all Canadians to join with us in condemning Israeli Apartheid Week, and to reject, in principle, all forms of anti-Semitism, racism and intolerance, both within this country and around the world.”
LOOKING BACK: SPIVAK’S INTERVIEW WITH IGNATIEFF A YEAR AGO
By Rhonda Spivak, March 20, 2009
(*versions of this article below were published in the Canadian Jewish News and the Vancouver Jewish
Independent)
Liberal Party Leader Michael Ignatieff says that the Iranian government must understand that the international community’s support for Israel’s existence is “backed up by credible deterrents.”
Ignatieff was referred to a recent statement made by Israel’s incoming Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the March 9,2009 edition of Newsweek. Netanyahu was asked by Newsweek whether he thought that short of military action it’s possible to halt Iran’s nuclear program. Netanyahu answered, “I think this regime is vulnerable to pressure that ought to be intensified. But none of these sanctions and other measures that are contemplated would have much of an effect if the Iranians believe that a military option is off the table.”
After referring to the above statement by Netanyahu, Ignatieff was asked if he agreed with Netanyahu. Ignatieff’s response:
“What I would say is that Iran has to understand that the international community is united on the proposition that you can’t deny the holocaust, and you can’t threaten any of your neighbors, and certainly not the Jewish state. And that means that the Iranian government has to be aware that those feelings, those views are backed up with appropriate military force.... so its backed up by credible deterrents. But I think it’s legitimate... to say no thoughtful Israeli and no thoughtful Iranian in my view wants this to come to conflict, and it would be a catastrophe for both sides. And Canada has always stood for peace. So... Canada has to stand essentially for three things: unequivocal condemnation of holocaust denying rhetoric [and] anti-Israeli rhetoric by the Iranian regime 2) commitment to credible military deterrence 3) commitment to demanding that Iran comply with the International Atomic Energy Association in respect of its domestic nuclear program; and 4) Canada has always said there are no military solutions in this region.
“At the end of the day, Iran is a great power. Israel is a legitimate democratic state. There are no ultimate military solutions to these problems. There has to be some kind of opening of the doors in which Israel and Iran eventually sit down and live in peace with each other. The alternatives are generally too horrible to contemplate. That doesn’t mean backing down form being totally clear to the Iranians, but I don’t want to encourage any saber rattling rhetoric, especially not at a moment when the President of the United States is beginning to open the door to discussion. And those discussions I’ve made clear have to include as the central item of business with the Iranians: you can’t talk to Israel this way, it’s got to stop. And if they stop, then things become possible. If not, we’ll be back in the deep freeze for a long time to come.”
Ignatieff was asked whether he would be in favour of trying to organize an explicit statement and commitment from a number of countries (West and East) regarding the safety of Israel that might be used to try to dissuade Iran from ever deploying nuclear weapons against the Jewish state. He answered:
“I think Iran is fully aware...[Israel’s] allies have made it perfectly clear that nuclear threats towards Israel are unacceptable and will be met with...uh there’s credible deterrence, lets put it that way. I don’t think the Iranian regime... is in any doubt about the determination of Israel’s allies to defend her.”
Ignatieff made a statement in the Gaurdian, in April 19, 2002, regarding the Palestinian territories. He was quoted then as saying:
“Two years ago, an American friend took me on a helicopter ride from Jerusalem to the Golan Heights over the Palestinian West Bank. He wanted to show me how vulnerable Israel was, how the Arabs only had to cross 11 km of land to reach the sea and throw the Israelis into it. I got this message but I also came away with another one. When I looked down at the West Bank, at the settlements like Crusader forts occupying the high ground, at the Israeli security cordon along the Jordan river closing off the Palestinian lands from Jordan, I knew I was not looking down at a state or the beginnings of one, but at a Bantustan, one of those pseudo-states created in dying years of apartheid to keep the African population under control.”
When asked to clarify what he meant by the above statement, Ignatieff responded:
“You know I think all my adult life [I’ve] made it clear that... it’s... illegitimate to compare Israel to apartheid South Africa and let’s be very clear why, because all citizens of Israel have equal rights. In apartheid South Africa, people were excluded from full citizenship on the basis of race. And that was denounced as a crime against humanity. So I’ve never ever in my life equated Israel and apartheid South Africa. I think what I meant in using the terminology that I used in that article in 2002 is something that I think is as evident to Israelis as it is to anybody else, which is that the only way out of the horror and the tragedy in the Middle East is a two state solution in which Israel has absolutely solid guarantees of its security and international legitimacy, and the Palestinian state is viable enough to survive. I think my choice of words was not of the best, but the point was not to equate Israel to apartheid South Africa but to say for Israel’s own security the Palestinian state that will eventually emerge in the West bank and Gaza must be viable. It’s not for me to say what viability amounts to. It’s not for me to define what the boundaries and frontiers should be. That’s between the two parties. But it ought to be viable.”
When asked if he was concerned about the clear rise of anti-Semitism in the European mainstream, Ignatieff responded:
“Well, it’s not just in Europe. I’m very concerned about the statements by Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. I’m very concerned about Durban II, the flagrant misuse of international UN bodies to promote this entirely false equation between Zionism as a kind of racism. We’ve been here with this for thirty years. So some of the phenomena of anti-Semitism is not new in Canada, and I’m aware there are Jewish communities in Canada that feel a degree of insecurity in Canada that they’ve never felt before.
“My predecessor [Mr. Dion] committed to work with... not just the Jewish community but any community that feels its security is in danger to make sure they have the means to protect and defend their schools,.. all their establishments, because the bottom line for me as a Canadian politician is that every Canadian citizen must have a right to be who they are, say who they are, affirm their identity proudly, and go about their business in security. And the general atmosphere out in the world is of increasing hostility to the Jewish people and Canada has to make a very clear statement that that’s unacceptable, that all citizens in Canada are entitled to go about their business in peace and security.”
See the original interview in the Winnipeg Jewish Review
See more on this at Israel Behind the News
Showing posts with label Canada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canada. Show all posts
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Sunday, April 4, 2010
RESPONSE TO ABORIGINAL SPEAKER WHO MOCKED IRWIN COTLER DURING ISRAEL APARTHEID WEEK
At an event entitled “Canadian Apartheid & Indigenous Solidarity” on March 12 at the University of Manitoba before an audience of about 50 people, Cheryl-Anne Carr, a Metis Canadian, affiliated with the Communist Party of Canada mocked Irwin Cotler, Liberal Member of Parliament, former minister of justice and attorney general of Canada.
Why? What is Cotler’s great sin?
Cotler, a renowned human rights lawyer, has dared to suggest that when it comes to viewing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Jewish people can not be looked at as only having had a connection to the land of Israel for the last 120 years of Zionism, but indeed for much much longer.
M.P. Irwin Cotler. Photo by Rhonda Spivak.
In fact, Cotler has dared to suggest that Jews ought properly be viewed as “a First Nation”, an “ aboriginal people” when it comes to Israel.
He has not said that Jews are the only aboriginal people, but has used this logic to outline a vision for a two state solution to the conflict-two states for two peoples-Israel and Palestine, living peacefully side by side.
According to Carr, however, Jews can not be defined as any “aboriginal people” who have claims to an ancestral homeland. In her talk she painted Jews as a people who had no longstanding attachment to Israel and suddenly showed up at Israel’s door as colonizers, with a purpose of simply oppressing another people, the Palestinians.
Cotler’s thinking on why the Jewish people properly ought to be characterized as “a First Nation” in Israel is cogently outlined in an article he wrote on May 14, 2008, in the Jerusalem Post:
In mocking Cotler in her talk at University of Manitoba, Carr appears to have taken the rather extreme view that the Jewish people have no legitimate claim whatsoever to a national homeland, whatever size--- in other words, Jews ought not have the right to self-determination, ought not to have any state of their own at all.
Carr was not calling for any two state solution. She was in effect recognizing only the claim of one people, the Palestinians, in this conflict. According to her warped view, their claim is to be recognized in its entirety, while any Jewish claim to the land of Israel is to be entirely negated.
And that to her is justice?
A response to Carr can be quite brief.
Irwin Cotler tries to do justice wherever he goes, and because of that he has garnered a tremendous amount of respect as a human rights advocate internationally. His is a far more balanced and fair approach than yours will ever be.
This article can also be read in the Jerusalem Post
See this article and more at Israel Behind the News
Why? What is Cotler’s great sin?
Cotler, a renowned human rights lawyer, has dared to suggest that when it comes to viewing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Jewish people can not be looked at as only having had a connection to the land of Israel for the last 120 years of Zionism, but indeed for much much longer.
M.P. Irwin Cotler. Photo by Rhonda Spivak.
In fact, Cotler has dared to suggest that Jews ought properly be viewed as “a First Nation”, an “ aboriginal people” when it comes to Israel.
He has not said that Jews are the only aboriginal people, but has used this logic to outline a vision for a two state solution to the conflict-two states for two peoples-Israel and Palestine, living peacefully side by side.
According to Carr, however, Jews can not be defined as any “aboriginal people” who have claims to an ancestral homeland. In her talk she painted Jews as a people who had no longstanding attachment to Israel and suddenly showed up at Israel’s door as colonizers, with a purpose of simply oppressing another people, the Palestinians.
Cotler’s thinking on why the Jewish people properly ought to be characterized as “a First Nation” in Israel is cogently outlined in an article he wrote on May 14, 2008, in the Jerusalem Post:
“Israel is not simply a snapshot at age 60, nor a fragment frozen in time; nor is it anchored only in 60 years of Israeli statehood, or 120 years of Zionism.
“For Israel, rooted in the Jewish people, as an Abrahamic people, is a prototypical First Nation or aboriginal people, just as the Jewish religion is a prototypical aboriginal religion, the first of the Abrahamic religions.
“In a word, the Jewish people is the only people that still inhabits the same land, embraces the same religion, studies the same Torah, hearkens to the same prophets, speaks the same aboriginal language - Hebrew - and bears the same aboriginal name, Israel, as it did 3,500 years ago.
‘Israel, then, is the aboriginal homeland of the Jewish people across space and time. It is not just a homeland for the Jewish people, a place of refuge, asylum and protection. It is the homeland of the Jewish people, wherever and whenever it may be; and its birth certificate originates in its inception as a First Nation, and not simply, however important, in its United Nations international birth certificate.
“The State of Israel, then, as a political and juridical entity, overlaps with the "aboriginal Jewish homeland"; it is, in international legal terms, a successor state to the biblical, or aboriginal, Jewish kingdoms. But that aboriginal homeland is also claimed by another people, the Palestinian/Arab people, who see it as their place and patrimony.
‘The existence of a parallel claim does not vitiate that of the Jewish people or cause it to resonate any less as memory and memoir of homeland - where homeland represents history, roots, religion, language, culture, literature, law, custom, family, myth and values. Rather, the equities of the claim mandate the logic of Israeli-Palestinian partition - a logic which in moral and juridical terms requires that a just solution be organized around the "principle of least injustice," and that includes mutual recognition of the legitimacy of two states for two peoples.
“Nor should the internal divides besetting Israel mask the existential raison d'etre, and moral imperative, of Israel itself. Nazism, and the gathering storm of the Thirties, almost succeeded not only because of its pathology of hate and industry of death, but because of the powerlessness of the stateless Jew and the vulnerability of the powerless without a state. Israel, then, is an antidote to Jewish vulnerability, the raison d'etre in the most profound existential sense for Jewish self-determination.
It is not the case, as it sometimes said, that if there had been no Holocaust, there would not have been a State of Israel, as if a state could somehow even compensate for the murder of six million Jews. It is the other way around: If there had been an Israel, there would not have been a Holocaust, or others horrors of Jewish history.”
In mocking Cotler in her talk at University of Manitoba, Carr appears to have taken the rather extreme view that the Jewish people have no legitimate claim whatsoever to a national homeland, whatever size--- in other words, Jews ought not have the right to self-determination, ought not to have any state of their own at all.
Carr was not calling for any two state solution. She was in effect recognizing only the claim of one people, the Palestinians, in this conflict. According to her warped view, their claim is to be recognized in its entirety, while any Jewish claim to the land of Israel is to be entirely negated.
And that to her is justice?
A response to Carr can be quite brief.
Irwin Cotler tries to do justice wherever he goes, and because of that he has garnered a tremendous amount of respect as a human rights advocate internationally. His is a far more balanced and fair approach than yours will ever be.
This article can also be read in the Jerusalem Post
See this article and more at Israel Behind the News
Monday, February 8, 2010
Israel on Canadian college campuses; an up-hill battle
by Noam Bedein, Director of the Sderot Media Center, www.SderotMedia.org.il
Presenting the human side of Sderot, Israel and the western Negev would seem innocuous enough, as it is the only region in the western world where rockets and missiles target a civilian population. The people of southern Israel have their own story to share.
Yet after a 10-day visit to Canadian college campuses, organized by Hillel Canada and the CIJA umbrella organization of Canadian Jewry, I discovered that even Sderot residents must fight for their legitimate right to live in the land of Israel.
The purpose of this trip was to balance the after-effects of the “Gaza narrative”, exactly one year after Israel's 21-day Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip.
On Canadian college campuses, the challenge became to justify the very existence of the city of Sderot.
This was best exemplified by an article published in a Winnipeg student newspaper, penned by a Palestinian-Canadian sociology student. This student amazingly attacked the credibility of another student for sharing her experiences visiting Sderot. This student had described her shock at the ’15 second’ alarm, known as the “Color Red,” which warns Sderot residents of only a few seconds to escape to safety from the time the missile is fired from Gaza to the time it explodes in Sderot.
The Palestinian student showed little sympathy for Sderot under fire:
“Sderot’ is actually a settlement on the Palestinian land of Najd, an illegally occupied territory stolen from Palestinians. It is a town created on the ashes of an ethnically cleansed and defaced Palestinian village....You want to talk about ‘terror’? Najd’s Palestinian villagers were expelled on May 13th, 1948 by Israeli forces before Israel was even declared a state.”
Here is a well-educated student born in Canada, with Palestinian descent, that calls the Israeli town of Sderot an illegitimate “settlement” constructed on the ruins of an Arab village abandoned during the 1948 war. Indeed this same student makes no acknowledgement of the historical fact that between 1951-1953, the Jews that settled in Sderot were from among the 850,000 Jews expelled in masses from Arab countries in the Middle East. During and after the 1948 war, 670,000 Palestinian Arab refugees were fled or forced from their homes.
Indeed, this Canadian-Palestinian college student is not the first to rationalize the thousands of aerial attacks and terrorizing of Sderot and southern Israel civilians.
“You know why Sderot is under rocket fire? Because there was an Arab village called Najd,” began a BBC reporter in an interview. I recall the reporter sitting in our Sderot Media Center office trying to find a ‘reasonable excuse’ to justify rocket fire against a civilian population.
Ironically, most Israelis/Jews do not even know that Palestinians and their leadership define Sderot as an illegal ‘settlement,’ while under international law it is undisputedly a city in the State of Israel.
Indeed, the first question I often ask student audiences during presentations is the following:
“If Sderot is a settlement and two miles northeast of Sderot lies the ruins of the Arab village called Najd, which the Palestinians say had a population of 30 families, who now live in the United Nations refugee camps in Gaza, what’s the justification for Jews to live in Sderot or anywhere else in Israel?”
The challenge today is to first actually ask these basic questions, before throwing around answers or solutions for the modern Arab-Israeli conflict.
“What is our right, as Jews and as Israelis, to this country in our homeland? Do we have any rights to this land at all?”
This is the way I was able to get across and present Israel’s perspective to Muslims, to pro-Palestinians, Israel critics and to the international press. By asking this basic question, we ask everyone to realize that Israel is the only independent country in the world whose legitimacy as a state is being questioned.
The leadership and governing bodies of the Palestinian side do not recognize Sderot's establishment in the first years of the creation of the Jewish state, while most Israelis/Jews have accepted a two- state solution.
As another Canadian-Palestinian student expressed himself during my presentation at Carleton University in Ottawa, quite matter of fact:
”You Jews dreamt to go back to your home land after 2,000 years... Why do you think we will stop teaching our children to dream to return to our homes in Al-Majdal (Ashkelon) only after 60 years?”
In other words, educated Canadian born Palestinian students living comfortably abroad, view Sderot quite simply as an illegal settlement and do not recognize the Jewish State of Israel. They do not accept my existence as an Israeli. So does the opposite apply to a Palestinian raised in a United Nations refugee camp, who has not been given any solution or hope for the past 60 years- (even though the UN has resettled more than 50 million refugees worldwide since World War II), will that Palestinian recognize my existence as an Israeli?
Instead, Palestinian education focuses on the preparation of the Palestinian people for the ‘right of return’ to homes and villages from 1948 in Israel which no longer exist. Homes and villages for example in and around cities like Sderot, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Beersheba, and more which have all been under terrorist missile fire.
“So, what’s your solution to this reality?” asked students on each of the Canadian campuses that I visited. In the hundreds of presentations I have given in the past three years I always answer, “I’m not here to present you a solution, I’m here to present the problem.”
The answer to that logical question is that there may not be any instant “solution.” Yet that should not exempt students from knowing the reality of what people in Israel have to cope with - and, in the case of Sderot, that their unique miraculous rocket reality is like no other in the world right now. Rockets have become a daily routine of life in Israel, where one civilian population is being targeted by rockets, rocket-launchers take cover under another civilian population on the other side of the border.
Can this definition of terrorism be understood from a typical 5-second daily news broadcast in Israel in the past four years?
“Two rockets fell outside of Sderot today. No injuries, and no damages,” is how the typical broadcast or news update would read, followed by a weather report in Israel.
These five-second news reports have now tallied up to 311 attacks and including 20 different types of rockets, Iranian missiles and mortars fired from Gaza towards southern Israel, since the END of the military operation in Gaza on January 18, 2009.
If things were truly clear about our rights as Jews to live in Israel, I would not have found myself providing a testimony to a Jew, Judge Richard Goldstone in Geneva. I was allowed a 30-minute presentation where I described to the Goldstone Commission the eight-years of life under rocket fire and concluded by raising my hands in front of them:
“I do not have enough fingers on my hands to count the amount of times rockets exploded only 10 meters from a kindergarten packed with children...”
“Why do we have to wait until a kindergarten or classroom full of children suffers a direct hit by a rocket, in order for us Israel, to have the international support and sympathy to do what is right to protect our own citizens?”
This was the question I put forth to Judge Goldstone and the rest of the panel of UN judges, which was met only with stone silence.
The time has come to raise these questions to college students around the world, and to provide them with proper and accurate answers for them to stand up for Israel and for themselves as proud supporters of Israel.
By generating such awareness, we promote peace without instant solutions and we force the world of public opinion to acknowledge the real barriers for peace, beginning with the continuing refusal of the Arab world to recognize the legitimacy of Sderot and of Israel in their neighborhood.
Noam Bedein is the director of the Sderot Media Center.
Presenting the human side of Sderot, Israel and the western Negev would seem innocuous enough, as it is the only region in the western world where rockets and missiles target a civilian population. The people of southern Israel have their own story to share.
Yet after a 10-day visit to Canadian college campuses, organized by Hillel Canada and the CIJA umbrella organization of Canadian Jewry, I discovered that even Sderot residents must fight for their legitimate right to live in the land of Israel.
The purpose of this trip was to balance the after-effects of the “Gaza narrative”, exactly one year after Israel's 21-day Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip.
On Canadian college campuses, the challenge became to justify the very existence of the city of Sderot.
This was best exemplified by an article published in a Winnipeg student newspaper, penned by a Palestinian-Canadian sociology student. This student amazingly attacked the credibility of another student for sharing her experiences visiting Sderot. This student had described her shock at the ’15 second’ alarm, known as the “Color Red,” which warns Sderot residents of only a few seconds to escape to safety from the time the missile is fired from Gaza to the time it explodes in Sderot.
The Palestinian student showed little sympathy for Sderot under fire:
“Sderot’ is actually a settlement on the Palestinian land of Najd, an illegally occupied territory stolen from Palestinians. It is a town created on the ashes of an ethnically cleansed and defaced Palestinian village....You want to talk about ‘terror’? Najd’s Palestinian villagers were expelled on May 13th, 1948 by Israeli forces before Israel was even declared a state.”
Here is a well-educated student born in Canada, with Palestinian descent, that calls the Israeli town of Sderot an illegitimate “settlement” constructed on the ruins of an Arab village abandoned during the 1948 war. Indeed this same student makes no acknowledgement of the historical fact that between 1951-1953, the Jews that settled in Sderot were from among the 850,000 Jews expelled in masses from Arab countries in the Middle East. During and after the 1948 war, 670,000 Palestinian Arab refugees were fled or forced from their homes.
Indeed, this Canadian-Palestinian college student is not the first to rationalize the thousands of aerial attacks and terrorizing of Sderot and southern Israel civilians.
“You know why Sderot is under rocket fire? Because there was an Arab village called Najd,” began a BBC reporter in an interview. I recall the reporter sitting in our Sderot Media Center office trying to find a ‘reasonable excuse’ to justify rocket fire against a civilian population.
Ironically, most Israelis/Jews do not even know that Palestinians and their leadership define Sderot as an illegal ‘settlement,’ while under international law it is undisputedly a city in the State of Israel.
Indeed, the first question I often ask student audiences during presentations is the following:
“If Sderot is a settlement and two miles northeast of Sderot lies the ruins of the Arab village called Najd, which the Palestinians say had a population of 30 families, who now live in the United Nations refugee camps in Gaza, what’s the justification for Jews to live in Sderot or anywhere else in Israel?”
The challenge today is to first actually ask these basic questions, before throwing around answers or solutions for the modern Arab-Israeli conflict.
“What is our right, as Jews and as Israelis, to this country in our homeland? Do we have any rights to this land at all?”
This is the way I was able to get across and present Israel’s perspective to Muslims, to pro-Palestinians, Israel critics and to the international press. By asking this basic question, we ask everyone to realize that Israel is the only independent country in the world whose legitimacy as a state is being questioned.
The leadership and governing bodies of the Palestinian side do not recognize Sderot's establishment in the first years of the creation of the Jewish state, while most Israelis/Jews have accepted a two- state solution.
As another Canadian-Palestinian student expressed himself during my presentation at Carleton University in Ottawa, quite matter of fact:
”You Jews dreamt to go back to your home land after 2,000 years... Why do you think we will stop teaching our children to dream to return to our homes in Al-Majdal (Ashkelon) only after 60 years?”
In other words, educated Canadian born Palestinian students living comfortably abroad, view Sderot quite simply as an illegal settlement and do not recognize the Jewish State of Israel. They do not accept my existence as an Israeli. So does the opposite apply to a Palestinian raised in a United Nations refugee camp, who has not been given any solution or hope for the past 60 years- (even though the UN has resettled more than 50 million refugees worldwide since World War II), will that Palestinian recognize my existence as an Israeli?
Instead, Palestinian education focuses on the preparation of the Palestinian people for the ‘right of return’ to homes and villages from 1948 in Israel which no longer exist. Homes and villages for example in and around cities like Sderot, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Beersheba, and more which have all been under terrorist missile fire.
“So, what’s your solution to this reality?” asked students on each of the Canadian campuses that I visited. In the hundreds of presentations I have given in the past three years I always answer, “I’m not here to present you a solution, I’m here to present the problem.”
The answer to that logical question is that there may not be any instant “solution.” Yet that should not exempt students from knowing the reality of what people in Israel have to cope with - and, in the case of Sderot, that their unique miraculous rocket reality is like no other in the world right now. Rockets have become a daily routine of life in Israel, where one civilian population is being targeted by rockets, rocket-launchers take cover under another civilian population on the other side of the border.
Can this definition of terrorism be understood from a typical 5-second daily news broadcast in Israel in the past four years?
“Two rockets fell outside of Sderot today. No injuries, and no damages,” is how the typical broadcast or news update would read, followed by a weather report in Israel.
These five-second news reports have now tallied up to 311 attacks and including 20 different types of rockets, Iranian missiles and mortars fired from Gaza towards southern Israel, since the END of the military operation in Gaza on January 18, 2009.
If things were truly clear about our rights as Jews to live in Israel, I would not have found myself providing a testimony to a Jew, Judge Richard Goldstone in Geneva. I was allowed a 30-minute presentation where I described to the Goldstone Commission the eight-years of life under rocket fire and concluded by raising my hands in front of them:
“I do not have enough fingers on my hands to count the amount of times rockets exploded only 10 meters from a kindergarten packed with children...”
“Why do we have to wait until a kindergarten or classroom full of children suffers a direct hit by a rocket, in order for us Israel, to have the international support and sympathy to do what is right to protect our own citizens?”
This was the question I put forth to Judge Goldstone and the rest of the panel of UN judges, which was met only with stone silence.
The time has come to raise these questions to college students around the world, and to provide them with proper and accurate answers for them to stand up for Israel and for themselves as proud supporters of Israel.
By generating such awareness, we promote peace without instant solutions and we force the world of public opinion to acknowledge the real barriers for peace, beginning with the continuing refusal of the Arab world to recognize the legitimacy of Sderot and of Israel in their neighborhood.
Noam Bedein is the director of the Sderot Media Center.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Al QAIDA TARGETS UNRWA REFUGEE CAMPS
As published in the Winnipeg Jewish Report
by David Bedein
Jerusalem, Israel; A report, issued by the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation, shows that Al Qaida and its allies are bolstering efforts to infiltrate Palestinian refugee camps in the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria run by The United Nations Relief and Works Agency,[UNRWA].
UNWRA operates 59 refugee camps for Palestinian Arab 1948 refugees and their descendents
UNRWA is supported by direct contributions from 38 nations around the world under the framework of the the Refugee Working Group, [RWG] chaired by Canada.
Canada provides 11% of the UNRWA budget. The United States provides 31% of the UNRWA budget.
What may cause some concern among donor nations is that Al Qaida appears to have been targeting UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps for indoctrination and recruitment.
That concern stems from strict laws in the US, Canada and other donor nations which forbid financial donations to refugee camps that have become terror bases.
The Jamestown Foundation report documents how the Al Qaida-aligned Fatah Al Islam was recruiting cells in such UNRWA Lebanese camps as Bidawi and Burj Al Shamali.
"If training and organization become available to these young people they have the potential to become a threat to not only the countries in which they reside, but to the region as a whole," the report said.
The report documents that increasing Al Qaida presence has threatened the Western and United Nations presence in Arab states. Jamestown said Palestinians were undergoing radicalization and adopting the Al Qaida doctrine of jihad, or holy war.
In 2009, Al Qaida chief Osama Bin Laden addressed the Palestinians at least three times and appealed for their participation in his Islamist war against the West. Bin Laden has urged Palestinians to fight the United States in Iraq before moving on to Israel.
"They should hasten to take their positions among the ranks of the holy warriors in Iraq, and through support and trust in Allah," Bin Laden said in a recent message.
"The third phase is the emergence of the Salafi-Jihadi ideology as the primary ideology for Palestinian youth in the camps," the report said. "This phase is occurring now, as individuals and small groups are increasingly turning to Salafist militancy."
The biggest target of Al Qaida has been the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camp of Ein Hilwe. Ein Hilwe, the largest of the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, was said to harbor several Al Qaida figures, including Ahmed Abdul Karim Al Saadi, Haitham Abdul Karim Al Saadi and Saleh Qiblawi. Haitham was identified as a deputy of the late Al Qaida network chief in Iraq, Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi.
In Syria, Palestinian followers of Al Qaida clashed with Syrian security forces in October 2008. The unrest was said to have taken place in Syria's largest UNRWA refugee camp, Yarmouk.
"When Syria became a transit point for Syrian and Arab fighters aiming to take up jihad against Americans between 2003 and 2007, there were several cases of young fighters passing through Yarmouk camp," the report said.
The Jamestown Foundation also reported an Al Qaida presence in Jordan's UNRWA Baqaa refugee camp. The UNRWA camp in Irbid, located near the Syrian border, was also deemed an Al Qaida stronghold.
"The ties between the Salafi-Jihadis across the Levant region show that some young men in the UNRWA refugee camps are inspired and influenced by the late Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi's ambition of creating a Levantine Salafi-Jihadi movement," the report said.
by David Bedein
Jerusalem, Israel; A report, issued by the Washington-based Jamestown Foundation, shows that Al Qaida and its allies are bolstering efforts to infiltrate Palestinian refugee camps in the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria run by The United Nations Relief and Works Agency,[UNRWA].
UNWRA operates 59 refugee camps for Palestinian Arab 1948 refugees and their descendents
UNRWA is supported by direct contributions from 38 nations around the world under the framework of the the Refugee Working Group, [RWG] chaired by Canada.
Canada provides 11% of the UNRWA budget. The United States provides 31% of the UNRWA budget.
What may cause some concern among donor nations is that Al Qaida appears to have been targeting UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps for indoctrination and recruitment.
That concern stems from strict laws in the US, Canada and other donor nations which forbid financial donations to refugee camps that have become terror bases.
The Jamestown Foundation report documents how the Al Qaida-aligned Fatah Al Islam was recruiting cells in such UNRWA Lebanese camps as Bidawi and Burj Al Shamali.
"If training and organization become available to these young people they have the potential to become a threat to not only the countries in which they reside, but to the region as a whole," the report said.
The report documents that increasing Al Qaida presence has threatened the Western and United Nations presence in Arab states. Jamestown said Palestinians were undergoing radicalization and adopting the Al Qaida doctrine of jihad, or holy war.
In 2009, Al Qaida chief Osama Bin Laden addressed the Palestinians at least three times and appealed for their participation in his Islamist war against the West. Bin Laden has urged Palestinians to fight the United States in Iraq before moving on to Israel.
"They should hasten to take their positions among the ranks of the holy warriors in Iraq, and through support and trust in Allah," Bin Laden said in a recent message.
"The third phase is the emergence of the Salafi-Jihadi ideology as the primary ideology for Palestinian youth in the camps," the report said. "This phase is occurring now, as individuals and small groups are increasingly turning to Salafist militancy."
The biggest target of Al Qaida has been the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camp of Ein Hilwe. Ein Hilwe, the largest of the UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, was said to harbor several Al Qaida figures, including Ahmed Abdul Karim Al Saadi, Haitham Abdul Karim Al Saadi and Saleh Qiblawi. Haitham was identified as a deputy of the late Al Qaida network chief in Iraq, Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi.
In Syria, Palestinian followers of Al Qaida clashed with Syrian security forces in October 2008. The unrest was said to have taken place in Syria's largest UNRWA refugee camp, Yarmouk.
"When Syria became a transit point for Syrian and Arab fighters aiming to take up jihad against Americans between 2003 and 2007, there were several cases of young fighters passing through Yarmouk camp," the report said.
The Jamestown Foundation also reported an Al Qaida presence in Jordan's UNRWA Baqaa refugee camp. The UNRWA camp in Irbid, located near the Syrian border, was also deemed an Al Qaida stronghold.
"The ties between the Salafi-Jihadis across the Levant region show that some young men in the UNRWA refugee camps are inspired and influenced by the late Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi's ambition of creating a Levantine Salafi-Jihadi movement," the report said.
CANADA ELECTS TO DEFUND UNRWA AND APPLY FUNDS TO PA JUSTICE SYSTEM
CANADA ELECTS TO DEFUND UNRWA AND APPLY FUNDS TO PA JUSTICE SYSTEM
By Rhonda Spivak
Canada advised the Palestinian Authority on January 9th, that it will be re-directing funds given to "general operatiing expenses" of the PA Treasury towards specific projects in the area of justice and policing, according to Minister Victor Toews, President of Canada's Treasury Board.
Canadian aid will be redirected "to specific projects in the Palestinian Authority that will ensure accountability and foster democracy in the PA," he said.
Toews said that on January 9, he met with PA Minister of Planning and Administrative Development Ali al-Jarbawi in Ramallah, and funding to UNWRA was discussed. UNWRA is the UN agency that runs Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Until now, Canada has provided UNWRA with 11 percent of its budget, $15 million (Canadian) annually. Canada's funding of UNWRA, while still continuing to be $15 million annually has been specifically earmarked for "food security."
Toews also met with PA Justice Minister Ali Khashan and Attorney-General Ahmed al-Mughani.
He said that in the past, Canada aid earmarked for UNWRA "went into a general operating fund" in the PA Treasury and although Jarbawi had asked that this situation continue, the practice made it "difficult" for Canada to monitor how the funds were being used. Toews said Jarbawi had asked that the money be given "directly' to the PA Treasury but Toews refused the request.
Vic Toews meeting with Palestinian
officials in Ramallah
When asked whether Canada had concerns that UNWRA funds were being administered by Hamas operatives, Toews responded, "Canada has made a $300m. commitment over five years to the Palestinian Authority, but we want to put that money only into programs that are consistent with Canadian values. We are going to focus directing our funds on institution-building in the PA, such as building a proper functioning justice system. We need to insure that [the PA has] less wide discretion and the funds are being directed to specific projects."
Toews added, "I told him [Jarbawi] that our [Canada's] paramount concern is the security of Israel."
Toews, who is a former director of the Constitutional Law Branch at Manitoba's Department of Justice, said, "We are going to allocate money to training Palestinian prosecutors, and towards the Office of the Attorney-General, and the Public Prosecution Office. If we train people properly we will have the emergence of proper institutions necessary for a state."
"It is obviously more difficult to monitor the use of money sent into general funds than specific projects."
"Overall, Canada is not reducing the amount of money given to the PA, but it is now being redirected in accordance with Canadian values," he said.
Toews added, "Canada has pledged $20m. towards training prosecutors, judges and police and building up the Palestinian judicial sector by building courthouses in Ramallah, Hebron and Tulkarm. But more important than building the courthouses is training the people... A fair and effective system of criminal justice with an efficient and independent Prosecutions Office and Attorney-General's Office is integral to the process, and to securing long-term peace and stability in the Middle East."
Toews indicated that he met with PA officials on behalf of Canada's minister of international development, Beverley Oda, who is in charge of the Canadian International Development Agency.
Regarding the PA's police force that is being trained by US Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton in Jordan, Toews said, "Canada has the largest contingency under Gen. Dayton. We have 18 officers, and the United States only has 10."
After noting that he had spoken to a Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer from Halifax, Nova Scotia, and others, Toews said, "A full third of Palestinian Authority police have no training whatsoever."
Toews, who also visited Jordan during his trip, said he met with Jordanian Prime Minister Samir Rifai, the kingdom's finance and planning ministers as well as the head of its Atomic Energy Commission, "because Jordan is looking to produce nuclear energy for desalination."
Vic Toews meeting with US Lt.-Gen.
Keith Dayton
"They don't have water or energy that other Arab states have. We had very good discussions. Our Canadian technology, CANDU reactors are not conducive to the development of weapons grade uranium. I met with an expert... at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who assured me that this was the case. I wanted to verify it myself."
Toews was in Israel on behalf of the Canadian government to participate in the second annual Manitoba-Israel Water Symposium hosted by the Jewish National Fund-Keren Kayemet LeYisrael.
Rhonda Spivak, an attorney and a writer, is a member of the Canadian and Israel Bar Associations, now editing the Winnipeg Jewish Report at http://winnipegjewishreport.com/
By Rhonda Spivak
Canada advised the Palestinian Authority on January 9th, that it will be re-directing funds given to "general operatiing expenses" of the PA Treasury towards specific projects in the area of justice and policing, according to Minister Victor Toews, President of Canada's Treasury Board.
Canadian aid will be redirected "to specific projects in the Palestinian Authority that will ensure accountability and foster democracy in the PA," he said.
Toews said that on January 9, he met with PA Minister of Planning and Administrative Development Ali al-Jarbawi in Ramallah, and funding to UNWRA was discussed. UNWRA is the UN agency that runs Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Until now, Canada has provided UNWRA with 11 percent of its budget, $15 million (Canadian) annually. Canada's funding of UNWRA, while still continuing to be $15 million annually has been specifically earmarked for "food security."
Toews also met with PA Justice Minister Ali Khashan and Attorney-General Ahmed al-Mughani.
He said that in the past, Canada aid earmarked for UNWRA "went into a general operating fund" in the PA Treasury and although Jarbawi had asked that this situation continue, the practice made it "difficult" for Canada to monitor how the funds were being used. Toews said Jarbawi had asked that the money be given "directly' to the PA Treasury but Toews refused the request.
Vic Toews meeting with Palestinian
officials in Ramallah
When asked whether Canada had concerns that UNWRA funds were being administered by Hamas operatives, Toews responded, "Canada has made a $300m. commitment over five years to the Palestinian Authority, but we want to put that money only into programs that are consistent with Canadian values. We are going to focus directing our funds on institution-building in the PA, such as building a proper functioning justice system. We need to insure that [the PA has] less wide discretion and the funds are being directed to specific projects."
Toews added, "I told him [Jarbawi] that our [Canada's] paramount concern is the security of Israel."
Toews, who is a former director of the Constitutional Law Branch at Manitoba's Department of Justice, said, "We are going to allocate money to training Palestinian prosecutors, and towards the Office of the Attorney-General, and the Public Prosecution Office. If we train people properly we will have the emergence of proper institutions necessary for a state."
"It is obviously more difficult to monitor the use of money sent into general funds than specific projects."
"Overall, Canada is not reducing the amount of money given to the PA, but it is now being redirected in accordance with Canadian values," he said.
Toews added, "Canada has pledged $20m. towards training prosecutors, judges and police and building up the Palestinian judicial sector by building courthouses in Ramallah, Hebron and Tulkarm. But more important than building the courthouses is training the people... A fair and effective system of criminal justice with an efficient and independent Prosecutions Office and Attorney-General's Office is integral to the process, and to securing long-term peace and stability in the Middle East."
Toews indicated that he met with PA officials on behalf of Canada's minister of international development, Beverley Oda, who is in charge of the Canadian International Development Agency.
Regarding the PA's police force that is being trained by US Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton in Jordan, Toews said, "Canada has the largest contingency under Gen. Dayton. We have 18 officers, and the United States only has 10."
After noting that he had spoken to a Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer from Halifax, Nova Scotia, and others, Toews said, "A full third of Palestinian Authority police have no training whatsoever."
Toews, who also visited Jordan during his trip, said he met with Jordanian Prime Minister Samir Rifai, the kingdom's finance and planning ministers as well as the head of its Atomic Energy Commission, "because Jordan is looking to produce nuclear energy for desalination."
Vic Toews meeting with US Lt.-Gen.
Keith Dayton
"They don't have water or energy that other Arab states have. We had very good discussions. Our Canadian technology, CANDU reactors are not conducive to the development of weapons grade uranium. I met with an expert... at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who assured me that this was the case. I wanted to verify it myself."
Toews was in Israel on behalf of the Canadian government to participate in the second annual Manitoba-Israel Water Symposium hosted by the Jewish National Fund-Keren Kayemet LeYisrael.
Rhonda Spivak, an attorney and a writer, is a member of the Canadian and Israel Bar Associations, now editing the Winnipeg Jewish Report at http://winnipegjewishreport.com/
Monday, January 4, 2010
Canadian MP Prof. Irwin Cotler Spearheads Campaign for International Sanctions on Iran
Canadian MP Prof. Irwin Cotler Spearheads Campaign for International Sanctions on Iran
By David Bedein and Arlene Kushner
This past Wednesday, December 30, 2009, Professor Irwin Cotler, a member of the Canadian parliament and former Canadian minister of justice and Canadian Attorney General, conducted a press briefing at the King David Hotel in which he announced that he was spearheading new international sanctions against Iran.
Speaking of the parallels between the current situation and 1939, Prof. Cotler addressed the issue of the Iranian threat from multiple perspectives:
The Iran of Ahmadinejad, says Cotler, is a clear and present danger to Middle East stability, Israel and Jews more broadly, and its own people.
Of great concern is the indifference and inaction of the international community with respect to these dangers, and the impunity with which Ahmadinejad is permitted to proceed.
He proposes an approach to Iran that is broad-based, and demands accountability of Iran with regard to all of the threats it currently represents:
1) Iran is defying the international community with regard to its nuclear development. It is in standing violation of UN prohibitions.
2) Iran has already committed incitement to genocide, as forbidden by the Genocide Convention.
3) Iran is a state sponsor of international terrorism.
4) Iran commits major human rights violations against its own people.
Prof Cotler asserts thatr it is a mistake to focus only on the nuclear threat. This marginalizes the other threats, and allows Iran to proceed as if there is no international concern at these various levels.
Engagement with Iran must deal with all of it. Professor Cotler is working with some 60 international human rights lawyers, who will be releasing a petition very soon that will provide documented evidence of Iranian violations and propose actions to be taken.
Members of this group will be visiting Western capitals -- 15 have been targeted -- in an attempt to energize specific actions against Iran. Recommendations include comprehensive, calibrated and targeted sanctions:
a) Iran is currently in violation of five sets of UN resolutions, which are not being enforced. The start is the enforcement of these resolutions.
b) Gasoline sanctions: measures against those who export refined petroleum products to Iran, or facilitate such export.
c) Curbing of energy investments in Iran. This would include the energy infrastructure -- shipping, etc.
d) Include the Iranian Central Bank -- which is at the heart of Iranian financial dealings -- in financial sanctions. This has not been done yet.
e) International institutions must be monitored with regard to money laundering for Iran.
f) Companies that facilitate domestic repression in Iran must be sanctioned.
g) Sanction companies that do business with the Revolutionary Guard -- the most vicious and radical element in Iran and the one that now has control. The Guard must be put on terrorism lists.
h) Embargoes must be placed against technology and arms transfers to Iran.
i) Landing permission must be denied to the Iranian transportation industry -- planes and ships. Note: The UN is serving as a third party in money laundering for Iran. Iran has been using a UN office -- The Asia Clearing Union -- to avoid US financial sanctions that forbid dealing with Iran.
These sanctions are only the beginning, however.
Additional Cotler recommendations include:
1) The eight precursors to genocide have already been identifiedas existing in Iran.
In such a situation, the Genocide Convention calls for specific actions.
HOWEVER, not one single signatory nation has undertaken these actions.
They are not voluntary -- they constitute a legal obligation. Says Cotler: "International legal responsibility is not a 'policy option.'"
1) The issue must be raised in the Security Council and an inter-state complaint must be brought before the International Court of Justice.
2) Interpol, the international criminal police organization, has a warrant out for the arrest of Ahmad Vahidi, the Iranian Minister of Defense, for his role in the 1994 terrorist bombing of the Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina. But the world seems to be ignoring this.
3) It is important to provide solidarity with the Iranian opposition forces -- those challenging the government.
We are not at a tipping point yet, but it may come, and they may in time overturn the current regime.
They need international support.
Professor Cotler says there is no absence of remedy -- the problem is absence of action.
"We are witnesses to the crime of indifference", he concluded.
Indeed, perhaps the most newsworthy aspect of Prof. Cotler's press conference was that Iran Ahmad Vahidi, who has been named the Defense Minister of Iran, is wanted for the mass murder attack of the Jewish community center in Argentina which he masterminded in 1994.
Vahidi was the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards known as the Quds Force when he oversaw that antisemitic terrorist attack.
At the demand of the Argentinian government, Interpol issued a "wanted persons" alert for him in 2007.
Indeed, a quick search on the interpol web site will reveal the fact that, indeed,
Ahmad Vahidi remains on the active list of people whom Interpol still posts a "wanted" poster for Ahmad Vahidi's arrest..
See:
When Vahidi got his position to oversee the entire military apparatus of Iran earlier this year, a spokesperson for the US State Department simply described Vahidi's nomination as "disturbing".
By David Bedein and Arlene Kushner
This past Wednesday, December 30, 2009, Professor Irwin Cotler, a member of the Canadian parliament and former Canadian minister of justice and Canadian Attorney General, conducted a press briefing at the King David Hotel in which he announced that he was spearheading new international sanctions against Iran.
Speaking of the parallels between the current situation and 1939, Prof. Cotler addressed the issue of the Iranian threat from multiple perspectives:
The Iran of Ahmadinejad, says Cotler, is a clear and present danger to Middle East stability, Israel and Jews more broadly, and its own people.
Of great concern is the indifference and inaction of the international community with respect to these dangers, and the impunity with which Ahmadinejad is permitted to proceed.
He proposes an approach to Iran that is broad-based, and demands accountability of Iran with regard to all of the threats it currently represents:
1) Iran is defying the international community with regard to its nuclear development. It is in standing violation of UN prohibitions.
2) Iran has already committed incitement to genocide, as forbidden by the Genocide Convention.
3) Iran is a state sponsor of international terrorism.
4) Iran commits major human rights violations against its own people.
Prof Cotler asserts thatr it is a mistake to focus only on the nuclear threat. This marginalizes the other threats, and allows Iran to proceed as if there is no international concern at these various levels.
Engagement with Iran must deal with all of it. Professor Cotler is working with some 60 international human rights lawyers, who will be releasing a petition very soon that will provide documented evidence of Iranian violations and propose actions to be taken.
Members of this group will be visiting Western capitals -- 15 have been targeted -- in an attempt to energize specific actions against Iran. Recommendations include comprehensive, calibrated and targeted sanctions:
a) Iran is currently in violation of five sets of UN resolutions, which are not being enforced. The start is the enforcement of these resolutions.
b) Gasoline sanctions: measures against those who export refined petroleum products to Iran, or facilitate such export.
c) Curbing of energy investments in Iran. This would include the energy infrastructure -- shipping, etc.
d) Include the Iranian Central Bank -- which is at the heart of Iranian financial dealings -- in financial sanctions. This has not been done yet.
e) International institutions must be monitored with regard to money laundering for Iran.
f) Companies that facilitate domestic repression in Iran must be sanctioned.
g) Sanction companies that do business with the Revolutionary Guard -- the most vicious and radical element in Iran and the one that now has control. The Guard must be put on terrorism lists.
h) Embargoes must be placed against technology and arms transfers to Iran.
i) Landing permission must be denied to the Iranian transportation industry -- planes and ships. Note: The UN is serving as a third party in money laundering for Iran. Iran has been using a UN office -- The Asia Clearing Union -- to avoid US financial sanctions that forbid dealing with Iran.
These sanctions are only the beginning, however.
Additional Cotler recommendations include:
1) The eight precursors to genocide have already been identifiedas existing in Iran.
In such a situation, the Genocide Convention calls for specific actions.
HOWEVER, not one single signatory nation has undertaken these actions.
They are not voluntary -- they constitute a legal obligation. Says Cotler: "International legal responsibility is not a 'policy option.'"
1) The issue must be raised in the Security Council and an inter-state complaint must be brought before the International Court of Justice.
2) Interpol, the international criminal police organization, has a warrant out for the arrest of Ahmad Vahidi, the Iranian Minister of Defense, for his role in the 1994 terrorist bombing of the Jewish Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina. But the world seems to be ignoring this.
3) It is important to provide solidarity with the Iranian opposition forces -- those challenging the government.
We are not at a tipping point yet, but it may come, and they may in time overturn the current regime.
They need international support.
Professor Cotler says there is no absence of remedy -- the problem is absence of action.
"We are witnesses to the crime of indifference", he concluded.
Indeed, perhaps the most newsworthy aspect of Prof. Cotler's press conference was that Iran Ahmad Vahidi, who has been named the Defense Minister of Iran, is wanted for the mass murder attack of the Jewish community center in Argentina which he masterminded in 1994.
Vahidi was the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards known as the Quds Force when he oversaw that antisemitic terrorist attack.
At the demand of the Argentinian government, Interpol issued a "wanted persons" alert for him in 2007.
Indeed, a quick search on the interpol web site will reveal the fact that, indeed,
Ahmad Vahidi remains on the active list of people whom Interpol still posts a "wanted" poster for Ahmad Vahidi's arrest..
See:
When Vahidi got his position to oversee the entire military apparatus of Iran earlier this year, a spokesperson for the US State Department simply described Vahidi's nomination as "disturbing".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
