Geschiedenis herhaalt zich weliswaar niet, maar er vormen zich soms toch wel patronen. –– om maar eens op de toer van Het Historisch Nieuwsblad te gaan.

Vanmorgen las ik weer stuk in “Palestine. Peace Not Apartheid“, het boek van Jimmy Carter, de enige president van de VS die zich het lot van de Palestijnen werkelijk heeft aangetrokken. Hij herinnert zich hoe, in maart 1978, Palestijnse strijders vanuit een basis in het zuiden van Libanon een aanval uitvoerden op Israel. “A sightseeing bus was seized and thirty-five Israelis were killed. I publicly condemned this outrageous act, but my sympathy was strained three days later when Israel invaded Lebanon and used American-made antipersonnel cluster bombs against Beirut and other urban centers, killing hundreds of civilians and leaving thousands homeless. I considered this major invasion to be an overreaction to the PLO attack, a serious threat to peace in the region, and perhaps part of a plan to establish a permanent Israeli presence in Southern Lebanon. Also, such use of American weapons violated a legal requirement that armaments sold by us be used only for Israeli defense against an attack.” (Jimmy Carter, “Palestine. Peace Not Apartheid“, Simon & Schuster, New York et. 2006, 44). 

De aanleiding tot was dus de fatale afloop van een gijzeling die op 11 maart 1978 bij Haifa werd gepleegd door een Palestijnse commandogroep die via zee was geïnfiltreerd. Vrijwel onmiddellijk na het incident werden talloze doelen in het zuiden van het Libanon gebombardeerd, waaronder de haveninstallaties van Tyrus en het internationale vliegveld van Beiroet. Ook werden overal doelen door Israelische artillerie bestookt. Tienduizenden Israeli vielen drie dagen later Libanon binnen om in de weken daarna “te opereren” in het gebied tot aan de rivier de Litani (vanwaar de naam “Operatie Litani”).  “Naar de woorden van Minister Weizman”, lees je in de krant, “wil Israël het gebied ten zuiden van de Litani-rivier «voor eens en voor altijd zuiveren van terroristen» (“Israeli’s zuiveren het zuiden van Libanon”, Nederlands Dagblad, 16 maart 1978 (https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:010682231:mpeg21:a0001). De internationale gemeenschap heeft het dan liever, met Israel zelf, over de creatie van “een veiligheidszone” (De Telegraaf, 16 maart 1978,pagina 11, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:011199299:mpeg21:a0446). 

De toenmalige premier van Israel, Menachim Begin, “verklaarde dat de massale Israëlische actie, die in de nacht van dinsdag [14 maart] op woensdag begon, geen wraakneming was voor de Palestijnse terreuraanval van zaterdag [11 maart], maar een daad van gerechtvaardigde zelfverdediging. Deze zelfverdediging werd een dwingende noodzaak voor Israël, nadat de PLO bij monde van haar leider Arafat, die ook de verantwoordelijkheid voor de terreuractie van zaterdag had opgeëist, had aangekondigd dat dit maar het begin van een grootscheepse terreur-campagne tegen Israël was” (De Telegraaf, 16 maart 1978, pagina 1, https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=ddd:011199299:mpeg21:a0446).

Tenminste twee vluchtelingenkampen die in 1949 waren opgezet door het Internationale Rode Kruis werden flink getroffen: “Volgens verslaggevers lieten Israëlische Phantoms bommen vallen op de Palestijnse vluchtelingenkampen Sabra en Chatlia [sic.] aan de zuidelijke rand van Beiroet”. (Enige jaren later, in September 1982, zouden hier de beruchte bloedbaden van Sabra en Shatila plaatsvinden, met duizenden slachtoffers,  die aangericht werden door de Maronitische Hobeika militie in samenwerking met het Israelische leger.) Operatie Litani zou het leven kosten aan zeker 2.000 Palestijnen c.q. Libanezen en 20 Israëliërs. Zo’n 250.000 burgers werden uit het gebied verdreven, de rivier over, en de gewelddadigheden in de regio zouden voortduren, nu alleen met een VN vredesmacht (UNIFIL) in het gewoel (Ilan Pappé, The Biggest Prison on Earth. A History of the Occupied Territories, Londen 2017, 158).

De Egyptenaren stelden dat Israel, in het citaat van voornoemd krantenbericht, “«de beginselen van het internationaal recht en het handvest der Verenigde Naties schendt»”. De Syriërs verklaarden op hun beurt “te weten dat Israëlische aanval bedoeld was om het Palestijnse volk te vernietigen”. Westerse landen uitten zoals gewoonlijk hun “bezorgdheid”. 

Hier zien we, als parallel met hetgeen nu gebeurt in de actualiteit, de modus operandi van de Staat Israel: de Israeli staan gewoonlijk paraat om een aanval van de tegenstander, ogenschijnlijk of werkelijk “onverwachts”, onmiddellijk als excuus aan te wenden om een militair goed uitgewerkt plan van actie te implementeren. Zo schreef Ilan Pappé over de busgijzeling dat de PLO, die bedoeld zou zijn geweest om te protesteren tegen hun uitsluiting van deelname aan de vredesonderhandelingen tussen Israël en de Arabische buurlanden onder bemiddeling van de VS (Camp David), “executed an operation that went badly wrong, ending with the death of thirty-five Israeli citizens. This botched operation gave the Israeli army the ostensible reason to occupy southern Lebanon and meddle in the Lebanese civil war (which had broken out three years earlier) by creating its own militia there, the Southern Lebanese Army (SLA), after completing the occupation of southern Lebanon up to the Litani River.” (Ilan Pappé, op.cit. 158). Pappé schrijft de strategie van, zullen we het zo noemen, deze «voorwendselagressie» [mijn woord: zie eindnoot] toe aan Ariel Sharon (ibid., 158ev.)  Merk op dat ook Jimmy Carter de in zijn ogen buitensporige reactie van de Israeli op de busgijzeling en de dreigementen zag als “perhaps part of a plan to establish a permanent Israeli presence in Southern Lebanon” (zie het citaat hierboven, Carter, op. cit. 44).

Voor een bespreking van de Operatie Litani in context, zie, behalve voornoemde pagina’s van Pappé, ook Ben Schoenmaker & Herman Roozenbeek, red., Vredesmacht in Libanon. De Nederlandse deelname aan UNIFIL 1979-1985, Instituut voor Militaire Geschiedenis, Boom: Amsterdam 2004, 23-25. Cf. Rashid Khalidi, The Hundred Year’s War on Palestine. A History Settler Colonialism and Resistance, 1917-2017, Metropolitan Books, New York 2020, 137. 

Voor actuele aanvallen op Zuid-Libanon, zie bijv. de bevindingen van het onderzoek naar de moord op de journalisten van Reuters in een van de vele illegale “cross-border shillings” ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heTlC9x2gsk): “WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT: Israeli tank fire killed Reuters journalist in Lebanon. Israeli tank fire killed Reuters journalist Issam Abdallah. Reuters spoke to more than 30 officials, military experts, forensic investigators, lawyers, medics and witnesses, and reviewed hours of video footage and hundreds of photos.” 7 december 2023.

Huib J. Lirb, Facebook stukje,  28 november 2023

Naar aanleiding van een opiniestuk van Jonathan Cook in The Middle East Eye van gisteren heb ik vandaag twee zaken om te bespreken: een bezwaar tegen het gebruik van het woord “gevangenen”  in de huidige context van de ruil van gijzelaars; en een bezwaar tegen de in het westen dominante uitleg van de leus “From the River to the Sea etc”.

Deel 1. De ruil van gijzelaars

Er zouden weer Israëlische “gijzelaars” zijn geruild voor Palestijnse “gevangenen.” Uit de woordkeuze blijkt de partijdigheid. Hier wordt het beeld opgeroepen van een contrast tussen, aan de ene kant, gijzelaars die hun lot niet te danken hebben aan een eigen handelen of nalaten, en, aan de andere kant, mensen die zouden zijn gearresteerd, aangeklaagd en uiteindelijk veroordeeld door een rechter omdat ze kennelijk iets op hun kerfstok hadden. Think again. Israëlische militairen stormen bijna dagelijks de gebieden van de Palestijnse Staat binnen om mensen in gijzeling te nemen, veelal vrouwen en kinderen, om ze zonder verdere rechtsgang voor onbepaalde tijd op te sluiten. De “gevangenen” worden vastgehouden in wat men eufemistisch “administrative detention” noemt (“bestuurlijke detentie”), dat wil zeggen, willekeurige opsluiting (zoals de VN dat noemt) met een vervaltermijn van zes maanden  die steeds weer ongemerkt wordt verlengd naar Israelisch-militair goeddunken. Daar schuilt groot leed achter voor vele duizenden Palestijnen. Deze gijzelaars namelijk leven in grote onzekerheid onder slechte omstandigheden. Ze ondergaan vaak mishandelingen die soms ook fataal aflopen. Ook ondergaan ze doorgaans een totale ontzegging van medische bijstand, bezoekrecht, rechtshulp enzovoorts. Vaak komt er jarenlang geen rechter aan hun opsluiting te pas. En al zou er een rechter in het spel zijn, dan nog wordt “recht” gesproken in een Israelisch spel van Apartheid. Want de Palestijnen vallen onder militair recht en het is de Israëlische bezetter zelf die daarvan de spelregels bepaalt. Derhalve zijn ook deze mensen “gijzelaars” . Maar dan van de Israëlische staat.

“The intense focus on the plight of the hostages held by Hamas contrasts strikingly with the complete lack of interest, both historic and current, in Israel’s own hostages: the Palestinian women and children, often seized by masked soldiers in the middle of the night, who are locked up in Israeli jails, where they are rarely, if ever, able to see family. Though the media refer to them simply as “prisoners”, they have been either jailed without trial or prosecuted in military courts with an almost 100 per cent conviction rate.” Jonathan Cook, “How a slogan became bigger news than the murder of babies in Gaza”, Middle East Eye, 27 November 2023 (https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/israel-palestine-war-gaza-slogan-bigger-news-murder-babies)

Deel 2. De manipulatieve uitleg van een anti-apartheidsleus.

Ondertitel van Cook’s artikel: “‘From the river to the sea’ rejects not Israelis or Jews but the apartheid nature of Israel. This is why pro-Israel western politicians and media want to criminalise it.” 

Cook’s opiniestuk gaat verder in op het hardnekkige misverstand over de betekenis van de slogan die door velen nog steeds ten onrechte wordt gezien als een oproep om de Israeli de zee in te drijven. Het is evenwel de bedoeling van die slogan om vrijheid en gelijkheid (al zal broederschap echt te ver gezocht zijn) voor ALLEN te bewerkstelligen van de Jordaan rivier tot de Middellandse Zee.  Femke Halsema wil er niks van weten. De meerderheid in de Nederlandse Tweede Kamer ook niet. Dat geldt ook voor de meeste journalisten en publicisten in Nederland (zie bijv. Jan van Bethem, “Waarom de leus ‘Palestine free from the rivier to the sea’ een duistere betekenis heeft”, Nederlands Dagblad, 19 october 2023).
     Toch ligt er al lang een uitspraak van het Gerechtshof van Amsterdam in een Artikel 12 procedure van 15 augustus 2023, volgens welke de leus niet strafbaar is (https://rightsforum.org/niks-mis-met-slogan-from-the-river-to-the-sea-palestine-will-be-free-oordeelt-rechter/). Die uitspraak is de meeste mensen kennelijk compleet ontgaan.

Ook de Likud partij van Netanyahu zelf gebruikt de geografische aanduiding van de rivier tot de zee in hun handvest. Ik citeer:

“The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)

a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.

b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a “Palestinian State,” jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace.”

(https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party)

Met de verklaring van de Likud partij dat “between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty” wordt het recht op Palestijnse statelijkheid expliciet ontkend. De demonstranten die nu op straat de leus roepen, erkennen in feite de noodzaak om te werken naar een enkelvoudige staat. “They recognise that Israeli governments have already created a single state across the lands that were historic Palestine, and one in which different ethnic groups are segregated and accorded different rights.” De oproep is niet een van ethnische zuivering of genocide (waar de Israeli zich juist wél schuldig aan makenof, voor de hypercritici, “aan lijken te maken”), maar het is een oproep tot “a process of decolonisation – a dismantling of illegal settlements and the revoking of segregated rights – as happened with the end of white rule in South Africa. It recognises that decolonisation is incompatible with the ideological premises on which Israel is founded.” (Jonathan Cook, MEE, 27 November 2023, https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/israel-palestine-war-gaza-slogan-bigger-news-murder-babies)

En het kan nog erger dan de Likud: Daniella Weiss, de aanvoerder van een prominente kolonisten-beweging, blijft volhouden dat het land dat door haar god aan het volk van Israel zou zijn beloofd, haar Eretz Yisrael, zich uitstrekt van de rivier de Eufraat tot de rivier de Nijl. Van dergelijke lieden hebben we dus nog veel meer ellende te vrezen. 

Eindnoten:
 
Voorbeelden van rapportages aan de VN:
“Written statement* submitted by Organization for Defending Victims of Violence, a non-governmental organization in special consultative status”, d.d. 15 juli 2020 (A/HRC/44/NGO/99)(https://www.un.org/unispal/document/statement-submitted-to-the-human-rights-council-by-organization-for-defending-victims-of-violence-a-hrc-44-ngo-99/)

“Joint written statement submitted by Al-Haq, Law in the Service of Man, Al Mezan Centre for Human Rights, Human Rights & Democratic Participation Center “SHAMS”, Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH), non-governmental organizations in special consultative status”, d.d. 21 September 2022 (A/77/356) (https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/A.77.356_210922.pdf)

Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, Francesca Albanese, d.d. 23 September 2021: “addresses a number of human rights concerns, in particular regarding the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, in the context of the settler-colonial features of the prolonged Israeli occupation.” (A/HRC/48/NGO/151) (https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/A.77.356_210922.pdf)

Voor een recent interview met Daniella Weiss en haar optreden in een Australische documentaire over de marteling van Palestijnse kinderen in willekeurige opsluiting, zie:

Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Four Corners Documentary Series, Season 54, Episode 2, “Stone Cold Justice” (on Israel’s torture of Palestinian children), Aired 10 February 2014 (https://vimeo.com/86575949).

Isaac Chotiner, The Extreme Ambitions of West Bank Settlers. A Leader of the Settlement Movement on Expanding Into Gaza, and her Vision for the Jewish State”, The New Yorker, 11 November 2023 (https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/the-extreme-ambitions-of-west-bank-settlers).

Voor een artikel met een strekking die vergelijkbaar is met het opiniestuk van Cook: Alain Alameddine, “What Exactly Do We Want from the River to the Sea?”, The Palestine Chronicle, 25 november 2023 (https://www.palestinechronicle.com/what-exactly-do-we-want-from-the-river-to-the-sea/#:~:text=Palestinians%20living%20under%20the%20British,the%20river%20to%20the%20sea.)

NEWYORKER.COM

The Extreme Ambitions of West Bank Settlers

A leader of the settlement movement on expanding into Gaza, and her vision for the Jewish state.

De afgevaardigde van de Palestijnse Staat bij de Conventie over bepaalde conventionele wapens (CCW) in Genève, Nada Abu Tarbush (links), heeft op 17 november 2023 een verklaring afgelegd die neerkomt op een meervoudige aanklacht tegen Israel, een ontkrachting van het Israelisch excuus van “zelf-verdediging” én daarop aansluitend meteen ook een forse aanklacht tegen de vele medestanders van Israel, vooral onder de vele ondertekenaars van de politieke verklaring EWIPA (Explosive Weapons In Populated Areas).

 De afgevaardigde van de Palestijnse Staat bij de Conventie over bepaalde conventionele wapens (CCW) in Genève, Nada Abu Tarbush, heeft op 17 november een verklaring afgelegd die neerkomt op een meervoudige aanklacht tegen Israel, een ontkrachting van het Israelisch excuus van “zelf-verdediging”  én daarop aansluitend meteen ook een forse aanklacht tegen de vele medestanders van Israel, vooral onder de vele ondertekenaars van de politieke verklaring EWIPA [= Explosive Weapons In Populated Areas]

Bron: The 2023 Meeting of the High Contracting Parties to the Convention will take place in Geneva, Switzerland from 15 to 17 November 2023, in Room XIX of the Palais des Nations. Chairperson: H.E. Mr. Federico Villegas (Argentina) (https://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1b/k1bf0dm04k)

Transcriptie.

[20:14 in TC van UN WebTV] Nada Tarbush: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Given that a number of states have spoken about Palestine directly, we have prepared three replies which we will read one after the other and we kindly ask for your indulgence in that regard. We will first respond to Israel’s statement. 

[20:35] Mr. Chair, at the outset, let us remind Israel that our name is not the Palestinian Authority, but the state of Palestine. Sure, your finance minister said at an event in Paris earlier this year there is no such thing as a Palestinian people. And your prime minister on the 24th of September held up a map at the General Assembly entitled “The New Middle East” in which Palestine was deleted and replaced entirely with Israel. 

[21:08] But if your government is annexationist and racist, this body is not. And we ask you to kindly adhere to UN protocol and nomenclature and to show respect to all stakeholders in this room. Let us also remind the Israeli delegate that the lack of rules of procedure for this meeting does not give carte blanche to lose all sense of decorum when speaking to interlocutors in this room. To the other states and civil society in the room, let me simplify Israel’s statement for you. 

[21:41] Other than throwing insults around and making grave baseless accusations, Israel said something that should make all of you shudder. It effectively said, “I can kill any and every person in Gaza. The 2.3 million people in Gaza are either terrorists or terrorists, sympathizers or human shields and are therefore legitimate targets.” 

[22:06] Every person, according to Israel, falls into one of these three categories. A child, a journalist, a doctor, a UN staff, a newborn baby in an incubator. And so, according to Israel, it can kill them and then have the audacity to come to this room and tell the world with a straight face, we are acting in international law. The death of each of the over 11,350 people killed over the past month, be it children, journalists, UN staff, the sick, the elderly, according to Israel, was justified. Think about that for a moment and let it give you pause. 

[22:52] Anyone espousing this warped logic has no shred of humanity, no sense of morality and no knowledge of legality. But guess what? Your carpet explanation for carpet bombing will not fly. People are not fools. The people in this room are seasoned diplomats who are well read, have a knowledge of history and many of whom have seen your government make the same arguments during your six previous military aggressions on Gaza in the past 15 years. They have seen you resort to collective punishment, targeting of Palestinian children, journalists, medical staff, aid workers before. They have seen you forcibly transfer our communities, colonize our lands, demolish our homes and evict families from their own properties since the 7th of October and for the 75 years that preceded it. They have seen your state-sponsored disinformation campaign before. Again, not fools. Don’t insult our intelligence. 

[24:10] By saying that it is acting in accordance with international law, Israel is effectively saying the UN Secretary General, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the WHO, UNICEF, OCHA, UN Special Rapporteurs, the UN Independent Commissioner of Inquiry on the Situation, human rights organizations worldwide, disarmament NGOs worldwide, humanitarian NGOs worldwide, countless legal experts are all wrong. Everyone is lying about Israel violating international law and we are asked instead to believe Israel, the state that is actually doing the indiscriminate killing. It is interesting that by saying even wars have rules, Israel quoted the very same UN Secretary General, whose resignation it has called for, because he dared to say that Israel has a history of occupying Palestinian land. 

[25:15] The dissonance of hearing the Israeli representative talk about wars having rules as it commits genocide and breaches every rule in the book live on our TV screens is quite something. To Israel, we say, we see through your PR and disinformation. The whole world sees through your PR and disinformation. The millions of people filling the streets in every major capital of the world, calling you out for genocide, sees through your PR and disinformation. 

[25:52] Perhaps you think that with your incendiary rhetoric, we will all forget the incitement, the declarations and acts of Israeli officials, the people you represent, to wipe out Gaza, to drop a nuclear bomb on the Palestinian people, to destroy the “human animals” and “children of darkness”. Perhaps you think that your constant intimidation and threatening language will make everyone overlook the fact that Israelis, as we speak, killing babies, youth, women, men, elderly, no one too small or too old or too sick to be spared its wrath. Perhaps you think that by cutting off telecommunications and imposing yet another blackout on Gaza, you can continue to commit genocide while avoiding the annoyance of people being able to use their phones and computers to report on it. Perhaps you think that as your trigger-happy soldiers continue to kill journalists, 41 so far, the highest number of journalists killed over a four-week period than in any conflict in the last three decades, you think that no one will be left to expose your crimes. Perhaps you think that by trying to silence anyone who tries to speak about your crimes, the international law violations of the state, by calling them either anti-Semites or terror supporters, people will be silent. And your intimidation campaign knows no bounds. 

[27:30] They attack Palestinians, Jews, Israelis, U.N. officials, politicians, parliamentarians, university professors, and anyone worldwide who calls you out for your violations of international law. But guess what? Your intimidation and silencing will not work. We, along with all peace-loving nations and along with all people of conscience around the world, will not be silent. We will continue to call you out on your crimes to call for accountability for your violations, for sanctions as your government continues to reject calls for a ceasefire, to massacre our people, and to entrench your colonial occupation and apartheid regime. 

[28:18] Something your country should have learned over the past 75 years is that the Palestinian people are a people who refuse to disappear. And your nuclear threats, and your bombs, and your tanks, and your bulldozers will never break the Palestinian people’s will to be free, and to live in the dignity and peace to which all people are entitled. Unlike you, we have consistently stood in this forum calling for respect for international law, for ethical principles to guide state behavior, for peace over war, for humanity over national interests, for disarmament over destruction. Once again, we stand in this forum to call on all states to respect and ensure respect for international law. Let the law be the measure by which all are judged, not propaganda and hateful, biased, spin steeped in racism. [29:18] And to Israel’s absurd assertion that Palestinians have a problem with people of Jewish faith, and give the impression that this is a religious conflict, let us say it loud and clear, this is not, and has never been about religion. 

[29:35] Had the occupiers of our land, or the violators of our rights been Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, atheist, or of any other conviction, we would have called them out all the same. Palestine has always been multi-racial, multi-ethnic, and multi-religious. People of Jewish faith have lived in historic Palestine as Palestinians for centuries. 

[30:04] We consider them to be our brothers and sisters. And since the memory of the Holocaust has been invoked, let us also say loud and clear, we have the greatest of solidarity with both the victims and survivors of the Holocaust. [30:15] It was not Palestinians that committed that horrific genocide, but the fascist forces that spawned from Europe. And it is unconscionable that a number of European leaders are again beating the drum as another genocide is now underway in Gaza. We are united with those hundreds of thousands of Jews around the world, including from organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace, If Not Now, Na’amud UK, who are calling out this genocide and chanting in the streets of New York, London, Paris, Berlin, Sydney, Toronto, and all major western cities so that their governments can hear, “Not in our name! End the genocide in Gaza!” With them, we stand together to end this pain and suffering. Together, we will not allow this to happen. Never again is now.

[31:18] Now in response to the European Union, and states that claimed that Israel is acting in self-defense in Gaza. …

[31:30. De voorzitter grijpt in omdat de verklaring volgens hem weliswaar belangrijk is, nodig, maar wel te lang. Tot dusver heb ik voor transcriptie gebruik gemaakt van anderman’s transcriptie, die ik evenwel heb voorzien van tijdcodes gerelateerd aan de UNWebTV video (https://www.sott.net/article/486169-Palestinian-Representative-Nada-Abu-Tarbush-Demolishes-Israeli-Lies-at-UN). Het vervolg heb ik zelf getranscribeerd. Nada Abu Tarbush hervat dus haar betoog.]

[32:07]  So, In response to the European Union, and states that claimed that Israel is acting in self-defense, I am now convinced there is another International Law that we don’t know about. That the European Union, Switzerland, the United States and others are referring to when they use the term «self-defence» to descibe the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity at scale. One that allows collective punishment, indiscriminate attacks, wanton destruction, racial discrimination as long as your name is Israel. They just forgot to teach us this law in high school. That is why there is such a misunderstanding between us. 

      [32:43] When they say that Israel has a right to «self-defence» in Gaza, perhaps they would like to define their use of the term for all in this room. [32:53] Are you saying that dropping the equivalent of two nuclear bombs over the heads of 2.3 million people in one of the most densely populated areas on earth constitutes «self-defence»? Is destroying over 50% of all civilian infrastructure «self-defence»? Starving civilians, imposing a medieval siege, forcibly displacing millions of people, killing UN Staff, is this «self-defence»? [33:16] Do your governments feel no shame using language intended to justify the killing of thousands of children? So let me correct it for you: carpet bombing an occupied, besieged, colonised population with the latest military technology is not «self-defence». [33:33] It is genocidal aggression. And we encourage your governments to seek legal advice before making such statements. [33:39] Under international law, an occupying power does not have the right of «self-defence» against the territory it occupies. [33:35] And I refer you to paragraph 139 of the ICJ Advisory Opinion on the Wall. 

     [33:55] Now, to respond to signatories of the political declaration on EWIPA [= Explosive Weapons In Populated Areas] who did not…. who spoke about the need to uphold the declaration under all circumstances but could not get themselves to say a single word to deplore, condemn or at least express concern about the use of explosive weapons by Israel in Gaza. We have a few words for you. [34:21] For the past month, Gaza has been subjected to the most sustained and intense bombing campaign of a populated area in history. Let me just say that again: Gaza has been subjected to the most sustained and intense bombing campaign of a populated area in history. Amid the bombs, the sound that rings the loudest is the silence and even encouragement of the use of EWIPA by Israel’s allies. Many of whom were at the forefront of advocating for this political declaration. [34:57] Instead, they continue to support Israel’s actions, whether diplomatically, politically or militarily, enabling it to continue the use of EWIPA and egregious violations. [35:07] You know, as we do, that had this been happening in a different part of the world, you would have been horrified, you would have jumped to impose sanctions. Imagine if a hospital in the United States had been hit with explosive weapons killing patients, doctors and staff, or if a church in Europe sheltering homeless refugees was bombed. Any single one of those crimes would have caused you outrage, and they should. Yet all of them happen in Palestine in the span of a few weeks and you are unmoved. [35:39] The Austrian government here deserves especial mention. For years, Austria has been at the forefront of initiatives and efforts of EWIPA. We believed genuinly that Austria was a champion of the declaration. But when push came to shove, and Gaza is facing the most sustained and intense bombing campaign of a populated area in history, the Austrian government was one of the very few states that decided to vote «No» on a General Assembly Resolution calling for a cessation of hostilities. In its statements yesterday, Austria did not condemn Israel’s actions, flauting Austria’s own proclaimed values, but was very quick to condemn the alleged use of hospitals for military purposes with not a single shred of evidence to make that claim. [36:23] Indeed, as Human Rights Watch noted, Israel has put forward no evidence that would justify stripping hospitals of their special protections under IHL [International Humanitarian Law]. This statement therefore clearly emanated from political rather than legal considerations. 

     [36:38] Other states also deserve a special mention. The United States just said that it believes that the political declaration, quote, «helps states to do critical work to help improve the protection of civilians in armed conflict». How could they be saying this, when they themselves are not implementing their commitments under the declaration when it comes to Gaza? [37:02] Had the United States, Israel’s main ally and supporter, ordered a ceasefire seven day ago, a thousand-five-hundred more Palestinian children would still be alive. Had it ordered a ceasefire fourteen days ago, another three-thousand Palestinian children would still be alive. This is a huge responsibility. 

     [37:22] But even more horrifying than that, the United States, the UK, Canada, Germany, Italy and The Netherlands, all of them signatories to the political declaration [of EWIPA] have continued their supply of arms and military support to Israel. Sending more explosive weapons to Israel is not exactly the best way of implementing your commitments under the declaration [37:46] Besides, arms transfers to Israel as it pummels Gaza with explosive weapons could render government officials individually criminally liable for the role in aiding and abetting war crimes and crimes against humanity. And indeed a number of NGO’s have formally notified  politicians of relevant countries of their intention to prosecute.

      [38:05] You all spoke about your concerns for the humanitarian situation in Gaza but this humanitarian catastrophy is not the result of an earthquake or a natural disaster. It is the result of a deliberate genocide, supported militarily by some of the states represented in the room. And you have the power to stop it and you choose not to. 

     [38:25] It would be in the interest of no-one for double standards to lead to discrediting the political declaration on EWIPA. The Palestine Question remains a litmus testfor the viability and efficacy of international law. [38:40] The credibility of this declaration is dependent upon it being implemented by endorsing states in all circumstances and not just when politically convenient and expedient. And I will end her, I think. [38:54]

Eindnoot Over EWIPA: Explosive weapons in populated areas

De tekst van de politieke verklaring EWIPA (Dublin 2022):
https://www.dfa.ie/our-role-policies/international-priorities/peace-and-security/ewipa-consultations/

De lijst met ondertekenaars (Dublin 2022): https://www.dfa.ie/media/dfa/ourrolepolicies/peaceandsecurity/ewipa/List-of-endorsing-states-18-November-2022.pdf

Nadere toelichting: 

https://www.unocha.org/explosive-weapons-populated-areas

https://paxforpeace.nl/what-we-do/programmes/explosive-weapons-in-populated-areas/