Israeli officials are waging an intensive PR campaign against the recent International Criminal Court decision to proceed with an investigation of war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territory. The Israeli foreign minister, Gabi Ashkenazi, had phone calls on Feb. 9, 2021 with multiple counterparts in various Western countries, including Canada, to press home the case that Israel needs back-up on this issue. Although in his call with Canada’s foreign minister Marc Garneau, Ashkenazi didn’t need to do much convincing. Rather, he took the opportunity to thank Garneau for his Feb. 7 statement, which reiterated that Canada does not recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction to proceed with this investigation.
Garneau’s statement highlighted the ludicrous posturing that passes for Canadian foreign policy on Palestinian statehood and human rights. Canada says it supports the Palestinian right to self-determination, but refuses to recognize any Palestinian state unless it has the stamp of approval from its occupier, Israel, in negotiations. So yes, Canada will recognize the theoretical right to a state, but in practice makes sure that an independent Palestinian state will never come to fruition.
There was significant backlash on social media from many groups and individuals who were outraged at this new assault on Palestinian rights by the Canadian government. In a Feb. 9 statement from the Canada Palestine Association, they noted the following:
“Canada’s convoluted double-talk on Palestinian rights and the International Criminal Court is a true masterclass in diplomatic hypocrisy. It flows from a biased and erroneous foundation, that is both inherently anti-Palestinian and allows for sweeping Israeli impunity.
The Trudeau government claims it supports a rules-based order and the ICC, but just not when it comes to Israeli war crimes. According to the recent statement by Marc Garneau, Foreign Affairs Minister, this is because Canada does not acknowledge the ICC’s jurisdiction to launch such an investigation. And that position is based on another piece of flawed reasoning, that Canada does not recognize a Palestinian state. And will only do so if and when such a state is ‘achieved through direct negotiations between the parties.‘
So, lets follow this argument to its conclusion. Canada doesn’t recognize a Palestinian state (except maybe when it comes to vaccines?). Therefore, they are not allowed international protection or access to forums like the ICC; and are at the mercy of the prevailing status quo, which has much of the international community either turning a blind eye to, or actively promoting, Israeli aggression and ethnic cleansing.
And if Palestinians want that to change, they must commit to another 25, or even 50, more years of endless negotiations towards a mythical two-state solution. (Never mind that they went down this road already with Oslo which promised them a state by 1998.) A solution that so far has achieved nothing for Palestinians and has in fact, entrenched even more loss of land and loss of rights. Negotiations that basically give Israel, as the occupying and militarily superior force, veto power over what will be allowed. Ghassan Kanafani, the late Palestinian writer and thinker, aptly summed it up as a ‘conversation between the sword and the neck.’
Still, Canada repeatedly claims it is ‘firmly committed to a two-state solution,’ a claim that rings hollow…in a clear sign that they are willing to allow Israeli violations of International Humanitarian Law and Israel’s flouting of UN resolutions, successive Canadian governments have done nothing but sustain and provide cover for Israeli war crimes.”
The statement also highlighted the apparent ease with which Canadian officials produce performative actions to deflect criticism of their biased policies. Such actions, however, fall within the limits of treating the Palestinians as either little more than a “charity case,” or people who need the expertise of Canadian officials in reform and security matters. The CPA statement concluded:
“Canada will make some shallow gesture or nice photo-op, to show that they really do care about Palestinians and their rights. Some funding for UNRWA, but only if we can control the books in their schools and every action from their senior managers. Or a Canadian diplomat shows up in a photo at a West Bank location with EU reps to demonstrate their opposition to yet another Israeli demolition of a school or a village. But don’t expect any further meaningful action once that school is actually demolished, because that type of serious challenge to the Israeli government’s trampling of Palestinian rights is not on the agenda of the Canadian government.”
1 of 2
Brava Ms. Kawas!! A superb article!
It brings to mind the following:
How the Media Cracks Down on Critics of Israel ❧ Current Affairs
The Guardian, “How the Media Cracks down on critics of Israel” By Nathan J. Robinson, Feb. 10/21
EXCERPT:
“It is widely recognized that critics of Israel, no matter how well-founded the criticism, are routinely punished by both public & private institutions for their speech. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has documented a pattern by which ‘those who seek to protest, boycott, or otherwise criticize the Israeli government are being silenced,’ a trend that ‘manifests on college campuses, in state contracts, & even in bills to change federal criminal law’ & ‘suppress[es] the speech of people on only one side of the Israel-Palestine debate.’ The Center for Constitutional Rights has shown that ‘Israel advocacy organizations, universities, government actors, & other institutions’ have targeted pro-Palestinian activists with a number of tactics ‘including event cancellations, baseless legal complaints, administrative disciplinary actions, firings, & false & inflammatory accusations of terrorism & antisemitism’ & concludes that there is a ‘Palestine exception to free speech.’ (cont’d)
.
Canada has gone to the dark side. It has joined the US and the UK, in showing unwavering support for a human rights violator. They now go against international bodies who want to hold Israel accountable for many crimes. The model worked here, so now the UK and Canada are the next victims of Israel’s controlling actions. They are already controlling the UK and Canada, and they know it.
2 of 2
“The effort to keep critics of Israel quiet sometimes takes the form of explicit government action—there is an open campaign to criminalize speech critical of Israel & some states even require oaths from government employees promising not to boycott Israel. But as Israeli journalist Gideon Levy notes in the Middle East Eye, it often comes in the form of baseless (& offensive) accusations that criticisms of Israel are definitionally anti-Semitic. In the United States, academic critics of Israel have had job offers rescinded or been otherwise kept from teaching, & CNN fired academic Marc Lamont Hill over his call for a free Palestine. In Britain, there has been a years-long absurd campaign to tar former Labour leader (& critic of Israeli government policy) Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. Human Rights Watch notes that the United States government has wielded unfounded accusations of anti-Semitism against it & against other human rights groups like Amnesty and Oxfam that have exposed Israel’s shoddy human rights record. Within Israel itself, the free speech rights of Palestinians are brutally suppressed, & even Jews supportive of Palestinian rights are regularly harassed by the state. Abeer Alnajjar of Open Democracy wrote last year about how ‘major, mainstream news media outlets are sensitized against any reference to Palestinian rights or international law, and any criticism of Israel or its policies.'”
Canada has proven itself unworthy of its previous reputation of upholding human rights and also its once-independence of the USA. This is evident not only in this instance but also in such far-flung countries as Venezuela and Ukraine. I have many Canadian friends who themselves, much like me re: the US, are so disgusted with the downward trajectory of a once supported, adhered-to standard / paradigm of international morality.
Nay and fie, they have been reduced to the status of a puppy both excited and fearful which rolls over on its back and pees prodigiously at the sound of its master’s raised voice.