July 9, 2006
The Editor,
The Chronicle Herald.
Dear Editor:
Israel Defies International
Law.
Howard Gerson, in his article:{"What is behind the
boycotts of Israel?" July 9}, indulges in obfuscation and distortion of the
facts on the ground. He accuses CUPE and the United Church of failing " to
acknowledge the real and difficult issues faced by Israel in the context of
Middle East politics and the complexities of the conflict between Israel and the
Palestinians." This conflict is a very simple one. Israel drove the majority
of Palestinians, in 1948, out of their homeland, and is, since
1967, in illegal occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and
Gaza. This occupation still stands after 39 years, in defiance of international
law and repeated Security Council resolutions. Israeli practices during this
occupation include extrajudicial assassination, detention of thousands without
charge or trial, torture, daily humiliation of Palestinians at check points,
denial of health care, demolition of thousands of homes and expropriation of
property for the creation of illegal colonies [settlements]. These practices are
in violation of virtually every article of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, and are, thus, defined by international law,as war
crimes. Yet, Mr. Gerson claims that
Israel " shares Canadian core values." It is our hope that Canadian values,
unlike Israel's, are distinctly different and that Canada honours its
obligations under international law and the UN Charter.
Mr. Gerson objects to CUPE and the United Church's
criticism of what he calls:" Israel's passively defensive separation barrier."
This wall is illegal, built largely, on illegally occupied land and has been
condemned by the International Court of Justice, which
called for its dismantlement.
Mr Gerson castigates Mr. Sid Ryan, of CUPE, for
comparing Israeli racist policies with those of Apartheid South Africa.
Israeli racist policies are manifest to anyone
who cares to look at Israeli policies and practises, as enacted in its
legislation and practised on the ground. These policies are not only practised
against the Palestinians under occupation, but are also enforced against
Israel's own Muslim and Christian citizens. These practises have
been condemned by all international human rights bodies, including
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and
Israeli human rights groups, including B'Tselem. The catalogue of these practises is lengthy
but The late Professor Israel
Shahak, a Holocaust survivor and Chairperson of the Israeli
League for Civil and Human Rights, sums it up accurately in
his statement: " It is my considered opinion that the state of
Israel is a racist state in the full meaning of this term. In this state, people
are discriminated against, in the most permanent and legal way and in the most
important areas of life, only because of their origin. This racist
discrimination began in Zionism and is carried today mainly in cooperation with
the institutions of the Zionist movement."{"The Racist Nature of Zionism
and of the Zionist State of Israel", article published in Pi-Ha'aton,
the weekly newspaper of the students of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem,
Nov.5, 1975}.
Derek Tozer, an
Israeli thinker, stated : " The official policy of the government[of
Israel] is unequivocal. Arabs, like the Jews in Nazi Germany, are officially
'class B' citizens, a fact which is recorded on their identity cards."
Archbishop Desmond Tutu,
during a Christmas visit to Jerusalem in 1989, stated: " I am a black
South African, and if I were to change names, a description of what is happening
in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, could describe events in South
Africa."
The predicament of Israel's own Arab citizens, roughly 1.2 million, is
evidnt as the 2003 Israeli State Committee of Inquiry made
clear, they suffer systemic discrimination in employment, housing, and
education, and lack of equal access to state resources.
It is clear that Israeli practices and laws stand in violation of
international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article One
of the Convention calls on all High Contracting Parties,
including Canada, to take action against any state that violates any
article of the Convention. Accordingly, the boycott, called for by CUPE and the
United Church, is not only legitimate but represents an action that all
signatories to the Convention, including Canada, should endorse and
effect.