 |
The B’nai Brith Canada Institute for International Affairs has a mandate to protest the abuse of human rights throughout the world and advocate on behalf of worldwide Jewish communities in distress. The Institute has a special focus on pro-Israel advocacy and education. |
|
|
Rochelle Wilner |
Frank Dimant |
Amos Sochaczevski |
Ruth Klein |
The Institute of International Affairs presented an extensive analysis of the Department’s Position on Key Issues at last year’s Consultations.xvii The Department’s positions remain unchanged according to the most recent version of the Department of Foreign Affairs website, except for a missing section entitled “Progress through Diplomatic Support for Practical Contributions”, which we presume is being updated.
There is just one additional point that needs to be made. In December 2002, the Solicitor-General added Hezbollah to a list of terrorist organizations banned in Canada pursuant to the anti-terrorist provisions of the Criminal Code. Hamas and Islamic Jihad had already been included in the list. The section of the Department’s Policies entitled “Terrorism” still reads, as it did last year: “Canada condemns all acts of terrorism, wherever they may occur. Canada has called for the dismantlement of terrorist networks, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.” The section needs to be amended to include Hezbollah. In addition, now that Canada is making progress on identifying and banning such groups, it is to be hoped that terrorist organizations such as the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, Tanzim and other factions be listed forthwith, even if they enjoy the protection and support of the Palestinian Authority (PA).
The Department of Foreign Affairs has demonstrated that it understands the ongoing terrorism that Israel faces on a daily basis and yet its briefing paper on “Israel, The West Bank & Gaza”, does not make this clear. Concern is expressed at Israel’s “use of force” in built-up areas of civilian population, including refugee camps, without any acknowledgement of why this takes place. Palestinian terrorist groups specifically base their terrorist activities in civilian areas, engage their civilian neighbours in abetting their activities, and show no compunction for assembling bomb belts, planning homicide bombings, establishing safe houses, recruiting impressionable young people for homicide bombings, launching rocket and mortar attacks, all the while admitting and boasting about these activities.
In fact, Israel’s sensitivity to civilian casualties led it to send infantry into Jenin rather than simply level it with artillery and air strikes as was the approach of the US to fighting terrorism in Afghanistan. To the terrorists, this approach was gratifying. As Islamic Jihad terrorist Tabaat Mardawi told CNN on April 23, 2002, finding out that Israel would send in soldiers instead of tanks and planes was a relief. “It was like hunting ... like being given a prize. I couldn’t believe it when I saw the soldiers,” he said. “The Israelis knew that any soldier who went into the camp like that was going to get killed.” He added: “I’ve been waiting for a moment like that for years.” Mardawi estimated that Islamic Jihad had strewn 1,000-2,000 bombs and booby traps throughout the camp.
Another Islamic Jihad leader, Abu Jandal, told Al Jazeera on April 4, 2002 that “Believe me, there are children stationed in the houses with explosive belts at their sides.” He also stated: “We had more than 50 houses booby-trapped around the camp.”
The Department statement that “Attacks against individuals Israel believes to be responsible for terrorist activity are also a matter of serious concern” needs to be re-evaluated. Canada has expressed no such condemnation of US operations in Afghanistan and, indeed, has sanctioned the participation of Canada’s JTF 2 special forces unit in anti-terror raids in civilian areas. When feasible, they sought to capture, as Israel has done. When that proved impossible, anti-terror units moved to strike with lethal force at known and suspected terrorists based on intelligence and an appreciation of the tactical situation. US Special Forces, the SAS, the ASAS, the German GSG-9, and other anti-terror units around the world operate on similar grounds. It is hypocritical to sanction such actions by Canadian and allied troops elsewhere, but to raise “concerns” about these actions when the terrorists in question are targeting Israeli civilians.
It is, of course, a tragedy, when innocent civilians lose their lives in the war against terrorism. These losses are just as tragic as similar “collateral damage” in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
An interesting question is raised by the Department’s comment that “Such targeting, without trial, of those suspected of terrorist acts is a clear contravention of international law.” Whose responsibility is it to put terrorists on trial? Clearly, the PA — which aids and abets constituent factions that implement terrorist attacks — is not a responsible partner. The fact that Israel has incarcerated — often in the face of world censure — 3,000 known and suspected terrorists, clearly indicates that, where feasible, Israel’s preference is capture and trial. In the face of the relentless terror campaign against Israelis and the ongoing assistance and encouragement of such attacks by neighbouring Arab countries, Israel alone bears the responsibility of protecting its citizens. What would Canada do in such a situation? However, the Department condemns “Restrictions on freedom of movement by curfews, closures of access roads and checkpoints”, all defensive measures to stop terrorists reaching their civilian targets.
A key clarification needs to be made by the Department. “Canada considers Israeli settlement practices to be contrary to international law and especially unproductive for the peace process.” Does this blanket statement include all Jews living in the area? Does it mean that Jews should not be allowed to live in Hebron, for example, where members of the ancient Jewish community were slaughtered or mutilated in 1929 by their Arab neighbours and the survivors expelled? By the Department’s definition, does the “peace process” entail Israel renouncing all claims for Jews to live on this disputed territory? If so, this would seem to be advocating a negotiated capitulation to every Palestinian demand, rather than a negotiated peace with concessions on both sides. When the terrorist threat ends, then normal life and the economic growth that the Palestinian economy experienced prior to unleashing violence against Israel can resume.
Just months before the outbreak of widespread Palestinian hostilities against Israel in October 2000, Chairman Arafat told the World Economic Forum on February 1, 2000: “Projects to rehabilitate existing infrastructure and build new ones have been implemented. Modern industrial zones have been constructed. Investment in education and health is continuing…All these efforts, Mr. Chairman, have started to produce positive results. In 1999, the Palestinian economy has witnessed 4.5% growth in GNP; unemployment, around 14%, is down from its previous high rates; private investment is up and has provided 60% of the new jobs created last year.” This was the improving humanitarian picture of the disputed territories as the leader of the PA described it.
Arafat’s Communications Minister, Imad Faluji, told reporters on March 3, 2001 that the uprising “had been planned since Chairman Arafat’s return from Camp David, where he turned the tables on the former US President and rejected the American conditions.”xviii Thus the Palestinian leadership described an improving economic and humanitarian situation, and then took responsibility for initiating the hostilities that have caused the situation to deteriorate.
The Department’s briefing paper also expresses deep concern at “reports from the ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross], among others, detailing incidents when marked ambulances were denied access to wounded civilians, delayed at checkpoints, or were fired upon.” It is a grave omission that the Department does not mention reports and photographs detailing Palestinian use of ambulances to transport terrorists and weapons. As early as October of 2000, USA Today reporter Jack Kelly witnessed Red Crescent ambulances transporting Molotov cocktails to rioters, as well as transporting Palestinian snipers. Wafa Idris, who carried out a suicide attack on the Jaffa Road in Jerusalem and was lauded by the Arab world for her “bravery”, was an accredited Red Crescent secretary. The planners of the attack, Munzar Noor and Mohammed Hababa, were, according to investigators, both Red Crescent employees, and it is likely that Idris traveled to deliver her deadly payload in a Red Crescent vehicle.
In October 2001, Nidal Hazzal, a Red Cresent ambulance driver and Hamas operative was arrested by the IDF. Evidence suggests that he used the access provided by his vehicle to transmit messages and instructions for his organization. A Reuters photo taken on March 8, 2002, shows two Palestinian Red Crescent ambulances being used to block a street in Tulkarem to Israeli military traffic. On March 27, 2002, a search of a Palestinian Red Crescent ambulance turned up two men identified as having direct links to terrorist organizations. An explosive vest similar to those worn by suicide bombers was discovered hidden under a stretcher. Jenin doctor Mustafa Amjad admitted to being recruited by Hamas to transport two would-be suicide bombers to the Israeli Arab town of Baka el Sharkieh on June 17, 2002. This phenomenon continues, making it very clear why the IDF views Red Crescent ambulances with suspicion and extreme caution. It is less clear why the Department does not demand an explanation from the ICRC, which turns a blind eye to the abuse of its emblem, staff and vehicles in this outrageous manner.
The Department states: “The use of schools and clinics as detainment centres or firing points is also unacceptable.” Why is there no mention of the common practice whereby Palestinian gunmen hide in civilian areas, refugee camps and UNWRA institutions, and locate weapons factories and ammunition dumps there? Why is this widespread Palestinian practice ignored?
The Department’s briefing paper includes unequivocal condemnation of “indiscriminate attacks against civilians, including terrorist attacks carried out by suicide bombers affiliated with extremist groups”. Surprisingly, however, there is no condemnation of Yasser Arafat’s own Fatah organization, specifically the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, the Tanzim Militia, and elements of the PA security forces that have also engaged in such attacks. It is impossible to absolve the PA of its direct responsibility in such attacks, when its own factions and functionaries claim credit for them.
The Fatah-related Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades claimed responsibility for, among many other atrocities, the January 5, 2003 double suicide bombing in Tel Aviv that claimed more than 20 lives, the March 12, 2002 ambush at Kibbutz Matsuva that claimed 6 lives, and the horrific March 2, 2002 bombing outside a synagogue in Jerusalem that claimed 10 lives, many of them children.
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) claimed responsibility for suicide bombings at a shopping mall in Karnei Shomron on February 16, 2002, and a market in Netanya on May 19, 2002. Finally, the plethora of incriminating documents seized by the IDF in Operation Defensive Shield in April of 2002 demonstrate the active participation and financing of these terrorist activities by the PA. It is imperative that among its other criticisms of the PA, the Department acknowledge the active participation of the Authority, through its security agencies and its political factions, in the current campaign of terror.
The Department’ briefing paper claims that the rights of the Christian minority in the PA are respected. The hijacking of the Church of the Nativity as a hiding place for senior Palestinian terrorists hardly constitutes respect. Neither does the forced use of church buildings in Beit Jala as firing positions to attack the Jewish neighbourhood of Gilo. A continuing exodus of Christians from Bethlehem, for example, has eroded that town’s Christian majority. The Boston Globe published a series of articles in January 1999 that noted the feeling of discrimination that many Palestinian Christians experience in PA-controlled towns and cities. The situation has not ameliorated since and, in fact, with the rise of radical Islamist organizations such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad, it has worsened substantially.
As for the treatment of homosexuals in the PA although the Department claims that “…the PA does not publicly discriminate against homosexuals”, serious allegations have been made by Gay Palestinians about systematic abuses. Paul Varnell, the noted Gay rights activist and writer, wrote of this terrible situation in the Independent Gay Forum, describing an expatriate community of Gay Palestinians living in Tel Aviv, fearful of persecution and death if they return to the PA. Articles in other publications within the Gay community in the past few months have also illustrated this issue. There have been reports that “one young man discovered to be gay was forced by Palestinian Authority police to stand in sewage water up to his neck, his head covered by a sack filled with feces, and then he was thrown into a dark cell infested with insects.”xix
The Department notes that “Canada has encouraged UNRWA to use its [position to] promote a culture of peace and to prevent incitement in the educational system it supports.” Yet two years and more into the current conflict, that incitement remains entrenched. IDF soldiers and reporters entering UNRWA-run schools described the presence of posters depicting suicide bombers as heroes festooning the walls. UNRWA uses and funds textbooks that incorporate maps of the Middle East that omit Israel and delegitimize its existence, and denigrate Judaism and Jews. The Centre for Monitoring the Impact of Peace has illustrated extensively the continued use of Palestinian textbooks, which are the texts of choice in UNWRA schools within the West Bank and Gaza, to incite hate and violence against Jews.xxi
In addition, the open activity of terrorist groups in the UNWRA camps, as well as their increasing militarization, should be cause for major concern. According to a departmental publication on security sector reform, “Canada has placed particular emphasis on developing practical strategies to enhance safety and security in refugee camps.”xxii Given that statement, addressing the dangerous situation prevailing in the UNWRA camps that Canada helps to fund should be an urgent priority.
In this atmosphere of hatred and violence, there are serious concerns that aid money given to the Palestinian Authority through CIDA or to UNWRA is not reaching those in need. The Department needs to instigate a thorough audit of these funding streams, as well an investigation into the personal wealth of PA Chairman Yasser Arafat and his inner circle. Canada is very insistent that Arafat must be regarded as the legitimate leader of the PA without any preconditions whatsoever, but given his connections to terrorism, the endemic corruption and abuse of aid money by the PA, and the ongoing human right violations of its personnel, this policy should be re-evaluated.
¤ Canada should work towards the identification, banning and dismantling of all terrorist organizations, both at home and abroad, including Palestinian terrorist entities such as the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the Tanzim
¤ The Department’s foreign policy stance, as reflected in its positions at the UN and related agencies, should reflect Canada’s determination to root out all forms of terrorism
¤ Canada should withdraw its support and recognition from PA leader Yasser Arafat as a consequence of his involvement in terrorist activities and his corrupt and despotic rule
¤ Canada should call for a Commission of Enquiry into the increased use of UNWRA facilities and resources to breed a culture of violence and hatred, and should make financial aid contingent on substantial reform in these areas
Table Of Contents
| Introduction
| The Need For Reform Of The UNCHR
| The UNCHR Agenda
| The Mandate of The Special Rapporteur
Canada’s Voting Record At The UNCHR
| Positions Of The Department Of Foreign Affairs
| Terrorism
| Racism And Racial Discrimination
Freedom Of Expression
| Conclusion
| Summary Of Recommendations
| Footnotes