Dear friends,
rarely do I applaud politicians, but Independent South Australian Senator, Nick Xenophon's speech to the Australian Senate yesterday (25 June 2014) on Palestine challenging the Australian Abbott government - including the claims by the Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, the Attorney General George Brandis and the Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, that East Jerusalem is not occupied and the Israel's settlements are not illegal should on the whole be applauded.
While I disagree with one or two things in his speech, on the whole it was a very strong one.
Xenophon has recently returned from visiting Palestine and Israel and had already challenged Foreign Minister Julie Bishop's claims that Israel's colonies in the Occupied West Bank were not illegal under international law.
I have included below the video of his speech and an article by the editor of New Matilda, Chris Graham on the speech which gives the political back ground too it. I have also included John Lyon's report on Xenophon's May visit to Palestine, in particular Occupied Hebron.
in solidarity, Kim
***
Senator Nick Xenophon's speech to the Australian Senate on Palestine, 25 June 2014
Independent federal Senator Nick Xenophon has delivered a comprehensive – and at times stunning – dismantling of the Abbott Government’s apparent decision to no longer refer to areas of Palestine as “occupied” by Israel, describing the Commonwealth’s actions as “factually untrue, legally ignorant and most unhelpful”.
Senator Xenophon, an independent from South Australia, delivered the speech to the federal Senate yesterday evening. It followed Attorney General George Brandis ‘freestyling’ during a Senate Estimates hearing on June 5 over disputed territories in the Middle East.
Brandis’ latest brain snap was sparked by a late night question from Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon, to the secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Peter Varghese: "Why did the Australian ambassador to Israel attend a meeting in occupied East Jerusalem with the Israeli minister for housing and construction, the same minister who is forecasting a 50 per cent increase in settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories in the next five years?"
Varghese never got to answer. Brandis interrupted him and decided, on the fly, to single-handedly rewrite Australian Government policy on Israel-Palestine.
“The Australian government does not refer to East Jerusalem by the descriptor 'occupied East Jerusalem'. We speak of East Jerusalem,” Brandis replied.
The following morning, Brandis poured fuel on a growing fire by reading from a written statement: “The description of East Jerusalem as 'occupied …' is freighted with pejorative implications, which is neither appropriate nor useful.”
Prime Minister Tony Abbott tried to dig his party out of the hole, referring Brandis’ comments as a "terminological clarification", but in the process introducing the phrase “disputed territories".
The ‘policy on the fly’ approach to Middle East relations, not surprisingly, sparked widespread outrage, with Arab threats of sanctions worth $2 billion against Australia’s live cattle trade, and more internal party rumblings at yet another stuff up from senior Liberals.
Yesterday evening, Xenophon set the record straight with a point-by-point decimation of Abbott’s and Brandis’ and claims, which he described as “false and actually most unhelpful to the process of achieving a lasting peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict”.
“According to the 1949 Geneva conventions and the 1907 Hague regulations, territory is considered occupied when it comes under the actual authority of the invading military.
“There are certain objective tests.
“One - has the occupying power substituted its own authority for that of the occupied authorities? Yes. It is a matter of fact that Israel's authority prevails in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
“Two - Have the enemy forces been defeated, regardless of whether sporadic local resistance continues? Yes. It is a matter of fact that Israel defeated its military adversaries in the June 1967 war.
“Three - Does the occupying power have a sufficient force present to make its authority felt? Yes. It is a fact that Israel has sufficient force to make its authority felt.
“Four - Has an administration been established over the territory? Yes. It is a fact — a poignant fact — that even the Palestinian leaders who wish to enter or leave the occupied Palestinian territories cannot do so without permission from Israel. Even the Palestinian president cannot go to the United Nations in New York, or indeed to anywhere else in the world, without permission from Israel.
“Five - Has the occupying power issued and enforced directions to the civilian population? Yes. It is a fact that Israel has issued and enforced such directions.
“Indeed, Israel's highest court — the High Court of Justice — stated in paragraph 23 of its verdict in the case of Beit Sourik Village Council v The Government of Israel on 30 June 2004 that ‘Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation’.
“I concede that here the word 'occupied' is 'freighted with implications', but to say they are pejorative is factually untrue and legally ignorant.”
Senator Xenophon also pointed to a landmark opinion handed down by the International Court of Justice in 2004 around the illegal establishment of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, and the construction of a wall by Israel to separate it from parts of Palestine, and to regulate the movements of Palestinians.
That judgment repeatedly refers to ‘occupied’ territory in East Jerusalem.
“Australia is quite happy to accept the wisdom of the International Court of Justice when it comes to whales,” Xenophon said, “but not, it seems, the Palestinians.”
“We already know, thanks to the so-called Palestine Papers — which are the biggest leak of secret documents in the history of the Middle East conflict — that a solution is already available.
“The Palestinian negotiating team in 2008 offered a formula where Israel would annex 1.9 per cent of the West Bank in the context of a land swap, allowing Israel to retain within its borders 63 per cent of the illegal settler population.
“We also know, according to the same leaks, that Israel's negotiating team turned down this offer.
“Australia, by adopting these rejectionist statements, has given comfort to the extremists and has weakened the position of the moderate and reasonable Israelis and Palestinians.
“We should instead encourage our great friend Israel to accept the generous offer made in 2008 so that we can have a real, lasting and durable peace in the Middle East.
“The statement made by the Australian government on 5 June this year is not only wrong; it is factually untrue, legally ignorant and most unhelpful.”
For his part, Brandis reportedly blamed the ‘misunderstanding’ on "journalist-led confusion of an innocuous statement"
*********
Both want the ear of the South Australian senator on his first visit to the region. “This is madness,” he said later. In Hebron, 800 settlers live surrounded by 180,000 Palestinians.
“I would urge any Australian politician who comes here to go to Hebron, walk the streets, run the gauntlet of checkpoints and speak to both sides,” he told The Weekend Australian.
As he walked the ghost-town streets of Hebron, the Palestinian woman, Zleikha Muhtaseb, called from the cage she has built to prevent settlers breaking her windows. “Where in the world do you need to put a cage around your house?” she shouted.
She came downstairs to shake Senator Xenophon’s hand through a security grill — the Israeli army has welded shut her front door so she can open only the back door, and the army does not allow her to walk on the street in front of her house.
But US-born settler David Wilder, carrying a Glock, says Palestinians are not allowed on to that street for security reasons — that recently an Israeli was shot dead nearby.
Senator Xenophon said later: “What I saw in Hebron was heartbreaking — the division, the segregation, the palpable fear in the community.”
He questioned whether having a civilian law for Israelis and military law for Palestinians could last. “It seems unsustainable that you have two different legal systems for people living in the same community,” he said.
In Jerusalem, he met the Likud party’s Yariv Levin, who said Israel was committed to peace. He met Breaking the Silence — almost 1000 current and former Israeli soldiers trying to reform how the army relates to Palestinians — and human rights group B’Tselem.
Senator Xenophon said: “There is some hope through Israeli groups like Breaking the Silence and B’Tselem, who show the views of the Israeli government do not necessarily represent the views of all Israelis.”
He was briefed by Australian barrister Gerard Horton from Military Court Watch about a Unicef report that found ill treatment of Palestinian children appeared to be “widespread, systematic and institutionalised”. Mr Horton said MCW had found that since the report there had been some improvements but 90 per cent of detained children were still tied and 55 per cent reported physical abuse.
Before leaving, Senator Xenophon had a message for any Australian politician who argued Israel’s settlements were not illegal. “I would urge Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten to have a good look at the International Court of Justice’s statement on Israeli settlements,” he said.
“The ICJ statement is crystal clear — all settlements are illegal under international law.”
rarely do I applaud politicians, but Independent South Australian Senator, Nick Xenophon's speech to the Australian Senate yesterday (25 June 2014) on Palestine challenging the Australian Abbott government - including the claims by the Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, the Attorney General George Brandis and the Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, that East Jerusalem is not occupied and the Israel's settlements are not illegal should on the whole be applauded.
While I disagree with one or two things in his speech, on the whole it was a very strong one.
Xenophon has recently returned from visiting Palestine and Israel and had already challenged Foreign Minister Julie Bishop's claims that Israel's colonies in the Occupied West Bank were not illegal under international law.
I have included below the video of his speech and an article by the editor of New Matilda, Chris Graham on the speech which gives the political back ground too it. I have also included John Lyon's report on Xenophon's May visit to Palestine, in particular Occupied Hebron.
in solidarity, Kim
***
Senator Nick Xenophon's speech to the Australian Senate on Palestine, 25 June 2014
Xenophon Smashes Brandis-Abbott Spin On Occupied Palestine
Independent federal Senator Nick Xenophon has delivered a comprehensive – and at times stunning – dismantling of the Abbott Government’s apparent decision to no longer refer to areas of Palestine as “occupied” by Israel, describing the Commonwealth’s actions as “factually untrue, legally ignorant and most unhelpful”.
Senator Xenophon, an independent from South Australia, delivered the speech to the federal Senate yesterday evening. It followed Attorney General George Brandis ‘freestyling’ during a Senate Estimates hearing on June 5 over disputed territories in the Middle East.
Brandis’ latest brain snap was sparked by a late night question from Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon, to the secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Peter Varghese: "Why did the Australian ambassador to Israel attend a meeting in occupied East Jerusalem with the Israeli minister for housing and construction, the same minister who is forecasting a 50 per cent increase in settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories in the next five years?"
Varghese never got to answer. Brandis interrupted him and decided, on the fly, to single-handedly rewrite Australian Government policy on Israel-Palestine.
“The Australian government does not refer to East Jerusalem by the descriptor 'occupied East Jerusalem'. We speak of East Jerusalem,” Brandis replied.
The following morning, Brandis poured fuel on a growing fire by reading from a written statement: “The description of East Jerusalem as 'occupied …' is freighted with pejorative implications, which is neither appropriate nor useful.”
Prime Minister Tony Abbott tried to dig his party out of the hole, referring Brandis’ comments as a "terminological clarification", but in the process introducing the phrase “disputed territories".
The ‘policy on the fly’ approach to Middle East relations, not surprisingly, sparked widespread outrage, with Arab threats of sanctions worth $2 billion against Australia’s live cattle trade, and more internal party rumblings at yet another stuff up from senior Liberals.
Yesterday evening, Xenophon set the record straight with a point-by-point decimation of Abbott’s and Brandis’ and claims, which he described as “false and actually most unhelpful to the process of achieving a lasting peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict”.
“According to the 1949 Geneva conventions and the 1907 Hague regulations, territory is considered occupied when it comes under the actual authority of the invading military.
“There are certain objective tests.
“One - has the occupying power substituted its own authority for that of the occupied authorities? Yes. It is a matter of fact that Israel's authority prevails in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
“Two - Have the enemy forces been defeated, regardless of whether sporadic local resistance continues? Yes. It is a matter of fact that Israel defeated its military adversaries in the June 1967 war.
“Three - Does the occupying power have a sufficient force present to make its authority felt? Yes. It is a fact that Israel has sufficient force to make its authority felt.
“Four - Has an administration been established over the territory? Yes. It is a fact — a poignant fact — that even the Palestinian leaders who wish to enter or leave the occupied Palestinian territories cannot do so without permission from Israel. Even the Palestinian president cannot go to the United Nations in New York, or indeed to anywhere else in the world, without permission from Israel.
“Five - Has the occupying power issued and enforced directions to the civilian population? Yes. It is a fact that Israel has issued and enforced such directions.
“Indeed, Israel's highest court — the High Court of Justice — stated in paragraph 23 of its verdict in the case of Beit Sourik Village Council v The Government of Israel on 30 June 2004 that ‘Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation’.
“I concede that here the word 'occupied' is 'freighted with implications', but to say they are pejorative is factually untrue and legally ignorant.”
Senator Xenophon also pointed to a landmark opinion handed down by the International Court of Justice in 2004 around the illegal establishment of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, and the construction of a wall by Israel to separate it from parts of Palestine, and to regulate the movements of Palestinians.
That judgment repeatedly refers to ‘occupied’ territory in East Jerusalem.
“Australia is quite happy to accept the wisdom of the International Court of Justice when it comes to whales,” Xenophon said, “but not, it seems, the Palestinians.”
“We already know, thanks to the so-called Palestine Papers — which are the biggest leak of secret documents in the history of the Middle East conflict — that a solution is already available.
“The Palestinian negotiating team in 2008 offered a formula where Israel would annex 1.9 per cent of the West Bank in the context of a land swap, allowing Israel to retain within its borders 63 per cent of the illegal settler population.
“We also know, according to the same leaks, that Israel's negotiating team turned down this offer.
“Australia, by adopting these rejectionist statements, has given comfort to the extremists and has weakened the position of the moderate and reasonable Israelis and Palestinians.
“We should instead encourage our great friend Israel to accept the generous offer made in 2008 so that we can have a real, lasting and durable peace in the Middle East.
“The statement made by the Australian government on 5 June this year is not only wrong; it is factually untrue, legally ignorant and most unhelpful.”
For his part, Brandis reportedly blamed the ‘misunderstanding’ on "journalist-led confusion of an innocuous statement"
*********
Hebron ‘heartbreaking’ for Xenophon
John Lyons Middle East Correspondent: Jerusalem: The Australian May 10, 2014
Senator Xenophon visits a demolished Palestinian house in Hebron. Picture: Sylvie Le Clezio
Source: News Corp Australia
IN an empty street in Hebron, deep in the Palestinian territories,
independent senator Nick Xenophon is trying to have two conversations at
once.
A Palestinian woman in a caged balcony is explaining her plight while an Israeli settler carrying a handgun wants his say.Both want the ear of the South Australian senator on his first visit to the region. “This is madness,” he said later. In Hebron, 800 settlers live surrounded by 180,000 Palestinians.
“I would urge any Australian politician who comes here to go to Hebron, walk the streets, run the gauntlet of checkpoints and speak to both sides,” he told The Weekend Australian.
As he walked the ghost-town streets of Hebron, the Palestinian woman, Zleikha Muhtaseb, called from the cage she has built to prevent settlers breaking her windows. “Where in the world do you need to put a cage around your house?” she shouted.
She came downstairs to shake Senator Xenophon’s hand through a security grill — the Israeli army has welded shut her front door so she can open only the back door, and the army does not allow her to walk on the street in front of her house.
But US-born settler David Wilder, carrying a Glock, says Palestinians are not allowed on to that street for security reasons — that recently an Israeli was shot dead nearby.
Senator Xenophon said later: “What I saw in Hebron was heartbreaking — the division, the segregation, the palpable fear in the community.”
He questioned whether having a civilian law for Israelis and military law for Palestinians could last. “It seems unsustainable that you have two different legal systems for people living in the same community,” he said.
In Jerusalem, he met the Likud party’s Yariv Levin, who said Israel was committed to peace. He met Breaking the Silence — almost 1000 current and former Israeli soldiers trying to reform how the army relates to Palestinians — and human rights group B’Tselem.
Senator Xenophon said: “There is some hope through Israeli groups like Breaking the Silence and B’Tselem, who show the views of the Israeli government do not necessarily represent the views of all Israelis.”
He was briefed by Australian barrister Gerard Horton from Military Court Watch about a Unicef report that found ill treatment of Palestinian children appeared to be “widespread, systematic and institutionalised”. Mr Horton said MCW had found that since the report there had been some improvements but 90 per cent of detained children were still tied and 55 per cent reported physical abuse.
Before leaving, Senator Xenophon had a message for any Australian politician who argued Israel’s settlements were not illegal. “I would urge Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten to have a good look at the International Court of Justice’s statement on Israeli settlements,” he said.
“The ICJ statement is crystal clear — all settlements are illegal under international law.”
No comments:
Post a Comment