Your Excellency Secretary General
Mr, Antonio Guterres,

On the 22nd anniversary of UNSC Resolution 1325 and the annual open discussion at the Security Council for the advancement of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda, the Palestinian Women’s Civil Coalition for the Implementation of UNSC Resolution 1325 would like to bring your attention to the fact that the suffering of Palestinian women living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) has unprecedentedly escalated since this resolution was passed, due to the Israeli occupation’s ongoing, hostile policies, systematic violations of human rights and grave breaches of international humanitarian law that are disproportionally impacting women and girls in the OPT. These violations include extra-judicial killings, arbitrary arrests, restriction on movement, military blockades, house demolitions, land confiscation and illegal de-facto and de-juri annexation, in addition to the ongoing isolation of areas of the OPT from one another. This has had both individual and collective impact on the lives of women, impeding their access to resources, compounded by the deteriorating economic situation due to the occupation’s control and dominance over land and resources. Added to this is the rise in poverty levels due to unemployment, military blockade on the Gaza Strip for over 15 years and the occupation’s exercise of systematic long-term violence against the Palestinian protected population in the OPT, settlement expansion combined with settlers’ violence and vandalism

The Palestinian Women’s Civil Coalition strongly believes that 22 years since the passage of UNSC Resolution 1325 has not resulted in concrete measures for the advancement of the women, peace and security agenda to Palestinian women living under Israeli prolonged military occupation. A lot still need yet to be made by the Security Council to maintain peace and security for Palestinian women living under military occupation. To the contrary, complications and challenges to Palestinian women have increased in terms of implementing the WPS agenda, due to Israeli impediments to its implementation. Israel, the occupying power, has also placed enormous obstacles before Palestinian women who seek to implement this resolution, given its continued occupation of the OPT and the absence of a just and durable solution to end this prolonged belligerent occupation. No concrete measures were taken by the international community to implement UN resolutions related to the question of Palestine, namely UN Resolutions 242, 338, 194 and 2334. Instead, Israel is intent on confiscating and annexing more land to build settlements, which has severed any path to the establishment of an independent and contiguous Palestinian state. Instead, OPT has been transformed into isolated islands more like the Bantustans of apartheid South Africa, as indicated in the most recent evidence based-report by Amnesty International, describing Israel as an apartheid regime, where one racial group is discriminating against other racial groups.

The Palestinian Women’s Civil Coalition, would also like to point out to the remarkable conclusions of a UN independent Commission of Inquiry (CoI) in its recent to the UN General Assembly in New York on 20/10/2022, which considered the Israeli occupation as unlawful according to international law. The report called on the UN General Assembly to ask the International Court of Justice for an urgent advisory opinion on the illegality of this prolonged military occupation, and the impacts of the Israeli illegal measures and violations against the Palestinian civilian population in the 1967 OPT.

Your Excellency UN Secretary General,

As the UNSC is meeting to discuss the advancement of the WPS agenda, we would like to draw to their attention the double standards employed by the United Nations in dealing with its own resolutions, especially when it comes to Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the practices of Israel, the occupying power against Palestinian civilian population. Israeli illegal policies in the OPT , has not only curtailed Resolution 1325 from guaranteeing protection for women and involving her in security and peacemaking, it has also thwarted all international tools and mechanisms for the protection of civilians in times of war and under occupation. This is due to the failure of the international human rights and humanitarian law especially the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protections of Civilians at time of War and under occupation. The reason for this is that the UN itself is discriminatory and has double standards in its handling conflicts, and peoples’ causes due to the huge imbalance in justice and the policy of impunity, which Israeli, the occupying power enjoys. These policies have allowed Israel to escape from accountability or any punitive measures in accordance to UN Charter and more specifically Article 11 of UNSC Resolution 1325, which demands that perpetrators of crimes and violations during war are not afforded impunity. The fact that Israel is treated as a country above the law, and the absence of any form of accountability has only encouraged it to commit more crimes and violations. A case in point is the recent murdering of Palestinian Journalist Shirine Abu Akleh, where no one has been held accountable thus far, although the incident was caught on tape and there is hard evidence proving that her death was the result of premeditated and extrajudicial killing by the Israeli army.

During its evaluation and review of its action plan, the Palestinian Women’s Civil Coalition noted that Resolution 1325 and the nine subsequent resolutions, pinpointed the reasons for the outbreak and development of conflicts in various regions of the world to racial, religious and ethnic disputes. However, it excluded women under racist, colonialist occupation, which is the case of Palestinian women under Israeli occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, including occupied East Jerusalem. Thus, it has disregarded all international resolutions pertaining to the rights of the Palestinian people, over and above Israel’s disregard for its responsibilities as an occupying power. This necessitates a special resolution addressing the status of Palestinian women under racist, colonialist occupation, and addressing the root causes of the suffering of Palestinian women and the major obstacle they face in meaningful political participation, and in moving forward in the advancement of the women, peace and security agenda.

Mr. Secretary General,

Finally, we in the Palestinian Women’s Civil Coalition for the implementation of Resolution 1325, thank your Excellency for your understanding, and for conveying our concerns to all nation states during the open debate on WPS in the Security Council this year. We call on you to dedicate ample attention to the status of Palestinian women during the 22nd Security Council meeting on Resolution 1325, with the objective to develop and push forth the WPS agenda and put into action the role of international tools of accountability. We ask you to provide the necessary protection for Palestinian women under occupation, by closely overseeing the implementation of this resolution and the party responsible for impeding its application on the ground, namely, the Israeli occupying power that has exacerbated the suffering of Palestinian women at all levels and increased discriminatory measures against them.

With our sincere thanks and appreciation,
The Palestinian Women’s Civil Coalition for the Implementation of UNSCR1325

Mr. President, Esteemed Members of the Security Council,

I am deeply grateful for the opportunity to address you today, especially thankful to H.E. Ambassador Macharia Kamau, Foreign Affairs Principal Secretary and the Republic of Kenya for the kind invitation.

For over 70 years, the UN and its various bodies have been seized of the Palestine question; repeatedly reviewing conditions, adopting resolutions, and dispatching fact-finding missions, to no avail. Sadly, this Council has been unable to assert authority, allowing this injustice to become a perpetual tragic human, moral, political and legal travesty.

So it would be disingenuous of me to come before you assuming I could inform you of something you do not already know. Nevertheless, I do appreciate the opportunity to communicate in a candid manner, not to recite endless statistics, nor to reiterate the ongoing pain of a people, deprived of their basic rights, including even the right to speak out, admonished not to “whine” or “complain,” as a means of silencing the victim.

The tragedy is that you know all of this; yet, it has had a minimal impact, if any, on the horrific conditions in Occupied Palestine.

I imagine it must be disheartening and frustrating for this distinguished organization and its members to find themselves trapped in this cycle of deliberate disdain and futility.

It is therefore imperative that this Council consider where it has gone wrong and what it can do to correct course and serve the cause of justice and peace.

Undoubtedly, the absence of accountability for Israel and of protection for the Palestinian people has enabled Israeli impunity to ride roughshod over the rights of an entire nation, allowing for perpetuation of a permanent settler-colonial occupation.

Mr. President,

Much of the prevailing political discourse overlooks reality and is diverted and subsumed by chimeras and distractions proffered by Israel and its allies under such banners as “economic peace,” “improving the quality of life,” “normalization,” “managing the conflict,” “containing the conflict,” or “shrinking the conflict.”

These fallacies must be dismantled. Volatile situations of injustice and oppression do not shrink. They expand and explode, with disastrous consequences. Similarly, the delusion of “imposing calm” under siege and systemic aggression, particularly as in Gaza, is an oxymoron, for calm or security on the one hand and occupation or captivity on the other are antithetical and irreconcilable.

Likewise, the fallacy of “confidence-building measures” is misguided since occupation breeds only contempt, distrust, resentment, and resistance. The oppressed cannot be brought to trust or accept handouts from their oppressor as an alternative to their right to freedom and justice.

The misleading and flawed “both sides” argument calling for “balance” in a flagrantly unbalanced situation is another attempt at obfuscation and generating misconceptions.

Israel’s impunity is further enhanced using such excuses as being the so-called “only democracy in the Middle East” or a “strategic ally,” or having “shared values,” or even for the sake of protecting its “fragile coalition.”

There has also been tacit and, at times overt, acceptance of Israel’s ideological, absolutist arguments, including the invocation of religious texts as a means to dismiss and supplant contemporary political and legal discourse and action. Hence, the so-called “Jewish State Law,” which allocates the right to self-determination exclusively to Jews in all of historic Palestine, is endorsed and normalized.

In the meantime, a massive disinformation machine persists in its racist maligning and demonizing of the Palestinian people, going so far as to label them “terrorists,” or a “demographic threat,” a dehumanizing formula exploited as a way to deny the right of millions of Palestine refugees to return.

Such slander has warped political focus and discourse globally. Some states have gone off on a tangent pursuing Palestinian textbooks for so-called “incitement,” or adopting the IHRA definition that conflates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism, or criminalizing BDS, or intimidating and censoring academics and solidarity activists who stand up for Palestinian rights.

These distortions ignore the unequal and unjust laws designed to persecute Palestinians, individually and collectively. It is evidenced in the defamation of our political prisoners and the targeting of their families’ livelihoods, as though Israeli military courts or prison systems have anything to do with justice or legality.

The mindless refrain that Israel has the “right to defend itself,” while the Palestinian people are denied such a right, is perverse in that the occupier’s violence is justified as “self-defense” while the occupied are stigmatized as “terrorists.”

We cannot afford to disregard the context of occupation and its systemic aggression as the framing device for all critical assessments and action.

Excellencies,

Occupied Palestine, including Jerusalem, is the target of a comprehensive and pervasive policy of colonization and erasure, of displacement and replacement, in which Israel is appropriating everything Palestinian; our land and resources; our cultural and human heritage; our archeological sites, which we have safeguarded for centuries; our history; our cuisine; the names of our streets; and most egregiously the identity of Jerusalem, as we witness in the ethnic cleansing of the Old City, Sheikh Jarrah, Silwan among others. Even our cemeteries have been desecrated such as the building of a so-called “museum of tolerance” on top of human remains in Maman’ Allah cemetery. And, Israel continues to stoke the flames of a “holy war,” with repeated assaults on our holy sites, particularly Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Jerusalem is being targeted in a deliberate campaign of annexation and distortion. Israel now brazenly declares its intent to complete the settlement siege of Jerusalem and destruction of the territorial contiguity of the West Bank, with its outrageous plans for E-1, Qalandiya airport (Atarot), “Pisgat Ze’ev” and “Giv’at HaMatos.”

We cannot be distracted by symbolic gestures that create a false impression of progress. Claims that the “time is not right,” or that it is “difficult now” to work for a peaceful solution, give license to Israel to persist in its perilous policies. Likewise, repeating a verbal commitment to the two-State solution, while one state is allowed to deliberately destroy the other, rings hollow.

Mr. President,

All of this does not preclude our recognition of our own shortcomings. We do not shirk our responsibility to speak out against internal violence, human rights abuses, corruption, or other such practices that are rejected and resented by our own people. It is our responsibility to carry out democratic reform and revitalize our body politic while ending our internal divisions. This is a Palestinian imperative.

But we must caution others against exploiting our shortcomings to justify Israeli crimes or international inaction, or to condition any positive engagement on the creation of an ideal system of governance in Palestine while we languish under a lawless system of Israeli control.

We ask that you, trustees of the rules-based order, uphold your responsibilities: provide us with protection from aggression and empower our people to amplify their voice, both in governance and liberation.

Esteemed Members of the Council,

Peace is not achieved by “normalizing the occupation,” sidelining the Palestine Question, or rewarding Israel by repositioning it as a regional superpower. Such an approach maintains the causes of regional instability and insecurity, while enabling Israel as a colonial apartheid State to superimpose “Greater Israel” on all of historic Palestine.

Generation after generation, the people of Palestine have remained committed to the justice of their cause, the integrity of their narrative, the authenticity of their history and culture, and their inviolable right to live in freedom, and dignity, as an equal among nations and in the fullness of our humanity.

It is time to reclaim the narrative of justice and invoke our collective will to activate the UN Charter and affirm the relevance of international law.

The time has come for courageous and determined action, not just to undo the injustice of the past but to chart a clear and binding course for a peaceful future of hope and redemption.

I thank you.

To view the full Speech as PDF

We, the undersigned global coalition of leaders –from civil society to academia, art, media, business, politics, indigenous and faith communities, and people of conscience around the world– call upon the States Parties to the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to act decisively to put an end to Israel’s notorious use of arms and military equipment for the commission of serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights against Palestinian civilians by immediately imposing a comprehensive two-way arms embargo on Israel.

In the spring of 2021, the world once again watched in horror as Israeli occupying forces attacked defenceless Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip, in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and inside Israel. Palestinian civilians peacefully protesting against colonisation of their land were assaulted with live fire, rubber-coated steel bullets, sound bombs, tear gas and skunk water. Israel’s deadly military aggression against the Palestinian civilian population in the Gaza Strip was the fourth in a decade. Over 11 days, 248 Palestinians were killed, including 66 children. Thousands were wounded, and the reverberating effects of the use of explosive weapons on hospitals, schools, food security, water, electricity and shelter continue to affect millions.

This systematic brutality, perpetrated throughout the past seven decades of Israel’s colonialism, apartheid, pro-longed illegal belligerent occupation, persecution, and closure, is only possible because of the complicity of some governments and corporations around the world.

Symbolic statements of condemnation alone will not put an end to this suffering. In accordance with the relevant rules of the ATT, States Parties have legal obligations to put an end to irresponsible and often complicit trade of conventional arms that undermines international peace and security, facilitates commission of egregious crimes, and threatens the international legal order.

Under Article 6(3) of the ATT, States Parties undertook not to authorise any transfer of conventional arms if they have knowledge at the time of authorisation that arms or items would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva conventions of 1949, attacks directed against civilian objects or civilians protected as such, or other war crimes as defined by international agreements to which they are a Party.

Under Articles 7 and 11, they undertook not to authorise any export of conventional arms, munitions, parts and components that would, inter alia, undermine peace and security or be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law.

It is clear that arms exports to Israel are inconsistent with these obligations. Invariably, Israel has shown that it uses arms to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity, as documented by countless United Nations bodies and civil society organisations worldwide. Military exports to Israel also clearly enabled, facilitated and maintained Israel’s decades-long settler-colonial and apartheid regime imposed over the Palestinian people as a whole.

Similarly, arms imports from Israel are wholly inconsistent with obligations under the ATT. Israeli military and industry sources openly boast that their weapons and technologies are “combat proven” – in other words, field-tested on Palestinian civilians “human test subjects”. When States import Israeli arms, they are encouraging it to keep bombing Palestinian civilians and persist in its unlawful practices. No one –neither Israel, nor arms manufacturers in ATT States parties– should be allowed to profit from the killing or maiming of Palestinian civilians.

It is thus abundantly clear that imposing a two-way arms embargo on Israel is both a legal and a moral obligation. ATT States Parties must immediately terminate any current, and prohibit any future transfers of conventional arms, munitions, parts and components referred to in Article 2(1), Article 3 or Article 4 of the ATT to Israel, until it ends its illegal belligerent occupation of the occupied Palestinian territory and complies fully with its obligations under international law. Pending such an embargo, all States must immediately suspend all transfers of military equipment, assistance and munitions to Israel.

A failure to take these actions entails a heavy responsibility for the grave suffering of civilians – more deaths, more suffering, as thousands of Palestinian men, women and children continue to bear the brutality of a colonial belligerent occupying force– which would result in discrediting the ATT itself. It also renders States parties complicit in internationally wrongful acts through the aiding or abetting of international crimes.  A failure in taking action could also result in invoking the individual criminal responsibility of individuals of these States for aiding and abetting the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity in accordance with Article 25(3)(c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Justice will remain elusive so long as Israel’s unlawful occupation, settler-colonialism, apartheid regime, and persecution and institutionalised oppression of the Palestinian people are allowed to continue, and so long as States continue to be complicit in the occupying Power’s crimes by trading weapons with it.

In conclusion, we believe that the ATT can make a difference in the Palestinian civilians’ lives. It has the potential, if implemented in good faith, to spare countless protected persons from suffering. If our call to stop leaving the Palestinian people behind when it comes to implementation of the ATT is ignored, the raison d'être of the ATT will be shattered.

Joining organisations:

1. Action Sécurité Ethique Républicaines
2. Adalah Justice Project
3. Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association
4. AFPS 63
5. Al Mezan Center for Human Rights
6. Aldameer Association for Human Rights
7. Al-Haq, Law in the Service of Man
8. Alrowwad Cultural and Arts Society
9. American Muslims for Palestine
10. Anglican Pacifist Fellowship
11. Applied Research Institute - Jerusalem (ARIJ)
12. Arab Canadian Lawyers Association
13. Arab Organization for Human Rights
14. Argenteuil Solidarité Palestine
15. Asociación Americana de Juristas
16. Association Belgo-Palestinienne WB
17. Association femmes plurielles
18. Association France Palestine Solidarité (AFPS)
19. AssoPacePalestina
20. Australia Palestine Advocacy Network
21. Australian Centre for International Justice
22. Australians For Palestine
23. Badayl
24. BDS Australia
25. Begian Campaign for Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
26. Campagne BDS France
27. Canadian BDS Coalition
28. Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME)
29. Center for Constitutional Rights
30. Center for International Policy
31. Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios Estratégicos para la Seguridad y el Desarrollo Social CIESED A.C.
32. CNAPD - Coordination Nationale d'Action pour la Paix et la Démocratie
33. Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine
34. Collectif 69 de Soutien au Peuple Palestinien
35. Collectif BDS 57
36. Collectif Judéo Arabe et Citoyen pour la Palestine
37. Colombian Campaign to Ban Landmines
38. Columban missionaries Britain
39. Columbia Law Students for Palestine
40. Combatants for Peace
41. Comitato BDS Campania
42. Comité de Solidaridad con la Causa Árabe
43. Comité pour une Paix Juste au Proche-Orient asbl
44. Community Action Center - Al-Quds University
45. Confederación Intersindical Gallega (CIG)
46. Cultura è Libertà, una campagna per la Palestina
47. Dagropass
48. De Palestijnse gemeenschap in Nederland
49. Defense for Children -Palestine (DCI-Palestine)
50. Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN)
51. docP - BDS Netherlands
52. Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights
53. European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine (ECCP)
54. European Legal Support Center
55. Femmes Unies pour la Paix dans la région des Grands Lacs
56. FILEF Sydney Federation of Italian Migrant Workers
57. Finnish-Arab Friendship Society
58. Friends of Palestine Tasmania Inc
59. Gaza Action Ireland
60. Gesellschaft Schweiz Palästina GSP/ASP
61. Global Kairos Asia Pacific Solidarity For Palestine (GKAPS)
62. Good Shepherd Collective
63. Housing and Land Rights Network
64. Human Rights and Democratic Participation Center “SHAMS”
65. Human Rights Network Nigeria
66. ICAHD Finland
67. ICAHD UK
68. Independent Jewish Voices Canada
69. Indian Writers Forum
70. Indo Palestine Solidarity Forum
71. International Organization for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (EAFORD)
72. International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific
73. Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign
74. Jewish Voice For Peace
75. Jews for Palestinian Right of Return
76. Just Peace Advocates/Mouvement Pour Une Paix Juste
77. Karapatan
78. Kenya Human Rights Commission
79. Labor for Palestine
80. Manushya Foundation
81. National Association of Democratic Lawyers (South Africa)
82. National Justice & Peace Network (NJPN)
83. National Lawyers Guild, Palestine Subcommittee
84. Nederlands Palestina Komitee
85. Newweapons research group
86. Niagara Movement for Justice in Palestine-Israel (NMJPI)
87. North Notts Unite Community
88. NOVACT
89. Oakville Palestinian Rights Association
90. Palestine Solidarity Network - Edmonton
91. Palestinian and Jewish Unity
92. Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR)
93. Palestinian Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign (Stop the Wall)
94. Palestinian Non-Governmental Organizations Network (PNGO)
95. Pax Christi International
96. Pax Christi, England and Wales
97. Paz con Dignidad
98. Platform of French NGOs for Palestine
99. Salaam ragazzi dell'Olivo, comitato di Trieste
100. Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network
101. SODePAZ
102. Solutions Not Punishment Collaborative
103. The Civic Coalition for Palestinians Right in Jérusalem
104. The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD)
105. The Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center (JLAC)
106. The National Association of Human Rights Defenders
107. The Oakville Palestinian Rights Association
108. The Palestinian Human Rights Organizations Council (PHROC)
109. The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy-MIFTAH
110. UJFP French Jewish union for peace
111. Union syndicale Solidaires
112. US Campaign for Palestinian Rights
113. US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
114. Visualizing Palestine
115. Vrede vzw
116. Vredesactie
117. War on Want
118. Women for Palestine
119. Women in Black Vienna
120. Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling

Joining individuals:

121. Ahmed Ben
122. Ahmed Reda Tolba
123. Alaa Shalaby
124. Alaaeddine Tatak
125. Aline Shaban
126. Amin Abbas
127. Andrea Balduzzi
128. Angie Mindel
129. Ann McNicholas
130. Anne Peacey
131. Ashley Tellis
132. Atamjit Singh
133. Audrey J Bomse
134. Badee M.T. Aldwaik
135. Baruti Likoyi
136. Bernadette McPhe
137. Chirag Shah
138. Claudia Karas
139. Claudia Schiavelli
140. Denise Peillon
141. Denotter JJ
142. Devaki Khanna
143. Dr. Ibrahim Lada’a
144. Dr. Nerina Cecchin
145. Egbert Harmsen
146. Marc Fayard
147. Firoz Ahmad
148. Flavia Lepre
149. Françoise Abadie
150. Frstot Marie-Paule
151. Gabriel Mondragón Toledo
152. Geeta Kapur
153. Geeta Kapur
154. Georges Franco
155. Gillard Francois
156. Gina Cardosi
157. Githa Hariharan
158. Gregory Kotoy
159. Gyan Prakash
160. Haidi Ali Muhammad Eltayeb
161. Hélène Le Cacheux
162. Herman De Ley
163. Huwaida Arraf
164. Ian Ampleford
165. Ian Mc Cabe
166. Indu Chandrasekhar
167. Jake Javanshir
168. James Dickins
169. James Lafferty
170. John King
171. Joop Hoekstra
172. Julia Auf Dem Brinke
173. Julie Hart
174. Kalyani Chaudhuri
175. Karel Arnaut
176. Karin Brothers
177. Karin Verelst
178. Kathryn Kelly
179. Kellie Tranter
180. Lauren Speiser
181. Laurent De Wangen
182. Lee Rhiannon
183. Luisa Morgantini
184. M.N. Harakeh
185. Madeline Lutjeharms
186. Maha Abdallah
187. Maha Alami
188. Malini Bhattacharya
189. Mani Shankar Aiyar
190. Marcy Newman
191. Maria Bartolacci
192. Marjorie Cohn
193. Martin Mavenjina
194. Massimiliano Masini
195. Maxime Florentin
196. Maya Devi
197. Michael Letwin
198. Michel Gevers
199. Mohamad Arouki
200. Mohamed Aboelazm
201. Mohammad Al Nabulsi
202. Mohan Rao
203. Monique Vincent
204. Muralidharan K
205. Nalini Nayak
206. Nandini Sundar
207. Naresh Dadhich
208. Nasir Tyabji
209. Navdeep Mathur
210. Nick Deane
211. Nozomi Takahashi
212. Oishik Sircar
213. P A Azeez
214. Pamela Blakelock
215. Pamela Philipose
216. Paola Manduca
217. Patrick Lechopier
218. Persis Ginwalla
219. Pierre Bordone
220. Pushpa Achanta
221. Pushpamala N
222. Raffaele Spiga
223. Rajni Palriwala
224. Rev Joseph Ryan
225. Rey Asis
226. Rudolf Knutti
227. S. Raghunandana
228. Salim Yusufji
229. Sellin Jean-Christophe
230. Shafey Kidwai
231. Sharib Aqleem Ali
232. Sigour Brigitte
233. Sonia Fayman
234. Stephen Flaherty
235. Sue Ingham
236. Sumanta Banerjee
237. Terri Ginsberg
238. Valter Mutt
239. Vinay Bharadwaj
240. Vincent Basabé
241. Winfried Belz
242. Yousuf Saeed
243. YVes Goaer
244. Yves Jardin

To View the Letter as PDF

In his United Nations speech, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called on the Security Council to “to urgently adopt a resolution comprising the basis and foundations for a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that would serve as a binding reference and guide for all if the vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, is to survive and if peace is to prevail in the land of peace.” In November 2009 I drafted a proposal for a Security Council resolution which I shared with the leaders of Israel, the PLO and the United States. The following is that draft:

EXPRESSING ITS continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East, emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every state in the area can live in security, affirms that the fulfillment of UN Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, which should include the application of both the following principles:

1. The establishment of the state of Palestine on the basis of the June 4, 1967 borders, in the areas of the West Bank and Gaza including East Jerusalem.

2. Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the State of Israel and the state of Palestine in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

3. The governments of the State of Israel and the state of Palestine will enter into immediate negotiations between them on the exact borders between them based on the June 4, 1967 borders with agreed upon territorial exchanges of equal size and quality. The guiding principle in the determination of the borders is that the state of Palestine will be composed of 22 percent of the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and the remaining 78% of the territory will be the State of Israel.

4. This settlement will establish Palestine as the Palestinian homeland, just as Israel is the homeland for the Jewish people. Both States are free to maintain their own immigration policies allowing for the return of nationals to each state respectively. The issue concerning the rights of Palestinian refugees will be dealt with in negotiations between the parties seeking to reach a just and agreed upon solution that will put an end to the decades of suffering of the Palestinian refugees.

5. The issue of the rights of Jewish refugees from Arab and Islamic countries will be dealt with in the framework of bilateral negotiations between Israel and the second parties directly involved.

6. Accepting this resolution: Israel must immediately demonstrate support for the creation of a prosperous and successful Palestinian state by removing unauthorized outposts, and ending settlement expansion. The government of the state of Palestine must demonstrate that their State will create opportunity for all its citizens and govern justly and must show that a Palestinian state will accept its responsibility and have the capability to be a source of stability and peace for its own citizens, for the people of Israel and for the whole region.

7. In Accordance with the Principles laid down in UN Resolution 181 from November 29, 1947, both states will respect the rights of national minorities within their borders and grant them full equality under the law and in practice.

9. The Security Council recognizes the city of Jerusalem as the capitals of both states and calls on the Governments of the two states to negotiate the modalities for application of such in the city.

10. The Security Council recognizes the importance of the holy sites in Jerusalem to all three religions and proposes that they be placed under an international guardianship guaranteeing free and open access to all people who respect the sanctity of the sites or any other acceptable arrangement reached by agreement of the parties.

11. The Security Council empowers the Quartet to work with the governments of the State of Israel and the state of Palestine to conclude negotiations on the permanent borders of the two states within one year, including the modalities for the city of Jerusalem. The Quartet will report back to the Security Council on progress of those negotiations on a quarterly basis.

12. In accordance with Chapter VI and Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Security Council announces its readiness to deploy peace-keeping troops to the state of Palestine to assist and to facilitate the withdrawal of Israeli security forces from the territories of the state of Palestine.

The Security Council calls on the General Assembly to act in discharge of its functions under Article 4 of the Charter and rule 125 of its rules of procedure, to: decide that the state of Palestine is a peace-loving state which accepts the obligations contained in the Charter and is able and willing to carry out those obligations; and decide to admit the state of Palestine to membership in the United Nations.

THE TWO-states solution was determined by the United Nations in UNGA Resolution 181 from November 29, 1947. This proposed Security Council resolution aims to put the entire international community behind the path towards ending the conflict, ending the Israeli occupation and creating a peaceful Palestinian state next to Israel on 22% of the land between the River and the Sea (far less than proposed in 1947).

Israel will finally achieve permanent recognized borders on 78% of the land between the river and the sea.

Jerusalem will finally be recognized and accepted as the capital of Israel when it is also recognized and accepted as the capital of Palestine.

As Abbas said in his UN speech: “We continue to sincerely extend our hands to the Israeli people to make peace. We realize that ultimately the two peoples must live and co-exist, each in their respective State… The core components of a just solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict do not require effort to discover, but rather what is needed is the will to implement them. And marathon negotiations are not required to determine them, but rather what is needed is the sincere intention reach peace. And those components are by no means a mysterious puzzle or intractable riddle, but rather are the clearest and most logical in the world.”

Spending days with the Jewish community of South Africa at Limmud is a unique opportunity to meet another dynamic, engaged Jewish community in the Diaspora. My lectures here have focused on political issues concerning Israel and the region, Israeli-Palestinian peace and conflict and the story of the secret back channel for the Schalit negotiations.

Throughout my time here, both in the Jewish community, and in media interviews with the non-Jewish South African press, I have been repeatedly asked my opinion on whether or not Israel is an apartheid state or if it is heading towards being an apartheid status.

Many of the Jews here were actively involved in the anti-apartheid movement in the past. I too grew up boycotting South Africa until 1994. I remember attending the first party at the home of the South African ambassador in Herzliya in 1994 for the inauguration of Nelson Mandela. After holding parties for years on South Africa Independence Day without participants, in 1994 there were over 1,000 people there, including prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, foreign minister Shimon Peres, and president Ezer Weitzman.

It was very emotional to see the Afrikaner ambassador stand tall (he was a big man anyway) with his fist in the air singing the new South African national anthem and watching President Nelson Mandela being sworn in. There was a sense in the air that the impossible was possible – and even we in Israel could, would someday enjoy peace.

MY ANSWERS to the questions about Israeli apartheid were that inside of Israel proper, within the borders of the “green line,” the one million Palestinian citizens of Israel (20 percent of our population), in principle enjoy equal rights, citizenship, participation, the right to vote and be elected. This is not apartheid.

I said that there is discrimination against them, some of it societal and some of it political and structural. In my mind there is no excuse whatsoever after 65 years of independence for the continued existence of discrimination against the Palestinian citizens of Israel. This should not even be part of our discourse.

The State of Israel must eliminate all forms of discrimination and ensure full and absolute equal rights and opportunities for all of its citizens. Our discourse regarding the Palestinian citizens of Israel should be focused on the challenge of how to create a greater sense of shared citizenship in our state.

Naturally the continuation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict makes it more difficult, but we must rise to this challenge. I believe that this will also require us to come to terms with Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and all of its citizens. This will require us to define collective rights of a national minority in our state.

Thinking is terms of a possible Jewish national minority in a Palestinian state in the future may assist us in defining what this means, when we would also consider what could be the collective national rights of the Jewish minority in Palestine, as well. My answer did not satisfy them.

WHAT ABOUT the West Bank – isn’t there apartheid there? It was difficult for me to say no. There are two populations living there, each under a different legal status – one with political rights, and one without them.

One group lives in modern planned communities with infrastructure matching the wealth of Israel, and the other lives with backwards underdeveloped basic needs.

One group lives under civil law, the other under military law. One group has total freedom of movement, the other cannot move without permits and permissions. One lives under an economic system with a GDP per capita of almost $30,000 the other under $2,000.

How is this any different than a form of apartheid, ethnic/ national/religious separation rather than racial separation? Yes, we rule the West Bank as a form of apartheid.

Our stated policy is that we hope that there will be a Palestinian state and that the Palestinians will live in their own country and not under our control. But after 45 years of our control, no one is fooled by the idea that this is not an apartheid system because the majority of Palestinians live under the rule of their own Palestinian Authority. The PA is not a free sovereign party. It is under the direct control of Israel.

Even the Palestinian president and prime minister requires a travel and movement permit from Israel. Israel controls their borders, their economy, their land and population registry. The PA is basically equivalent in its power to a municipal government in Israel, not much more than that.

How then is this not a form of modernized apartheid? It is very poignant to think this and to hear this in South Africa. For some in the audience, especially the young people, the next question is, “So why not adopt the South Africa solution? Why not just grant everyone citizenship and allow them to vote?” The answer is because both we, the Jewish people, and the Palestinian people, want a state of their own. We both want a territorial expression of our national identity and we will not be prepared to be ruled over by the other side.

Therefore, there is no one-democratic-state solution to this conflict. There is no avoiding this conclusion if our Jewish senses and values effect our decision making and policies.

How can we Jews, with our history and heritage, allow ourselves to be the 21st century perpetuators of a modern form of apartheid? We were strangers in Egypt and now we are free. This is for me the central thread of our identity and the most important lesson of Judaism to humanity.

THERE ARE challenges, dangers and risks involved in making peace with the Palestinians, no doubt.

We know what they are and we have the intelligence to mitigate them and to come up with solutions to the problems.

The challenges, dangers and risks of the continuation of the status quo are far more detrimental to our state and our identity.

We must rise to impetrative of our Jewish values and experience and relieve ourselves of our apartheid status. We must be a free people in our land and in order to do that the Palestinians must also be a free people in their land.

Palestine is becoming a reality, whether we like it or not. The Palestinian Authority may not be increasing its sovereignty over a single centimeter of land, but the awareness of the emergence of the State of Palestine is spreading all over the world. The government of Israel might believe it has a veto over this process; it may believe it can prevent Palestine from becoming more than a “virtual” state, but it cannot.

The battle to prevent Palestinian statehood has been lost, and Israel had better come to terms with this emerging reality.

Yet rather than face this straight on and understand how its interests would be served by a free, independent, democratic and peaceful Palestine, this country is instead tightening its grip.

Our forces are arresting more peaceful activists and popular leaders, preventing protests against land confiscation, while inciting against Palestinians and the Palestinian Authority. The face of the occupation is becoming more visible and more ugly.

Palestinians, joined by internationals and a growing number of Israelis, are facing off with this ugly face every week all around the West Bank, from Naalin to Bil’in, from al-Masara to Nebi Salah, from Walaja to Oush al-Ghrab, from Sheikh Jarrah to Silwan.

In all these places, the scene is the same, week after week; a protest is staged to decry a land grab to expand some settlement, a wall or a fence by public popular committees of locals; they are joined by other Palestinians, Israelis and international solidarity supporters who march to the point of confrontation. Sometimes some of the young Palestinians will throw some stones; at other times, with no provocation, the tear gas, rubber or plastic-covered bullets, concussion grenades and “the skunk” (stinky liquid) come down. Lately it’s enough just to be there when the soldiers are riled up.

That’s what happened last week in Silwan and in Nebi Salah. When there are no television cameras around, the soldiers tend to take greater liberties, but today everyone has a camera in his or her pocket, and there are no more secrets.

When I witness this wanton violence my blood boils and I am filled with shame. These surely cannot be the Israeli defense forces; just what are they defending, and in whose name? The farmers of Bil’in whose land was taken for the expansion of Modi’in Illit are not protesting in order to destroy Israel; they just want their land and olive trees back, and even the Supreme Court supports them. But our government acts with blind disregard for the law, and without the slightest sense of wisdom.

WHEN IDF soldiers fire tear gas canisters in Nebi Salah even before even a single stone is thrown, I say we have lost ourselves, and can no longer claim to hold the moral high ground. And no one should tell me the horrific, inhuman murder of the Fogel family has any bearing; I’m tired of the competition of suffering. I don’t want anyone to suffer, and believe that if we were wise, and if we act in our real interests and if we have the eyes in our heads to see how the world is changing around us, we would notify the Palestinian people that we, the Jewish people, want to sponsor the UN resolution for Palestinian statehood. We would shout from every hilltop that we want the Palestinian people to be free in their land so that we, the Jewish people, can be free in our land. And we would sit with their leaders, pull out our maps, and plan our withdrawal from the emerging state together.

I call on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, on the paranoids and xenophobes who occupy the coalition seats in the Knesset, I appeal to the NGO monitors: Come to your senses! It is not too late to change course and turn enemies into allies. We have all paid a tremendous price, and everyone has lost. Compassion, understanding, a desire to work together so we can all live peacefully – this is how we can rescue ourselves from the growing hatred around the world toward Israel.

If we do the right thing, the whole world will not be against us. Let’s stop being so shallow as to actually think we can win battles with new hasbara, while attacking Jewish groups in America that don’t agree with the Israeli policies.

Our friends in Europe are about to join the rest of the world in recognizing Palestine. An American veto in the Security Council, and even a letter signed by 96 senators and 400 members of the House of Representatives will not prevent the state of Palestine from being born. We can try to oppose this process for a few more years, maybe, but we will not be able to block it.

If we ever hope to coexist with the state of Palestine, Israelis must join hands with Palestinians and nonviolently co-resist the occupation (special credit to my daughter Elisha and her partner Noam Lekach for the term). Our liberation and their liberation will be won together.

What would be so terrible if the state of Palestine continues to gain more and more recognition, even from Israel’s friends and allies? That is the game in play today. Almost all of the world’s leaders have come to the conclusion that the Netanyahu government has nothing to offer the Palestinians and that another round of negotiations at this time will be fruitless.

The Americans are also coming to the same conclusion, but it is more difficult for the self-appointed mediator and policeman of the world to accept the failure of its intervention and the limits of its power.

At the same time, the same leaders understand that the two-state solution must be saved. If Israel is unwilling, or unable to act in its own best interests by ending the occupation, the international community does not have to sit idly by as the best chance of peace withers away once again. The risks and consequences of another round of violence are too great to the parties, the region and to the world to allow an irresponsible Israeli leader to dictate the possible death of the only solution that can end the conflict.

No one is a great supporter of unilateralism. No one really believes that the conflict will be resolved through unilateral steps. It is quite evident that a negotiated agreement must be reached that will determine permanent borders and other core issues. Security arrangements must be agreed by both parties and supported by international monitors and peacekeeping forces. The lessons of the unilateral disengagement from Gaza without agreement have hopefully been learned by all.

But in the face of Israeli refusal to seriously engage in real negotiations and Palestinian refusal to come to the table until they see Israeli seriousness, the rules of the game need to be changed to compel the parties to reach a negotiated agreement.

BINYAMIN NETANYAHU supports the two-state solution – at least that is what he claims. Our prime minister is intelligent enough to understand exactly what that means; he knows what the permanent status peace agreement looks like. He is well aware that his predecessor Ehud Olmert was quite close to reaching an agreement, and both he and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud believe that with several more months of negotiations an agreement could have been reached.

That agreement would have brought about the birth of Palestine on more than 95 percent of the West Bank with territorial exchanges on a 1:1 basis, with two capitals in Jerusalem and some form of a special regime in the Old City. This is the agreement, there will be no other and this is also the vision of peace that almost every world leader supports.

So even if Netanyahu has a different vision of peace, in his heart of hearts he has to be aware that he cannot convince the Palestinians to accept less. He must also realize that Israel cannot allow itself to miss the possibility of reaching a negotiated agreement and there will probably never be a better opportunity than right now.

What can Israel do if the process of recognizing Palestine continues? Probably nothing. It can kick and scream, threaten and protest but unless it is interested in working against itself, there is actually very little that can be done to block the inevitable.

It can bring back checkpoints all over the West Bank as punishment. Will this help the security situation, which has never been better?

It can withhold taxes and customs which it collects for the Palestinians in the framework of one of the only aspects of the Oslo agreement still working. Will the US and the EU, which are bankrolling the establishment of the Palestinian state, sit idly in the face of breaches of working relationships which are so vital to stability and security?

It could prevent Palestinians from traveling because it controls all of the movements of the Palestinians. How long would that work and how could that be in its interest?

Israel could unilaterally annex parts of the West Bank, but this would cross lines in international relations that no government before has even seriously considered. It could get the US Congress to write more letters to President Barack Obama and more House or Senate resolutions backing its policies, but that would not really help.

Let’s face it, there is very little that Israel can actually do to prevent the world from recognizing Palestine. Eventually the US will also recognize it and, at least according to Netanyahu, so will Israel. So what are we waiting for? For decades we have tried to prevent the creation of the Palestinian state. One prime minister after the other since Yitzhak Rabin has come to the conclusion that the only way to end the conflict is by accepting the logic that was behind the 1947 UN partition plan. So much blood could have been saved if we had been wise enough to accept the inevitable when our neighbors did in 1988 (41 years too late). How much more blood must be shed before the inevitable is implemented?

The conflict is resolvable. The two-state solution is the only solution. It can be achieved today and there is no better leader than Netanyahu to do it. Netanyahu and Abbas can lead their peoples to a new beginning – a new day when the slogan two states for two-peoples becomes a reality.