On the Wrong Side of History

Canada's opposition to Palestine's bid for statehood shows just how far it has strayed from being an "honest broker" in the Middle East.

In a historic speech delivered to the UN General Assembly on Sept. 23, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas announced his peoples’ application for full membership to the world body. President Abbas’s speech was greeted with a standing ovation by most of the country delegations in the chamber. A few sat silently, however, arms folded, staring grimly at the floor. Israel was one. The U.S. another. Canada a third.

The Canadian government’s policy is to support the government of Israel come what may. In fact, according to junior Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Kent, “Prime Minister Harper has made it quite clear … that an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada.” But Canada’s unconditional support of this one side in the broader Middle East conflict, and its opposition to Palestinian statehood, has put us on the wrong side of history. This stance is at odds with much of the world, and does long-lasting harm to our international reputation. Consider, for instance, the fact that Canada’s failure to achieve a seat on the UN Security Council is partly attributed to its unquestioning support for Israel.

It’s important to note that Canada’s blinkered support for Israel is relatively new. There have been frequent periods when the governments of the two countries have been at odds (for example, following the severe crackdown after the first Intifada in the late 1980s, and after the revelation that Israeli agents used faked Canadian passports when attempting to assassinate Hamas leader Khaled Meshal in 1997).

---

As Palestine moves toward statehood, Israelis and Palestinians must overcome their competing histories to build a common future. Read more here.

---

Canada once operated, and was understood, as an “honest broker.” The Conservatives’ ascent to power under Prime Minister Stephen Harper has led to a marked improvement in our relations with Israel, to the point that many now consider Canada to be more extreme in its advocacy of Israel than even the United States. However, the majority of Canadian citizens do not support the government’s position. A massive poll that the BBC conducted in July and August 2011 found that 46 per cent of Canadians were in favour of the Palestinian statehood bid, only 25 per cent were against it, and six per cent were undecided (the rest presumably offered no opinion or were undecided).

The current right-wing Israeli government opposes Palestinian membership in the UN for its own set of reasons. (Whether the long-term interests of all Israelis are served well by this position is another matter). The U.S., which also came out in opposition to the bid, remains hostage to a powerful lobby, making it seemingly unable to influence Israel. The U.S. is, not surprisingly, no longer regarded as an “honest broker” in the Middle East, and Canada is now regarded in the same light.

There was a time when Canada played a positive, and much appreciated, role in the Middle East. Canada’s Lester B. Pearson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, for example, for his role in placing UN troops in the Sinai in the wake of the Suez crisis. Canada could play a constructive role again. Perhaps it could expand on the bilateral trade agreement it has with Israel, for instance, and reach out to Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Palestine – a move that would promote trust and co-operation between Canada and the Arab world. More pointedly, instead of supporting Israel in its continued intransigence over illegal settlement building and the construction of the West Bank barrier (known as the “apartheid wall” to its critics), Canada could use its influence to stop its friend from pursuing such activities. This would give an immediate boost to the peace process. Similarly, were Canada to support the Palestinian bid for membership in the UN, it could act as a huge wake-up call to Israel, helping it realize that it must deal seriously with the Palestinians and work more earnestly toward peace.

The UN has already approved the establishment of a Palestinian state. In 1947, it voted to establish two states – one majority Jewish, one majority Arab ¬¬– in what had been British Mandate Palestine. The Jewish state was quickly established. The Arab one has been delayed for 64 years.

---

Canada's pro-Palestinian advocacy groups are working to delegitimize the state of Israel. Read more here.

---

Experts agreethat Palestine has all of the hallmarks of a state. The World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and European Union have all said the Palestinian territories are ready for statehood. Unfortunately, 18 years after their signing, the Oslo Accords have delivered almost nothing to the Palestinians, and have failed to deliver on their aspirations for statehood. There is currently no roadmap to peace or self-rule, and peace talks are not even underway, as Israel refuses to stop building settlements on Palestinian land in the Occupied Territories.

Should Palestine apply for non-member state status in the General Assembly, a Canadian “no” will be drowned under the tide of “yes” votes from around the globe. For the Palestinians to ask for membership in the UN is their simple right – a right they have come to realize they may never reap the benefits of if it is left to the stalled negotiations with the Israelis. “Freedom,” said Martin Luther King Jr., “is never voluntarily given by the oppressors; it must be demanded by the oppressed.” If Martin Luther King’s struggle is any indication, Canada’s opposition to Palestinian statehood – and its disturbing failure to support the demands of the oppressed – has put our country on the wrong side of history.

Origin
Source: the Mark