Ok, this is a tough one, and also an area where one must tread carefully considering the political tinderbox that this issue tends to be. I got an email from We Believe in Israel, an organisation which desires a negotiated two-state solution, but does not support the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign (naturally).
Dear JamesChan,
I am writing to all Parliamentary Candidates to ask you to read the “Charter for Israel” initiated by my colleagues at North West Friends of Israel, and consider signing it and publicly expressing support for it.
The Charter reads as follows:
“By signing the following charter I express my support for the fair and balanced treatment of Israel at home and abroad. In particular, I recognise:
1. Israel’s inalienable right to exist, free from the threat of terrorist attack.
2. The need for urgent progress towards a negotiated two state solution between Israel and the Palestinians concluding with a just resolution where a secure Israel, recognised by all countries in the Middle East, lives in peace alongside a viable Palestinian state.
3. That Israel be subject to the same moral code and standards as applied to other democratic countries that are committed to upholding the rule of law.
4. That the freedom to criticise and protest the actions of the Israeli Government is acceptable as in any democracy but that criticism consisting of antisemitic rhetoric or imagery intended to promote racial hatred is unacceptable. As such, recourse to the law must be available and enforceable through appropriate legal action.
5. That boycotts against Israel in any sphere must be opposed as they frequently damage the livelihood of Palestinians, foster resentment amongst the vast majority of Israelis, do nothing to help the peace process and are opposed by the President of the Palestinian Authority.
6. That the intimidation and harassment of Jewish individuals and groups which include Jewish businesses in the UK occurring as part of anti-Israel campaigns is unacceptable.
7. That the democratic State of Israel is not an “apartheid state” and must not be described as one. It is noted that every citizen has the right to vote and discrimination based on race, religion or sexuality is illegal. As such, Israel is a democracy and must be described accurately.”
If you support the charter, please sign the attached version (https://gallery.mailchimp.com/4f205ffabc02c1048c024eebe/files/Fairness_for_Israel_Charter.pdf) and scan and return the signed copy to me at luke@webelieveinisrael.org.uk and info@nwfoi.org.uk, or reply to this email indicating your support. We intend that responses will be collated and published.
Best wishes,
Luke Akehurst
Director, We Believe in Israel
This is my response:
Dear Luke Akehurst,
Thank you for contacting me to seek my support for the Fairness for Israel Charter. I support the right for Israel and Palestine to exist, but not along the current borders that exist today. I support the campaign group Jews for Justice for Palestine but regretfully cannot support the Fairness for Israel Charter in full. Although I agree with articles 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6, I cannot fully support the statements made in the other articles. I disagree with article 5 in that I actively support the BDS campaign. Article 7 refers to the description of Israel as an apartheid state, of which you claim to be inaccurate. A direct quote from the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, John Dugard, A/HRC/4/17, 29 January 2007:
Checkpoints and the poor quality of secondary roads Palestinians are obliged to use, in order to leave the main roads free for settler use, result in journeys that previously took 10 to 20 minutes taking 2 to 3 hours. Israel justifies these measures, together with the behaviour of its soldiers at checkpoints, on security grounds and claims that they have succeeded in thwarting the passage of numerous would-be suicide bombers. There is, however, another security perspective. Palestinians perceive these measures to be designed, first, to serve the convenience of settlers and to facilitate their travel through the West Bank without having to make contact with Palestinians; and, secondly, to humiliate Palestinians by treating them as inferior human beings. The result is a suppressed anger that in the long term poses a greater threat to the security of Israel. In apartheid South Africa, a similar system designed to restrict the free movement of blacks – the notorious “pass laws” – created more anger and hostility to the apartheid regime than any other measure. Israel would do well to learn from this experience.
And summarised in the same report as thus:
Israel is clearly in military occupation of the OPT. At the same time elements of the occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law.
My beliefs mirror those of the official Green Party stance on Israel and Palestine:
The Green Party believes that all Israelis, Palestinians, and their families should have and be able to exercise full human and civil rights throughout Israel, Palestine and the occupied territories in Palestine. Israel must be subject to the Geneva Convention concerning the rights of individuals and communities, in the same way that other states are. The resort to “collective punishment” in defiance of those requirements is unacceptable.
The Green Party calls for the implementation of United Nations Resolutions 194, 242 and 338, which addressed the problems created by Israeli conquests in the wars of 1948, 1967 and 1973.
The Green Party calls on the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people to recognise the right of the state of Israel to exist within recognised, agreed and secure borders.
The Green Party calls on the Israeli Government and the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people both to commit to replacement of military force with agreement through diplomacy as a means of resolution.
The Green Party calls on Israel to repeal its present “law of return” because it is incompatible with the full exercise of human rights and discriminates against Palestinians because they are not Jewish. This racial discrimination symbolises the unfairness of the present arrangements in Palestine, and will have to be addressed before any solution can be agreed.
Particular issues of conflict
The Green Party calls on Israel to evacuate the illegal settlements within the occupied territories of Palestine.
We call on the government of Israel to dismantle the ‘settlement wall’ in those territories, which has been condemned by the International Court, which divides Palestinian territories, and which deprives them of land, water, other resources and employment. The discrimination against Palestinians practiced by the Israeli government and settlers in the occupied territories needs to be addressed as a first step.
The Green Party calls for an end to all and any illegal deprivation of the Palestinians in the
occupied territories of the land and water resources pertaining to them.
We recommend that water resources in Palestine should be shared between the Palestinians and the Israelis. We call upon the government of Israel to enter into discussions with the democratically elected representatives of the Palestinian people to seek such an agreement covering both states in Palestine.
The Green Party calls on the government of Israel to abandon its claim to exclusive possession of the whole of the city of Jerusalem as its capital. That is contrary to the partition of the Palestine Mandate agreed by the United Nations in 1948. Equal rights should be given to Israeli and Palestinian citizens of the city, and accorded similarly to the monuments there which are holy to three religions Judaism, Islam and Christianity.
Yours sincerely,
James Chan
James Chan 