Palestine question – UN Latin American and Caribbean Meeting (Havana) – Press release

LAC COUNTRIES CALL FOR INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT FOR PALESTINIAN RIGHTS

Participants attend Round Table with Cuban President

HAVANA, 13 June — The overwhelming majority of the international community supported United Nations resolutions in favour of Palestinian rights but the will of the majority was being overruled, Shafick Handal, Member of the Salvadoran parliament told the final session of the United Nations Latin American and Caribbean Meeting on the question of Palestine this afternoon.

He said the United States used the question of human rights as an instrument of their own geopolitical strategy.  They had bombed Belgrade in the name of human rights.  If imperialism’s concept was to be consistent, they should bomb Tel Aviv.  Latin Americans found it difficult to accept that the Palestinians were not able to move around freely in the twenty per cent of their territory that was left to them.

Other speakers in Plenary III addressed the issue of international support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and actions by Latin American and Caribbean States in support of those rights within the United Nations system and the non-aligned movements.  Several speakers proposed strengthening the Committee for the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People to enable it to continue to pursue its mandate.

The representative of Tunisia made a statement.

Statements were also made by the Ambassador of Palestine to Chile, Saber Ateyeh; the President of the Brazilian Socialist Democratic Party, Maguito Vilela; the Head of the Movement Plaza de Mayo, Hebe Bonafini; Dean of the Faculty for Law and Political Sciences, University of San Marin, Eduardo Kronfly Kronfly; Professor of Constitutional Law, Raimundo Kabchi Chemor; and Professor, Higher Institute of International Relations, Havana, Gabriel Perez Tarrau.

Following the meeting, participants and members of the Committee attended a televised international round table on the Struggle of the Palestinian People and International Solidarity. The President of Cuba, Fidel Castro and the Foreign Minister of Cuba, Felipe Perez Roque, also attended the Round Table.

The main participants in the Round Table were the Head of the Political Department of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Farouk Kaddoumi; Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations Nasser Al-Kidwa; former Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations Zuhdi Terzi, member of the Political Department of the PLO; Visiting Scholar, Columbia University, Adelfo Garcia; Shafik Handal.  The Chairman of the Palestinian Rights’ Committee, Ibra Deguène Ka, also spoke.

At 9:30 a.m., the Committee will sponsor a Non-Governmental Workshop organized in connection with the Latin American and Caribbean Meeting on the Question of Palestine.  The closing session of the meeting will be held at 12 p.m.

Plenary III: International support for the inalienable rights of the Palestinian People

The representative of Tunisia said the United Nations meeting on the question of Palestine was taking place at a critical time.  More than 500 Palestinians had died and scores of homes were demolished.  In addition, the conflict had had a tremendous impact on the economy.  The situation could deteriorate further unless there was concerted action by the international community. Tunisia had always urged the international community and influential parties to act speedily and urge Israel to comply with international law.  It had placed the Palestinian question at the foremost of its priorities. Within the Security Council, his Government had supported the Non-aligned movements call for the establishment of an international force to protect the Palestinian people. Israel must withdraw from all the occupied territories occupied since 1967.

SABRI ATEYEH, Ambassador of Palestine to Chile said that the question of Palestine had been of great concern to the international community from the very beginning of the partition.  The relations between Latin America and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had evolved from the diplomatic efforts of the PLO. Throughout history there had been great understanding in Latin America for the cause of the Palestinians.  Palestine had permanent missions in numerous countries.

He said that since the Oslo Agreements, there had been a worsening of conditions in the occupied territories. Committees of solidarity and support for the Palestinian cause had become relaxed following the agreement and had not quite gotten into gear again.  Such organizations were reawakening so that they could help their counterparts in Palestine.  During Colombia’s chairmanship of the non-aligned movement the Chair had made a visit to Palestine. In the Security Council, Colombia had voted in favour of sending United Nations troops to protect Palestinian civilians reflecting the sentiments of many Latin American and the Caribbean States.

MAGUITO VILELA, Senator and President of the Brazilian Socialist Democratic Party, Brasilia, said the Jewish people had settled a state but had not allowed the Palestinians to do the same.  The United Nations must keep up its activities to ensure the rights of the Palestinian people.  In the eight months of armed conflict, almost one-fourth of the more than 1450 deaths had involved victims under the age of 18.  There had been an intensification of the conflict and it seemed to turning into a war.  Children could no longer believe in a future and adults were growing more hopeless.  Unemployment rates were frightfully high.  

He said there would be no peace under the present circumstances with a strong Israeli army occupying Palestinian territory.  The United Nations resolutions must be obeyed. Without the withdrawal of Israeli troops the Palestinians could not establish their sovereignty.  Those who remained in the region had crowded into besieged villages which were surrounded by Israeli checkpoints.

Meetings like that of today were vital, he said.  With the equal granting of rights to the two people, there was a chance for peace.  He hoped that peace would prevail and the Palestinians and Israelis would fulfill the dream of living in harmony.  He expressed the solidarity of the Brazilian people with the people of Palestine.  He expressed the wish that the international forces led by the United Nations would have success in the task that lay ahead.

SHAFICK HANDAL, Member of Parliament, San Salvador and leader of the revolutionary Frente Farebundo Marti para la Liberación Nacional of San Salvador said he was not an expert but a revolutionary and Salvadoran of Palestinian descent. People wanted peace and were asking the United Nations to send a protection force to stop the Israeli army’s activities against the Palestinian people.  In the United Nations such a force would be a routine exercise if it were not for Palestine.  

He said there was so much fragmentation of Palestinian land that it was difficult to imagine it as a state.  El Salvador was the same size as Palestine but Salvadorans could not imagine being cornered in just 20 per cent of their land.  The Palestinians were trying to recover their rights and freedoms and their own independent state with East Jerusalem as the capital.  And, they wanted their neighbours and relatives to return home.  They were not asking for all of Jerusalem but that an end be put to the policy of establishing settlements.  The Israeli policy was one of occupation and expulsion with the intention of driving the Palestinians out of their land.  In the beginning, the Government had financed groups to settle on Palestinian land and they had continued the policy of establishing and expanding settlements.  The first few settlements did not have an army behind them.  His father used to say that they had great relations with the Israelis.

The overwhelming majority of the international community supported United Nations resolutions in favour of the Palestinians but the will of the majority was being overruled.  The obstructionists could not continue to play politics with human rights.  It was worth insisting that the United Nations shoulder its responsibility with regard to the Palestinians and find a way to implement its resolutions.  Those who had died, particularly the children, had suffered a terrible tragedy.  But those who lived suffered a worse condition — humiliation.  No colonial country had humiliated its people in the same way.  Latin Americans found it difficult to accept that the Palestinians could be treated in such a way.  They could not even move around freely in the twenty per cent of their territory that was left to them.  On the other hand, apartheid and colonialism had seemed insurmountable but they were overcome.  

He said the United States used the question of human rights as an instrument of their own geopolitical strategy.  They had bombed Belgrade in the name of human rights.  If imperialism’s concept was to be consistent, they should bomb Tel Aviv.  The United States was hypocritical in its policy and did not deserve respect.  Some countries might have armaments or nuclear weapons but they did have moral authority.  He appealed for a moral uprising against Israeli actions.  Eventually justice would be done. Every day participants had said that the United Nations must act in accordance with the will expressed by the majority of its members.  Every time there seemed to be the chance of an agreement in Palestine, however, violence erupted as it had in September when there seemed to be some progress towards a solution. He called on participants to recognize that injustice to one was an injustice to all.

HEBE DE BONAFINI, Head, Movement Plaza de Mayo, Buenos Aires, asked if the participants really believed in the effectiveness of the Security Council.  She had been hardened by what had happened in her own country.  After more than 50 years and hundreds of resolutions the Palestinian rights had not been fulfilled.  The press and most of the media in the United States were pro-Israeli were in the hands of the Jews.  They had a great deal of skill in sensitizing the world and  making the Palestinians out to be terrorists and the Israelis victims.  The truth was that the United States was the terrorist.  It was the one which dropped the most bombs. It blockaded Cuba and protected other terrorist states like Israel.  

She praised Palestinian men and women and said they were incredibly brave.  They were supposed to accept what they received from the Israelis. Mothers around the world should go to the streets and town squares to tell the world that “we are all Palestinians”.

EDUARDO KRONFLY KRONFLY, Dean, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Bogota, said that within the Security Council had done nothing to alleviate the Palestinian crisis.  Peace in the Middle East was becoming more and more remote.  International law granted rights to states and not to individuals.  It recognized the dignity of people and highlighted independence.  Reading from chapters of a work he was preparing on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, he said the principles and philosophy of new international law had become a backup to the Charter and regional agreements.  The Charter of the Organization of American States called on all states to achieve peace and justice and to defend their sovereignty and independence.

The philosophy and norms of international law united the fate of the international community, he said.  The various bodies of the Untied Nations were caught in a new philosophy of decolonization.  The General Assembly had adopted a resolution that supported the right to self-determination.  It adopted the declaration of independence to colonial countries and people calling for an end to colonialism and the practices of racism and segregation associated with it. All people had a right to self-determination.  General Assembly resolution 1514 also related the right to self-determination with the declaration of human rights.     

He said that Colombia was one of the countries that had not voted for the partition of Palestine because it believed it to be the most terrible injustice towards the Palestinians Colombia had always voted for the right of the Palestinians to return to their homes.  Now in the Security Council, Colombia continued to stand for Palestinian rights in spite of the implied threats from the United States.

RAIMONDO KABCHI CHEMOR, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Santa Maria, Caracas, said it was sad to have to begin the millenium by noting that the fascism which had been dead for 50 years had been reborn.  Latin America and the Caribbean were dedicated to the support of the Palestinian people.   He recalled that a Caribbean vote, called the “$10,000 vote”, had made it possible for the partition to enjoy a majority of one vote.  On the whole, Latin America had voted for the partition.  However that resolution had also created Palestinian state.  Latin Americans were obligated now to ensure the establishment of that state.  The majority of Latin American leaders had lacked convictions. The partition resolution did not have one vote from Asia and Africa.

He said there was no peace process. Peace without justice was not peace and there was no justice.  The international community must work together to make compliance possible with General Assembly resolution 181 (II) (1947).

What did the Palestinians want? He asked.  First on their list was the creation of a Palestinian state, a right that was recognized by the United Nations.  Jerusalem was an entirely Arab city and had been so for millennia.  The Palestinians also wanted the right to return.  How could Israel say that the Palestinians had no right to return while people from Russia, Ukraine and all over the world had the right to return if they had a Jewish mother.  What international law said that someone who had recently arrived from Russia could go to the Palestinian territory and move into a settlement?  Unipolarism and globalization made it difficult for some countries to support the Palestinians.  It seemed sad that when there was reference to terrorism and violence in the Middle East, it was associated with the Palestinians.  The Palestinians who shouted for their rights could not be compared with the Israelis and their phantoms and other sophisticated weapons supplied by the United States.  He was proud that Venezuela had assumed a principled stance with regard to the Palestinians.

GABRIEL PEREZ TARRAU, Professor, Higher Institute of International Relations, Havana, said the Security Council t constantly demonstrated that used a double standard, particularly in the treatment of the question of Palestine. He called attention to the impunity with Israel had violated international law.  In fact, the State of Israel was constituted in violation General Assembly resolution 181 (1947) because it had seized part of the land that was supposed to go to Palestine.  Israel was founded using discriminatory practices against Palestinians living within its territory.  

He said Israel had started wars five times against its Arab neighbours.  It felt it was entitled to develop weapons of mass destruction.  The State of Israel flagrantly violated agreements and showed a god-like contempt for all the resolutions adopted by the United Nations.  It used missiles, bombs and warships against young people and children who had only stones to protect themselves.  The State of Israel that had increased its population with the right to return denied that right to the Palestinians.  Its entire history was one of arrogance and impunity.  An exception had been made for Israel because it had always found financial and political support from the United States.  He noted that Israel always voted with the United States for the blockade against Cuba.  The double standard stood unchallenged.  However, it had put itself in a vulnerable situation.  In vetoing fair and necessary proposals such as the deployment of an observer force, the United Nations showed its true nature.  The policy of double standards must fade away helped by the actions of the Palestinian Rights’ Committee, which worked to dispatch the myths that people were bombarded with about this issue.

He said the Cuban experience showed that peace was indivisible and sovereignty was indivisible.  He stressed the importance of approaching the issue on the basis of history.

—–