Speech G. Duisenberg on Arab-International Forum on Palestine

Allow me to start by introducing myself. I am the chair of a Dutch group called “Stop the Occupation”. We began our activities in The Netherlands in September 2002. A committee was founded, which launched a declaration that called on Dutch and European politicians to take their responsibilities. A considerable number of well-known people signed our call, as did more than 50.000 others until the present day. The media exposure has been overwhelming, even before the launch of our campaign, when a Palestinian flag on my balcony caused a row.

The demands in our declaration are moderate and do not exceed much the declared positions of the European Union and its member states. We call on the international community to promote an Israeli withdrawal from all of the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967, in order to allow for the establishment of a viable and sovereign Palestinian state with East-Jerusalem as its capital. Also, we call for the implementation of all relevant UN resolutions. We simply expect our political leaders to act within the boundaries of resolutions that have been adopted by the world community.

Our activities have triggered lots of positive reactions. A growing number of Dutch people question the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians more and more. Not long ago, such doubts were only raised in leftist circles, progressive parts of the catholic and protestant churches, the Arab community and a few critical groups within the Jewish community. But now, criticism of Israeli policy has spread to mainstream segments of Dutch society and has also been voiced by opinion leaders.

The initiative “Stop the Occupation” was explicitly inspired by the desire to bridge the growing gap between the actions of the body politic and society at large. In short, to let society at large be heard ! Because in Europe the Netherlands has from the outset and till today always assumed a very pro-Israel stance, and other activist groups have not succeeded in taking political steps, I found myself in the fortuitous position, by engaging on a different approach, to set things in motion where others had been less successful.
Because we have reached the public at large and managed to challenge the traditional pro-Israeli stance of the Dutch establishment, our campaign has caused quite a bit of controversy and even counter-campaigns and efforts to silence us. Without success of course, but it to some extent shifted attention away from our message: Stop the Occupation!

It seems to me that the only way to avoid criticism and counter-campaigns would be to remain within the existing discourse of so-called even-handedness and prudence, in a conflict were responsibility, violence and suffering are not at all even-handed and where a prudent approach has given rise to the deep crisis that we are currently facing. That is clearly no option. Efforts to silence us need to be resisted and will not deter us from pursuing our noble goals.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Based on our experiences so far, I would like to make a few suggestions on the way forward for civil society advocacy. One valuable approach common to groups such as ‘Stop the Occupation’ is grassroots activism. Gathering signatures, attending vigils and demonstrations, all visible signs of solidarity with the peace movement in Palestine and Israel. Also, sending letters to newspapers is of great importance, due to the biased provision of information of our media in the past, which for decades has distorted people’s perception of what is happening in Palestine. Fortunately, we can witness some promising changes in that regard in recent months.

A second approach aims at expanding the social base. Many social movements, like churches, labour unions and other civil society institutions still remain silent with respect to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They usually regard this issue as complicated and sensitive. In my eyes, these movements need to be convinced of three things.

First, that the facts are indeed complicated and sensitive, but still allow for a moral judgement to be made.

Second, they must realize that their involvement is needed, as the conflict results to a large extent from the unwillingness of the international community, including my government, to enforce international law. And finally, groups must be convinced that their involvement can make a difference. Governments will eventually have to act, if they encounter strong social pressure.

A third approach for civil society is political advocacy. This is a sophisticated activity where Palestinian solidarity groups have in the past always had to cope with a solid wall of resistance by pro-Israel sympathizers, while pro-Israel groups have been highly professional when it comes to lobbying.

Lobbying should focus on those issues that affect the interests of politicians, among them issues that relate to the enforcement of international law. It is up to lobby groups to explain that enforcement is firstly a matter of sticking to binding rules, but also a matter of tangible results: protection of human rights and respect for international humanitarian law provide the preconditions for a resumption and successful conclusion of peace talks between Israel and Palestine - prospects that constitute core political interests to our politicians. At the same time, it must be repeated like a mantra that the constant violation of international humanitarian and human rights law by Israel destroys every chance for peace and reconciliation.

Lobbying should also relate to the theme of this conference: development in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The EU is the largest donor to the OPT. Civil society has to point out that sustainable development depends on an end to the occupation, including the Wall. It should make clear that development aid cannot endlessly compensate for Israel’s colossal failure to ensure, as the occupying power, the humanitarian well-being of the Palestinian people. And our governments must be convinced that Israel needs to be held accountable, for all damages caused by Israeli occupation forces to development projects sponsored by the EU. These damages have been significant in the past, but no pressure has been put on Israel to make reparations.

European civil society organizations have to apply these approaches simultaneously, involving a variety of actors and resulting in as many initiatives as possible. Only then can change be brought about.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I would like to tell you why I consider the role of civil society so important. I see two reasons: first, the gravity of the situation in Palestine. Second, the failure of our governments to bring an end to the injustice we are all witness to.

A considerable number of speakers at this conference reports on the catastrophic situation in Palestine. I will limit myself to illustrating the seriousness of the situation by quoting from a few figures presented recently by Dr. Mustafa Barghouthi and Dr. Hanan Ashrawi’s organisation MIFTAH:

· More than 3000 Palestinians have been killed since the outbreak of the second intifada, of whom 80% were civilians. Among the dead are around 700 children. Moreover, 10.000 children have been injured. These facts are slaps in the faces of those who dare to claim that Israel’s military operations are targeted, legitimate and proportional. These operations are nothing but criminal acts of agression! Recent atrocities in the Gaza Strip prove this to the fullest.
· Hundreds of Palestinian children are in Israeli prisons. These children have been put in prison without charges and have no access to legal help for extensive periods of time. In total, over 7.000 Palestinian political prisoners are being held. Lawlessness rules!
· 30% of Palestinian children suffer from chronic malnutrition. Not too long ago, I heard that this percentage equals statistics from countries in sub-Saharan Africa. However, in Palestine the level of malnutrition does not result from natural causes, but is in fact man-made. More precisely: it is occupation-made.
· More than one billion dollars worth of Palestinian infrastructure and over 7.000 Palestinian houses have been destroyed by the Israeli army. The Palestinian economy has basically collapsed, largely due to extreme limitations imposed on the freedom of movement of Palestinian civilians and goods.
· Water supply for millions of Palestinians is very limited, or even worse, absent. Meanwhile, Israeli settlers illegally living in the occupied territories consume twenty times more water than the native Palestinian population. Is there another so-called ‘civilized and democratic’ state on earth that has produced such apartheid-style injustice on its doorstep?
· Finally, I have little news regarding the annexation, gettoization and human suffering, which results from the building of the Wall on occupied land. You are all aware of the consequences of the Wall. In recent years, Palestinians have already suffered from hundreds of movement restrictions, but the Wall brings Israel’s infrastructure of suppression, and thereby the individual and collective suffocation of the Palestinians, to a new level.

While many more examples could be given, these figures clearly illustrate the gravity of the human tragedy occurring in the Occupied Palestinian Territories as a result of Israel’s policies. And this tragedy leaves no choice to human beings and organizations who are guided by universal principles, but to intervene.

The second reason why civil society organizations are so important is the total failure of governments, all around the world, to bring an end to the injustice and suffering in Palestine. While I am disgusted by the support that the Israeli occupation enjoys in the United States and while I am deeply disturbed by the silence of Arab leaders to what is happening in Palestine, I like to limit my remarks to the behaviour of the EU member states, among them my government.

I like to illustrate that behaviour with the help of three short examples.

1) The first concerns the trade agreement that Israel has signed with the EU. Not only the human rights clause of that agreement, but also the clause referring to the origin of products has been violated by Israel for a long time. The reason is that Israel has been claiming and enjoying trade advantages for settlement products, which don’t fall under the scope of the agreement. One can say that the EU has been subsidizing the colonization of occupied Palestinian territory! The EU was aware of this malpractice, and Israel has in the meantime yielded to pressure by the EU and now indicates what produce originates in the settlements.

In recent months, an arrangement has been worked out that does not confront Israeli policies and underlying legislation, which lead to the violation of the trade agreement, but merely serves the interests of Israeli businesses and European customs services. This demonstrates how much space, maybe I should say tacit support, Israel’s illegal policies enjoy in the EU, even in a case in which the trade agreement, or rather suspending it, which is legally feasible, could easily be used as a stick to discourage these policies.

2) The second example concerns the Wall. Fortunately, the EU member states have voted in favour of UN resolutions condemning the Wall as illegal and calling on Israel to dismantle it. However, after the UN General Assembly vote that accepted and supported the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, it was reported that senior European diplomats had been reassuring their Israeli counterparts that in the UN, no further steps against the Wall would be supported by the EU. This clearly shows the discrepancy between declared positions and actions. The positions of the EU are in conformity with international law, but no actions are being taken on the basis of these positions. In the case of the present example, this means that Israel can continue to build the Wall without facing consequences. European criticism and rejection of the Wall turns out to be lip service, nothing more. Again, the Palestinian people pay the price and time running out !

3) My last example concerns the recent invitation by the Dutch government to the Israeli prime minister Sharon. In the context of the Dutch EU presidency, Sharon was invited to visit The Hague. Please don’t understand me wrong. I don’t mind Sharon coming to The Hague -as long as he is transferred upon his arrival to a cell next to Slobodan Milosevic, another war criminal who is currently being tried in my country for his deeds and responsibilities. However, in the case of Ariel Sharon, another treatment was planned. He was supposed to be received, with all honour, by the Dutch prime minister and even the Dutch Queen. It’s only because Sharon canceled the trip himself, that he won’t come to the Netherlands and enjoy this reception.

What I would like to say is the following. My government considers itself the guardian of morals and values, shaping our political and social life. My government claims to host the ‘legal capital of the world’ and writes HUMAN RIGHTS with capitals, for example when dealing with Turkey and Iran. However, in the case of Israel, these standards do not apply. Instead, the red carpet is unrolled for a man, of whom the world knows that he is guilty of war crimes and responsible for massive and ongoing human rights violations. The message is clear: is does not matter if you are a war criminal, as long as you come from Israel.

These examples, and again many more could have been given, explain why civil society is so relevant: because our governments make themselves so irrelevant. Because they evade their legal, moral and political responsibilities. Our governments have let down the Palestinian people and continue to do so. That is why we have to step in with all our energy, never allowing ourselves to be corrupted at the expense of more human suffering in Palestine.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I want to conclude with a critical remark in another direction. It is obvious that the Palestinians, above all, suffer from repressive Israeli policies. However, there are also important internal challenges, and some of them relate to the position of Palestinian civil society organizations. As chair of ‘Stop the Occupation’, I consider it my duty to express solidarity with these organizations, also in a situation in which they are hindered by their own political authorities.

Nobody has to explain to me under which constraints the Palestinian Authority has to operate. But these constraints cannot be used as a pretext to curtail the autonomous functioning of Palestinian civil society organisations, among them organisations which have criticised the PA for its poor human rights record. Unfortunately, employees of these and other organisations have been hindered in their efforts to build up a vibrant civil society in Palestine, based on the respect for human rights and democratic principles.

This has not only weakened the strength of Palestinian civil society, but also the vitality of the Palestinian national struggle as a whole. I am convinced that an end to the occupation and the beginning of self-determination and freedom will come sooner, if Palestinian civil society can evolve free from internal interference.

Sometimes, ladies and gentlemen, I ask myself in despair, what on earth are we doing. Is it worthwile to continue to think and work along the lines we are doing, working toward the establishment of a viable and autonomous Palestinian state, whilst the situation on the ground is deteriorating to such an extent that achieving our ultimate goal is virtually impossible. Does not the way in which Israel deals with its so-called security problem and the threats of terrorist actions effectively imply that Israel enhances and intensifies international violence ?
Nelson Mandela once said: “The nature of the resistance is determined by the nature of the occupation”. How true that sounds today !
Would it not be an important step if we, Europe and the Arab world, could convince Israel and the United States that this way of operating, also in other countries in the Middle East, e.g. Iraq, only adds to the escalation. Should we not work precisely in the opposite direction, namely de-escalation ?

Thank you for your attention!

Overzicht Reacties over dit Artikel