In his opinion piece entitled “Stupidity or cowardice? Europe refuses to recognize apartheid towards the Palestinians” 1Ferry de Kerckhove recognizes that “a historical shortcut never does justice to the facts”, but nevertheless proceeds to make dangerous shortcuts.
Thus, he asserts that Israel would have appropriated all of Palestine, but the reality is quite different. We will mention in particular that Israel accepted the plan of partition of the territory creating a Jewish State and an Arab State following the adoption by the General Assembly of the United Nations of resolution 181 on November 29, 1947. The representatives of the Palestinian people had persisted in their refusal to create an independent Arab State alongside Israel. Furthermore, this assertion that Israel appropriated all of Palestine presents a reductionist vision of the right to self-determination of the Jewish people, ignoring the fact that Israel is both the ancestral and contemporary home of the Jewish people. Jews are native to the area, where they have maintained a continuous presence for over 3,000 years.
The Jewish Diaspora, including that of Canada, is made up of descendants of Jews forcibly dispersed from the Middle East. Moreover this week will begin the holiday of Passover, the Jewish Passover, a holiday that celebrates the biblical Exodus of the Israelites from slavery imposed by the Egyptians to freedom in Israel. During their Passover prayers, Jews around the world will fondly wish “next year in Jerusalem,” as they have done for centuries.
Affirming the right to self-determination of the Jewish people in no way precludes the same right for the Palestinians through a two-state solution.
So what is Ferry de Kerckhove referring to when he asserts that “Israel has never really rallied, with one exception, to the idea of a Palestinian state”? We imagine he is not talking about the fact that Israel formally recognized the Palestinian people and their right to self-determination in the 1993 Declaration of Principles.2. No more than in the years that followed Oslo, at Camp David in 20003 then at the Taba summit in 20014, Israel has offered several territorial concessions. And what about the 2008 proposal5 in which then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered the equivalent of the entire West Bank as part of US-brokered peace proposals that would have established a Palestinian state? Could it be that M. de Kerckhove did not know?
A rule of law
According to Ferry de Kerckhove, accusing Israel of apartheid is highly justified and he cites an Amnesty International report in support of this assertion. By deliberately misapplying international human rights principles, this report diminishes the gravity of the most heinous crimes committed against humanity. The report also ignores the fact that, like those of Canada, Israel’s democratic institutions are based on the rule of law and the separation of powers between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. Regardless of their ethnic or religious origin, citizens of Israel are guaranteed equality before the law. While solid, Israeli democracy is not perfect and the majority-minority dynamic leaves room for improvement, much like our own experience in Canada.
Furthermore, the notorious report denies the Jewish people their right to self-determination, demands behavior from Israel that is not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation, and notably opposes any policy aimed at reinforcing the Jewish character of Israel while not opposing any of the 80 countries in the world that have a state religion. Strange coincidence that these accusations of apartheid are aimed at the only Jewish state in the world.
According to this text and many others, which seems to be the worst state when it comes to racism and discrimination? The Jewish nation, the State of Israel. The one and only true democracy in the Middle East. A place where everyone is equal before the law. The incendiary accusations circulating about the only Jewish state in the world demonstrate a disturbing double standard. Is it misunderstanding or rather bad faith? The question is valid…