Commissioner-General’s address to the Second International Academic Conference
By Peter Hansen
January 08, 2004
"An end to occupation, a just peace in Israel-Palestine: towards an active international network"
Sponsored by MIFTAH and FFIPP
Ladies and Gentlemen
- It gives me great pleasure to address such a distinguished
gathering at this conference. One of the remarkable characteristics of
the evolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the past
decade is the grass-roots mobilization of the common people, academia,
non-governmental organizations and institutions of civil society
focused on conflict resolution, reconciliation and reaching out to the
other. Though this phenomenon has been eclipsed by the official
representatives of the parties to the conflict and their versions of
political developments, this ‘grass-roots’ track has complemented, and
at times, competed with the official one. While they are traditionally
referred to as "track two" initiatives, in the Israeli-Palestinian
context they merit far greater attention and recognition especially
because "track one" could not sufficiently underscore and realize the
aspirations of ordinary Israelis and Palestinians. Your presence here
today further contributes to the momentum for peace in the Middle
East.
- The over five decade-long conflict in the Middle East has spawned
its own lexicon. Peace has been used by the parties to the conflict
along with a variety of adjectives – just peace, durable and lasting
peace and a balanced peace. The concept of ‘justice’ is central to the
purposes of the United Nations. Article 1 of the UN Charter notes the
purpose of the UN as bringing about an "adjustment or settlement of
international disputes" through "peaceful means, and in conformity
with the principles of justice and international law". Article 2 of
the Charter enjoins member states to "settle their international
disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace
and security, and justice, are not endangered". What then, are the
principles of justice that have been enunciated by the international
community to deal with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? How have such
principles of justice evolved over time?
- The international community, while considering the Palestine
problem and the termination of the British mandate in 1947, drew up a
blue-print of what it considered a just solution in UN General
Assembly Resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947 : i) creation of
independent Arab and Jewish states and a Special International Regime
for the City of Jerusalem; ii) adoption of a democratic constitution
in each state providing for equal and non-discriminatory rights to all
persons and enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms; and
iii) provision for an ‘economic union’ including a customs union,
joint currency system, common operation of infrastructure,
telecommunication and transport networks and non-discriminatory access
to water and power facilities. The 1948 conflict and its consequences
led to the establishment of Israel as the Jewish state in Palestine.
The Arab state as envisioned in UNGAR 181 was not established and the
refugee problem was created as a result.
- Even as the travails of the Palestine refugees continued, it was
not until the 1967 conflict that the various elements of a just
solution were revisited by the international community with a greater
focus, through the fora of the UN General Assembly and the UN Security
Council. The General Assembly in its resolutions had: i) reaffirmed
the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine,
including the right to self-determination without external
interference and the right to national independence and sovereignty;
ii) recognized that the Palestinian people is a principal party in the
establishment of a just and durable peace in the Middle East; iii)
recognized that the problem of the Palestine Arab refugees has arisen
from the denial of their inalienable rights under the Charter of the
UN and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and called for their
repatriation or compensation in terms of UNGAR 194 (III) of 11
December 1948; iv) expressed grave concern at Israeli policies and
practices in the occupied territories including acts of collective
punishment, arbitrary detention, curfews, destruction of homes and
property and deportation; and v) declared Israeli steps to change the
status of occupied territories, notably in occupied East Jerusalem, as
null and void. The Security Council, charged with the primary
responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and
security, arrived at a different set of principles for arriving at a
"just and lasting peace in the Middle East": i) withdrawal of Israeli
forces from territories occupied in the conflict; ii) respect for and
acknowledgement of the sovereignty of every state and their right to
live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries; iii)
guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in
the area; and iv) achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem.
Thus, the different mandates and the balances of power in the General
Assembly and the Security Council have resulted in different
articulation of the principles of justice in addressing the Palestine
problem. This situation has persisted until 2002. There were no
explicit calls for resolving the dispute through a two-state solution
and even the Oslo accords referred only to the ambiguous formulation,
first mentioned in the Camp David Frameworks for Peace in the Middle
East, of "final status negotiations".
Ladies and Gentlemen
- The cycle of violence and counter-violence that has engulfed the
West Bank and the Gaza Strip since 2000 has brought about certain
fundamental changes in the perceptions of the international community
of what constitutes a just basis for addressing the Palestine problem.
It is interesting to note that it was the UN Security Council that
took the initiative in articulating these positions, considering the
spiraling violence in the occupied territories as a threat to
international peace and security. The General Assembly meanwhile
continued with its earlier stated positions, including on the refugee
issue. The principal elements of both of the international community’s
approaches are:
- an explicit affirmation of a two-state solution in UNSCRs 1397
of 12 March 2002 and1515 of 19 November 2003. The Council affirmed
"its vision of a region where two states, Israel and Palestine, live
side by side within secure and recognized borders";
- taking direct note of the various initiatives by various parties
to facilitate the resumption of the diplomatic process for a
political settlement and calling on the Israeli and Palestinian
sides to implement the same– in UNSCR 1397, the Council called on
the parties to "cooperate in the implementation of the Tenet work
plan and the Mitchell Report recommendations" and welcomed "the
contribution of Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah"; in UNSCR 1402 it
called upon both parties "to cooperate fully with Special Envoy
Zinni"; in UNSCR 1435 it recognized "the continuing importance of
the initiative endorsed at the Arab League Beirut Summit"; and in
UNSCR 1515 it endorsed the Quartet’s roadmap to a permanent
two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and called on
the parties "to fulfill their obligations under the Roadmap in
cooperation with the Quartet";
- demand for a just settlement of the refugee problem through
repatriation or compensation in terms of UNGAR 194(III);
- demand for a cessation of all acts of violence including
terrorism, provocation, incitement and destruction and to move to a
meaningful cease-fire;
- expression of concern about the dire humanitarian situation of
Palestinian civilians and a call for immediate provision of
humanitarian access to ICRC, UNRWA and other humanitarian actors in
the occupied territories; and
- emphasizing the need to achieve progress on the Israeli-Syrian
and Israeli-Lebanese tracks for achieving a comprehensive, just and
lasting peace in the Middle East.
- The tragic developments since the eruption of the Al Aqsa
intifada have facilitated the crystallization of the international
community’s opinion that the conflict between the Israelis and the
Palestinians will not be resolved either through military means or
through terrorism and violence. The original two-state solution of the
partition resolution has again reappeared in a modified format after
over five decades. For this to happen and for an independent, viable
and contiguous Palestinian state and Israel to live side-by-side in
peace within secure and recognized borders, Israeli occupation of the
West Bank and the Gaza Strip since 1967 and its attendant consequences
must end. It is to be noted that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has
forthrightly supported the establishment of a Palestinian state,
despite opposition from within his party. He has also publicly
acknowledged that Israel cannot continue its occupation of the
Palestinian people in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip,
notwithstanding the clarification over whether the territories are
‘occupied’ or ‘disputed’.
- Even as ending the occupation and establishing a just peace on the
lines discussed here is the ultimate objective, what are the
challenges in the interim? The most important challenge is to ensure
respect for international humanitarian and human rights law. The
Palestinians, the refugees in particular, have suffered from
statelessness in general, and occupation in particular, in the West
Bank and the Gaza Strip. They have been denied the basic freedoms and
human rights that are recognized as universally applicable under all
circumstances. While Israel denies the de jure applicability of
the Fourth Geneva Convention to the occupied Palestinian territory, it
insists that its actions must not be measured against the rules of
international human rights law contained in the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights but by the rules of international
humanitarian law. The international community has not accepted this
argument and has time and again reaffirmed its determination to judge
Israeli actions in terms of both these legal regimes. While Israel has
legitimate security concerns, its measures against terrorism and
violence must be balanced by respect for basic human rights and guided
by the principle of proportionality. Protection of human life, a basic
human right, has been violated by both the Israeli military and the
Palestinian militants. Since September 2000, 2750 Palestinians and 830
Israelis have been killed, and 28000 Palestinians and 5600 Israelis
injured. Five hundred and fifty children have been killed of whom 460
were Palestinian and 90 Israelis. Extrajudicial killings by the
Israeli military and suicide bombings by Palestinian militants have
only raised levels of frustration and anger and derailed the political
process. The time for introspection is now.
Ladies and Gentlemen
- UNRWA has for decades dealt with the political vicissitudes of the
region and continued to maintain its humanitarian space and implement
its mandate of providing essential services to the Palestine refugees
and developing their human potential. It has had to face wars,
internal insurrections, military occupation of both short and extended
durations, and uprisings. Today, in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip,
UNRWA’s primary challenge is to continue with its regular and
emergency programmes amidst Israeli measures considered by the
international community as collective punishment – unprecedented
destruction of homes and property, curfews and closures, restrictions
on freedom of movement and denial of humanitarian access. The
situation is a humanitarian crisis that can be alleviated by a change
of Israeli policy. The construction of the Wall/Barrier in the West
Bank, continued settlement construction and expansion and talk of
unilateral disengagement and annexation of occupied territory erode
the hope of eventual statehood as these actions are seen to be
creating permanent facts on the ground that would vitiate the creation
of an independent, viable and contiguous Palestinian state. The
Palestinian and Israeli people have been through a great deal of
tragedy and hardship. It is time their leaders and the international
community work to fulfill their aspirations to lead normal and
peaceful lives. It is my fervent hope that this conference will
contribute to that process.
Thank you.
http://www.miftah.org
|