Trudeau government continues Harper's anti-Palestine votes at the UN

Last week the UN General Assembly held its annual vote on the "Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine". 155 countries votes yes, and 7 countries voted no: Australia Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, and the United States. Votes on several other Palestine-related resolutions were similar; Canada either abstained or voted against all of them.

The votes were the first for Canada's new government led by Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The early anti-Palestine direction of the government should not be a surprise to those paying attention. In this election blog post I wrote about how Trudeau had praised Paul Martin's abandonment of Canada's support for the Palestine UN resolutions, and then-candidate (now rookie MP) Anthony Housefather had some pretty terrible things to say.

Housefather, along with another rookie Liberal MP Michael Levitt, has apparently not stopped, and one would assume has the permission of the Prime Minister's Office to continue defending Israel's atrocious human rights record. In this article, the only record of anything close to journalism I can find about Canada's votes on the Palestine resolutions in the UN this year (which speaks to a bigger problem about media not covering it), the two rookie MPs are quoted saying:

“We are pleased to recognize that the government of Canada led by Prime Minister Trudeau has demonstrated its continued support for Israel’s security, democracy, and stability by maintaining our country’s UN voting record on Israel,” they said in a statement Nov. 26. We will persist in opposing initiatives that vilify or single out Israel, including the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement. This round of voting underscores our firm commitment to support our ally Israel… We call upon the United Nations to stop this annual attempt to vilify and demonize Israel, and we hope this year will be the last year we need to vote on these resolutions.”

While some (non-Palestine-related) things Trudeau has done so far have impressed me, this vote is an inexcusable one that simply continues Stephen Harper's anti-human rights approach to Israel-Palestine. What is even worse is that no opposition MP from any party has said anything about it (I'm prepared to be corrected if someone knows otherwise).

What we are left with at the moment is the worst of all possibilities. We have a government actively opposing Palestinian human rights with no opposition willing to speak a word about it. I don't want that to be the case for the whole four years of Trudeau's first mandate, but I'm afraid it might be. It's the job of those of us who know what is going on to call the government out on these decisions when they are made and to call on the opposition parties to do something about it.

--

Here is some background on the annual UN resolution called the "Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine":

In the UN's words, by adopting the resolution, "the Assembly reaffirmed the need to achieve a peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine. It called for the intensification of efforts by the parties, including through negotiations, with the support of the international community, towards the conclusion of a final peace settlement, as well as urging renewed international efforts to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting peace, based on the relevant United Nations resolutions; the terms of reference of the Madrid Conference, including the principle of land for peace; the Arab Peace Initiative adopted by the Council of the League of Arab States at its fourteenth session; the Quartet road map to a permanent two-State solution to the conflict; and existing agreements between the Israeli and Palestinian sides. It also called for the timely convening of an international conference in Moscow, as envisioned by the Security Council in resolution 1850 (2008), for the advancement and acceleration of the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement."

Read the official UN press release here, which has recorded votes on this resolution and others related to Palestine that were debated and voted on at the UN General Assembly this year.

FEDERAL ELECTION SERIES: The Liberal Party on Israel-Palestine

Sorry this blog has taken so long. This is the second post of four analyzing the major Canadian federal political parties' positions on Israel-Palestine.

Position on Israel-Palestine

The Liberals often articulate a position that relies on the Conservative position by saying they stand for a “more balanced” approach to the question of Israel-Palestine. While it is good that they see the above Conservative position in a negative light, the Liberal position is far from clear to me. Trudeau has recently said through his Twitter account that “The BDS movement, like Israeli Apartheid Week, has no place on Canadian campuses.” It is unclear if he is advocating for the government to do something to enforce his views, but it’s troubling enough that he is speaking out against such things. And while he doesn’t generally go out of his way to say anything about Israel-Palestine, this was clearly a calculated statement.

The Liberals under Chretien consistently voted in favour of the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine every year at the United Nations General Assembly. However, when Paul Martin became Prime Minister, Canada began to abstain. I actually was not aware of Trudeau ever taking a position on how Canada should vote on the annual UN resolution on the two-state solution. However, my Googling while doing research for this post produced a very helpful article quoting Trudeau at length from an event he spoke at in February 2015 in Winnipeg.

In the article, Trudeau praises Paul Martin’s shift to abstaining on the peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine and says he would take the same position. He also clearly opposes the UN bid for statehood that was brought to the UN General Assembly in November 2012, calling it a “unilateral action.” That phrase comes from the Israeli government, but it is one that boggles my mind, given that 138 countries in the world supported the move and only 9 opposed it. While I understand what he is saying is that statehood needs to be negotiated with Israel, Palestine’s declaration of statehood was far from unilateral.

More recently, the National Post published an article on a local battle in the riding of Mount Royal in Montreal where the Conservatives and Liberals are in a heated race. The riding, according to the Post, has a population that is 37 percent Jewish, and assuming these two candidates know their constituency, that population is overwhelmingly anti-Palestinian because they are climbing over each other for who should get the anti-Palestinian vote (NOTE: I think it is extremely important that a large Jewish population is not labelled anti-Palestinian by default. There are many Jewish people in Canada and around the world who stand for justice and peace for Palestine). The Liberal candidate, Anthony Housefather, is quoted as saying, "...we will not change the votes at the UN on Israel...we will continue to boycott anti-Semitic conferences like Durban...we're completely opposed to BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement targeting Israel.) I try to reassure [Jewish neighbourhoods] what Justin's actual positions are. He's as supportive of Israel as the Conservatives are."

It is difficult to track the Liberals' positions on Israel-Palestine because they speak of it so little (more on that in the next section), but this interview would seem to indicate that the Liberal position has shifted, specifically on the way they would vote in the UN, from abstaining on the annual UN resolution on the two-state solution to opposing it. That shift would put a Trudeau government even further into the anti-Palestinian camp than Paul Martin's Liberals and would make it, at least on that specific part of the issue, a polar opposite to the position of Chretien's Liberals. It is a shameful shift, indeed.

To top it off, there is also this video (start it at 1:53) Trudeau sent to an event in support of the Meir Hospital in Israel. In the video he states that Canada and Israel share values, including "democracy, openness, tolerance, compassion, respect for the rule of law, and, perhaps above all, the quest for peace." I'm not going to dissect in this space how those values, I hope, are not ones we share with Israel, particularly when it comes to how it treats the Palestinians within its own borders and the Palestinians they rule over in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. I'll assume if you're reading this that you understand how troublesome that comment is (and if not, let's chat sometime!).

Willingness to discuss the issue

While the above material shows Trudeau has discussed the issue of Palestine from time to time, it is by no means a regular occurrence, and I could find no instances where he discussed it from a human rights perspective. I couldn’t find a single mention by Trudeau of Israel’s settlements in the West Bank, of the wall Israel has built on Palestinian land, or really anything about the problems with Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories. The article on the Mount Royal race cited above is quite a rare one indeed, where a local candidate speaks out in very specific terms to a national newspaper about his party's positions on Israel-Palestine.

Diversity within the caucus

The Liberals have been known throughout their history for being a “big tent” party, where there are some MPs and candidates who are more conservative and some who are more progressive. That continues to be the case, in my view, but it is much harder to see at present. Part of that is because in the current media age anything a candidate says in one part of the country can be immediately broadcast to the public everywhere in the country. That means political parties are much more careful than they used to be at ensuring candidates don’t say anything that will cause questions to be raised about the party’s position on any given issue. That carefulness is even greater at election time, so it will be more and more difficult to see diversity of opinions in all of the parties.

The other reason the big tent is difficult to see at present is that the Liberal caucus elected in 2011 was the smallest in the history of Canada. One former MP I’m aware of with a better position on Palestine than his leader is Boris Wrzesnewskyj, who is running again in the Ontario riding of Etobicoke Centre. While an MP he was a member of the Canada-Palestine Friendship Group and travelled to both the West Bank and Gaza the summer of 2009 on a human rights trip. Space and time do not allow me to go into depth with specific citations, but my impression is that the Liberal caucus and slate of candidates is still quite diverse when it comes to the question of Palestine, despite the unproductive positions of Justin Trudeau. That said, if my assumption is correct, Trudeau's anti-Palestinian positions need to be brought out into the limelight. I think many Liberals, supporters and candidates alike, would be deeply disturbed by the subtle shift he has made to that party's policies.

Conclusion

I was actually much more hopeful about the Liberal position on Israel-Palestine before I began digging around for material for this blog post. The issue is raised so rarely that it is difficult even for the most engaged observers to know where the Liberal Party stands. It has not always been this bad, but the Liberal Party while it is under Justin Trudeau's leadership is very difficult to distinguish (or, according to its candidate in Mount Royal, not distinguishable at all) from the Conservatives.

FEDERAL ELECTION SERIES: Where do the parties stand on justice and peace in Israel-Palestine?

With a federal election campaign now underway in Canada, it is a good time to take stock of where the country is at in relation to the question of Palestine. I find that coverage of that issue as it relates to electoral politics is spotty at best and is usually related to gaffes and other events that can be used by one political party (or its supporters) to make another look bad. In addition, there is some criticism of all of the parties coming out of civil society groups. So given the scarcity of this sort of coverage, I will be publishing a series of blog posts to help fill the void in a small way. I will go through each of the political parties and do a little analysis of where they are at with regard to Palestine. I will look at three things for each party: their position on the Israel-Palestine issue, their willingness to discuss it in public (which has become a major issue in some parties), and the diversity of opinions within their caucus. I will begin the series with a few broad thoughts and comments related to Israel-Palestine in Canadian electoral politics. 

The first is that it is a very positive development that for the first time that I’m aware of in Canada’s history, the leaders of the major political parties will have a public debate focused solely on foreign affairs. It will take place on September 28th. I am very hopeful that Israel-Palestine will be the focus of at least one question that evening. Be sure to tune in.

Secondly, advocacy group Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) is releasing a series of materials throughout the election campaign related to where the parties stand on Middle East issues. So far they have released 3 of 15 analyses. Not all of them will be related to Israel-Palestine (the group focuses on other areas of the Middle East as well), but one of the ones already released is on the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement related to Israel-Palestine. All of the analyses are being posted here.

Thirdly, I wanted to point out the existence of a little-known group within Parliament called the Canada-Palestine Parliamentary Friendship Group. A Google search of the group brings up very little, but it is a multi-party group made up of MPs that is chaired by NDP MP Alexandre Boulerice. I wanted to put the word out about it in case anyone reading has access to a list of the group’s membership. This group is likely the only official one made up of MPs getting together to discuss issues related to Palestine. I first learned of its existence 5 years ago when NDP MP Libby Davies gave a talk at a federal NDP convention on a human rights delegation she was part of that travelled to the West Bank and Gaza. I found an article on the trip here.

Not mentioned in the article is that a Conservative Senator (I don’t recall which one) was part of the trip as well, although he did not attend the Gaza portion of the trip. At the time there were two Conservatives in the group, the other being Alberta Conservative MP Ted Menzies, who is now retired.

Lastly, I just want to lay out a brief framework for how I will analyze each of the parties related to the question of Israel-Palestine. I will look generally at the parties’ positions on a just and peaceful solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. I will look at statements the leaders have made and also positions they have taken on questions that reach UN votes, specifically related to the annual UN General Assembly vote on the Peaceful Settlement of the Palestine Question and the November 2012 vote on Palestinian statehood. Since, in my view, one of the issues with Israel-Palestine as it relates to Canadian politics, is a reluctance or resistance to public discussion of the topic, I will look at that issue for each party. And since it’s an issue that isn’t talked about much publicly, I will look at the diversity of opinions within each caucus and slate of candidates with regard to Israel-Palestine. That part is difficult to get much information on, but over the years I have noticed some things worth commenting on.

So stay tuned! I’ve actually written drafts already for pieces on the Conservatives, Liberals, New Democrats, and a brief one on the Greens, so despite the sparseness of my blogs in the past, I promise these ones will actually happen and in a timely manner. I hope they help to stimulate more discussion on a topic that, in my view, doesn’t receive enough attention in Canadian electoral politics.

A Few Initial Thoughts on Palestinian Statehood at the UN Today

I was extremely happy to see the UN General Assembly resolution to recognize Palestine as a "non-voting observer state" pass by a large margin (138 in favour, 9 against). The countries voting against were Canada, Israel, United States, Czech Republic, Panama, Micronesia, Palau, Nauru, and the Marshall Islands.

Here are my initial thoughts:

- There is still much to do for Palestinians to have a sovereign state of their own. Israel still occupies, both with their military and civilian populations, a ton of Palestinian territory. This step is a positive one, but it is a small one.

- The US Ambassador Susan Rice said today that her country opposes "any or all unilateral actions." Apparently that doesn't include bombing civilians in Gaza.

- The US and Canada say Palestine can only have a state if it is negotiated with Israel, but when Israel became a state 65 years ago, they didn't require any negotiation with the Palestinians. The American and Canadian governments are being hypocrites with this approach.

- Even though Canada and the US see today's move as "counterproductive", thankfully only 7 other countries in the world agree with them.

- It is significant that Hamas actually came out in favour of this resolution, which recognizes Palestine within its pre-1967 borders.

- Despite what Canada, the US, and Israel are saying, this move by Palestine was not "unilaterial"; 138 countries supported them.

- The most tangible change that comes with this change is status is that Palestine will now be able to take Israel to the International Criminal Court for war crimes, if it so chooses.

Here in Canada, the NDP was the only party that came out in favour of the resolution before it was voted on. The Liberals and Conservatives both came out against it before the vote. The Liberals issued a press release moments after the resolution passed. The release did not take any explicitly different stance on the resolution itself, but it did call on the Canadian government not to punish the Palestinians for the initiative, something the Harper government has said it will do. It remains to be seen if the Conservatives will actually follow through on their threat to send the Palestinian representatives in Canada home.

Only time will tell what the actual impact of this change will be. We'll have to wait and see.