EU rightly separates Israel’s security from its colonial abuses
by Rami G. Khouri Released: 25 Jul 2015
[Forwarded by Rupa]
______________________________
BEIRUT
— Events related to the Iran nuclear technology/sanctions agreement,
the war in Yemen, and the battle against the “Islamic State” tend to
dominate the headlines from the Middle East these days, but behind the
scenes significant developments related to the Arab-Israeli conflict
continue to take place. The idea of a dramatic external intervention to
resolve this conflict remains a distant possibility, including options
like new and better mediation by a joint American-European combine,
French support for a “relaunched” Arab Peace Initiative, or taking the
conflict to the UN Security Council or General Assembly. As significant
may be the slow but continuing moves by the European Union (EU) to
differentiate between the security of the state of Israel within its
pre-June 1967 borders and the actions of Israel as a colonial and
occupying power in the territories seized in 1967.
These
moves have been underway for a few years now in the slow, bureaucratic
manner in which the EU does business. They focus primarily on legal and
political moves that would prohibit EU member states and private
companies, like banks, from doing business with Israeli government or
non-governmental entities based in the occupied territories. The
significance of these moves is that they shift the center of gravity of
the Palestinian-Israeli struggle away from the two arenas where Israel
dominates and progress has been minimal to zero (brute power on the
ground, and the American-mediated failed negotiations of the past 20
years), and into the arena of international law, accountability and
appropriate sanctions against miscreants, where Israelis and
Palestinians have equal rights and obligations.
Two
concurrent developments in the past week have given new vitality to
this effort. The first was the decision by the EU to keep moving ahead
with the process of labeling Israeli goods made in Jewish settlements in
the West Bank, and the second is a new proposal by a respected European
think tank for EU states to differentiate more firmly between Israel
proper and its post-1967 colonial realm, including the possibility of
ending official and private business dealings with Israeli banks.
These
developments send the powerful political message that Israel’s
continuing illegal actions in the occupied Palestinian territories
cannot continue forever with impunity. The EU move occurs while several
other significant developments increase the pressure on Israel to
respect its legal and ethical obligations: The Palestinian-initiated
boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel’s
mistreatment of Palestinians continues to pick up steam around the
world, the United States government more openly and frequently expresses
its opposition to some Israeli moves in the occupied territories, and
some EU member states unilaterally recognize the State of Palestine.
The
net result is that global powers that Israel had always assumed were
safely in its pocket are fed up with its behavior that flaunts
international law, and are prepared to take action to make this point.
This increases the likelihood of combined political-economic pressures
by states and civil society around the world to sanction Israel for its
subjugation of Palestinians, just as the world once pressured and
finally helped to end South African Apartheid policies.
Israelis
cry out that this is anti-Semitism, but the world now routinely ignores
such desperate Zionist measures, because those who pressure Israel to
end its often brutal and inhuman colonial behavior are also strongly
committed to its existence and security within its pre-1967 borders. The
declining impact of Israeli attempts to intimidate, immobilize, and
silence the critics of its colonial actions (with the possible exception
of the very strange terrain of the US Congress) is an important sign of
the changing international environment related to the
Israeli-Palestinian and wider Zionism-Arabism conflicts. Moving the
dynamics of this conflict into the realm of international law, rather
than brute power on the ground or the dysfunctional bias of American
mediation, should be applauded, because it could ultimately provide all
concerned with their legitimate rights, on an equal basis, and show a
real will to end impunity by all sides.
The
most intriguing new development last week was the European Council on
Foreign Relations report, entitled “EU Differentiation and Israeli
Settlements,” which argued that the EU is violating its own laws and
needs to take actions that would more emphatically affirm its normal
relations with Israel while condemning and somehow punishing Israel's
activities in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Among the possible moves
the EU could take would be to stop dealings with Israeli banks that
profit from operations in the occupied territories, including widespread
loans and housing mortgages — which triggered a sudden drop in some
Israeli bank stocks. Such moves would take the initial labeling of
products made in Israeli settlements to a much more significant level,
including possibly ending the tax-exempt status of European charities
with links to Israeli settlements, or not recognizing qualifications
from academic, medical and other Israeli institutions based in the
occupied territories.
Rami
G. Khouri is published twice weekly in the Daily Star. He was founding
director and now senior policy fellow of the Issam Fares Institute for
Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of
Beirut. Follow him on Twitter @ramikhouri.
++++
No comments:
Post a Comment