I began the year with three columns on the “Little Knesset,” and its pernicious influence on Canada’s sovereignty and foreign policy. It looks as if I’ll have to end the year the same way.
The latest Canadian official to endorse this sell-out is Alan Rock, ostensibly our ambassador to the United Nations. In what must be seen as a blatant repudiation of principle and international law, Rock has declared that Canada’s vote in the UN General Assembly will serve Israel’s public relations:
“In our judgment, the resolutions are often divisive and lack balance, no matter how artfully they are crafted. Foremost, references to Israeli security needs are often overlooked in the General Assembly. Repeatedly emphasizing Israel’s responsibility under international law obscures equally important responsibilities of other parties to the conflict. This is a major shortcoming of the process.”*
The false equivalence between Israel’s Nazi-style terrorism and the Palestinians’ increasingly desperate attempts at self-preservation is the foundation of the Lobby’s campaign of Arab demonization. This lie must be debunked, because without it, the canard of the po’ l’il “Jewish State” will convince stupid but well-meaning people that Israel faces a legitimate threat.
Perhaps Rock doesn’t know that the Palestinians (and Syrians) have long been prepared to make peace with Israel, but that Israel goes out of its way to provoke confrontation so that it will never have to define its borders or acknowledge the Palestinians’ right to live in peace.
The idea that Palestinians are equally responsible for the violence is so perverse that only the historically ignorant or politically corrupt could defend it. In Rock’s case, and Paul Martin’s government as whole, both criteria apply.
Canada will now no longer condemn the Zionist Occupation Force when it bulldozes homes, shoots children for sport, or kills journalists who decry mass murder. Instead, it will concoct something negative to say about the Palestinians so that clear-cut cases of ZOF criminality can be subsumed and attenuated under a feeble boilerplate condemnation of “terrorism.”
Israel’s clear violation of the Geneva conventions, UNGA Res. 273 and UN Security Council Res. 242? Can’t bring it up because to do so would make Canada appear to be “anti-Israel.” Nevertheless, we’ll continue to talk a good game and offer all assistance short of doing something tangible; hence, the following verbiage:
“Support for Israel, especially its right to live in peace with its neighbours within secure boundaries, has been at the core of Canada’s Middle East policy since 1948. Canada recognizes Israel’s right to assure its own security, and to take proportionate measures to protect the security of its citizens from attacks by terrorist groups, but always in accordance with international law, including human rights and international humanitarian law. (Italics added)
In tandem with this, Canadian support for the creation of a Palestinian state is unwavering. We believe the human rights of Palestinians are of primary importance and that the international community should do everything necessary to secure them. This is one of the reasons why Canada co-sponsored the resolution Assistance to the Palestinian people. A just solution to the Palestinian refugee issue is central to the Middle East Peace Process and to a peace settlement.”*
I wonder what would happen if our justice system worked this way. A gangster couldn’t be charged with murder because that would be proof of “anti-mafia bias.” At the very least the victim would have to be found guilty of something so that the application of justice would appear to be “fair.”
Sound ridiculous? It shouldn’t. Israel is a criminal state that uses torture, terrorism and murder against a largely defenceless civilian population. The post-war world was based on idea that civilized nations would prevent Great War and the deliberate murder of a specific group of people. The UN and its laws are the embodiment of this "never again” credo, but apparently "never again"does not apply to Arabs.
Every year the General Assembly passes resolutions to remind the UN that Israel is committing gross acts of inhumanity, and every year the zionist cancer in Palestine spreads a little more. Because Israel controls the U.S. veto in the Security Council, the UN can only watch in impotent rage as Israel does to Palestinians what Hitler did to the Jews, albeit on a different scale.
If Canada were serious about wanting a just peace in the Middle East, it would do everything possible to force the UN to try to live up to its high-falutin’ principles. According to Rock, though, Canada and the UN suffer from a surfeit of principle:
“We have consistently urged and continue to urge the sponsors to make real efforts to reduce the number of resolutions, many of which are redundant and outdated. This fact not only damages UN credibility but also gives the impression that their objectives are more rhetorical than results-oriented.”*
These General Assembly resolutions, which Canada supported until now, represent the legitimate cry of international outrage, but because of the number of times the General Assembly has had to condemn Israel, the Lobby deems Canada’s support for these resolutions to be “biased,” As a spokesman for the “Little Knesset,” Rock has declared that numbers, not principle will govern Canada’s behaviour in the General Assembly.
After all, it’s not Canada’s fault that Israel is an illegitimate colonial empire run by Ashkenazi gangsters. If we’re to have a meaningful voice in Middle East affairs, we have to look beyond petty, empirical inconveniences like history and responsibility to champion the greater cause of superficial, contrived equality.
If that means Canada must downplay or cover up Israeli brutality; manufacture sophistries to make Palestinian victims look like “terrorists”; or regularly affix our lips to the hindquarters of the Israel Lobby for the sake of future elections and campaign funds, then that’s what we’ll do.
* Alan Rock, Canada’s Statement to the Plenary of the General Assembly (General Debate), 59th Session, New York, Nov. 30, 2004.