The Quartet met this month to express their concerns and made
clear what they expect from both parties in order for their stated goal of a two-state solution – now is the time for the international community to judge theirefforts.
The Quartet statement released after this 9th May meeting barely holds even to a pretense of impartiality, placing conditionality only upon the Palestinian Authority headed by its newly elected Hamas government. They emphasized “grave concern that the Palestinian Authority government has so far failed to commit itself to the principles of non-violence”, yet show no acknowledgment of the truce Hamas has held to for over a year. No such conditionality is demanded of Prime Minister Olmert's government but to its credit, the Quartet has “expressed concern over Israeli military operations that result in the loss of innocent life”.
A recent example of such operations can be found in the attack on a civilian building in Ramallah on 24/05/06, which resulted in the loss of one citizen and the wounding of eleven when “Israeli soldiers open fire towards civilians...Israeli troops are preventing ambulances from reaching others” (WAFA). Such events are
commonplace but the threat of sanctions towards Israeli aid for these war crimes are not.
“The Quartet urged it (the Palestinian Authority) to act decisively against terrorism and bring an end to violence”, one would assume that their tactic assumption is that the sole source of terrorism and violence is within the Occupied Territories – if they are not insinuating this then the UN has declared the PA must do the work of both governments if peace is to be achieved. How representative is the Quartet of the international community? You need only to look briefly into recent votes taken by the UN General Assembly to see a stark difference in tone.
To quote from Gen Assem Resolution 60/183 Permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the Arab population in the occupied Syrian Golan over their natural resources:
• “Reaffirming the principle of the permanent sovereignty of peoples under foreign occupation over their natural resources.”
• “Aware of the detrimental impact of the Israeli settlements on Palestinian and other Arab natural resources, especially as a result of the confiscation of land and the forced diversion of water resources”
• “Aware also of the detrimental impact on Palestinian natural resources being caused by the unlawful construction of the wall by Israel, the occupying Power, the the Occupied Palestinian Territory...and of its grave effect on the natural resources and economic and social conditions of the Palestinian people”
• “recalling the need to end all acts of violence, including acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction”
-note that the last quote is addressed to both parties, as opposed to demanding the PA somehow end the terrorism of Palestinian militants unrelated to Hamas while it politely ”calls for restraint and asks Israel to bear in mind the potential consequences of its actions”.
The critical manner the General Assembly adopts to Israel's unlawful occupation of the Palestinian Territories and the responsibilities the UN repeatedly demand they incur are missing in the Quartet's recent statement. A vote on this particular
resolution was called on 31/01/06 and was passed by a vote of 156-6, it seems a far more democratic means of administering the international community's will to me.
The EU and US, half of the Quartet, have demonstrated their unwillingness to negotiate with the Hamas government by denying aid to the PA – economically crippling them further. Both are holding Hamas to similar principles; that the must commit to non-violence, recognise Israel and commit their already dire lack of
resources towards securing Israel's ever-expanding borders. The US House bill passed 23/05/06 aside from cutting off aid to the PA has now designated it a “terrorist sanctuary”, bans visas allowing entry to the US of any PA representative and calls for withholding UN contributions to the value of financial support it gives to the newly elected government.
No recognition is offered to the Palestinian Authority's parliamentary power structure, and nothing but disdain shown for the Palestinian people's democratic rights. The position of Hamas is expressed by their political bureau head Khalid Mish'al, “We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us...We shall
never recognise the right of any power to rob us of our land and deny us our national rights. We shall never recognise the legitimacy of a Zionist state created on our soil in order to atone for somebody else's sins or solve somebody else's problem. But if you are willing to accept the principle of a long-term truce, we are prepared to negotiate the terms”, from this we can assume their recognition of a negotiating parter (Israel), a preparedness for peace also demonstrated by the ongoing and one-sided ceasefire.
Christian Aid has voiced their concern over EU sanctions on the PA, depicting the grave impact their actions would have on the civilian infrastructure citing the UN prediction that “74% of the population living on less than £1.10 a day in two years” and emphasized the importance that the Quartet “act impartially; if conditions are to be applied, they should be done so to whichever party breaks agreed accords or international law.” It requested Israel “desist from any action, such as settlement activities and construction of the separation barrier on Palestinian land, that is
contrary to international law and threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution” - very reasonable demands that Israel won't be held to.
Koffi Annan alarmingly showers praise on the Jewish rights group B'nai B'rith which has publicly claimed the Hamas government “has again reiterated its core mission of destroying Israel by violent means”, offering no source for this and contradicting Mish'al's talk of truce. The group's perception of the conflict is that after the
“courageous disengagement from Palestinian territories, Israel has repeatedly shown the willingness to struggle and sacrifice for peace...it is time the Palestinians displayed similar strength of responsibility and positive will”. This dillusional outlook
on the situation is not shared by Amnesty International, “Despite the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, the situation for Palestinian refugees there and in the occupied West Bank continued to worsen because of land acquisitions, house
demolitions, closures and controls on movement imposed by the Israeli authorities”.
B'nai B'rith is clearly encouraging these attacks on Palestinian sovereignty over their democratic process, hails their government's partial and wholly inadequate adherence to international law, while promoting ignorance over continued aggression and illegal settlement expansion. The demands of the Quartet seem
similar to this NGO's expectations and Annan's 22/05/06 declaration to the group that it “has a continuing role to play in promoting a just, lasting and comprehensive solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict” demonstrates a disturbing lack of credibility.
The UN leadership has picked its partners in the fruition a two-state settlement, the elected government of Palestine does not appear to be one of them. The cantonisation of Palestinians through continued settlement expansion and the construction of the apartheid wall (which the General Assembly held to be illegal)
fits into the Zionist dream of “convergence” but not international law. Olmert's message is clear; there is to be no viable Palestinian state. Past UN Security Council resolutions claim to be held dear to the Quartet but Israel's continual deviance Resolution 242 is met with neither threat nor firm warning - “concern” is all they can
muster. The British Foreign and Commonwealth Office speaking out against Israeli military actions said on 22/05/06 “We condemn the killing of three Palestinian civilians, including a five year old child, in an Israeli air strike in the Gaza Strip on 20 May”, yet these barbaric acts seem to hold no great importance to the Quartet
and therefore not an issue obstructing the peace process to this international community. There will be no punishment for these actions, only reward and this will come in the form of the $2.5 billion in aid contribution the US House of Representatives has afforded Israel for next year.
Now is the time for move forward, for the true international community to demand an end to terror and relativism and for the acknowledgment of universal human rights. PA Prime Minister Haniyeh announced to an Israeli paper on 23/05/06 that if
Israel withdraws to the pre-1967 borders (in accordance with Resolution 242) that “peace will prevail and we will implement a ceasefire for many years” - who the ceasefire is to be with is unclear if we are to believe the Zionist propaganda that Israel remains unrecognised by Hamas. For the Quartet is to function in any meanful way (with the goal of a two-state settlement) it must place pressure on Olmert's government to accept the olive branch extended to them.