 |
 |
 |
Do Away With UNRWA
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.israpundit.com/mt-tb.cgi/10869
Comments
1
.
BobW
said:
Dave Bedein is one of only a few to address the real problems and to offer realistic solutions.
Kol Hakoved, Dave.
of the Issacharites, men who knew how to interpret the signs of the times, to determine how Israel should act. I Chronicles 12:33
Kol tuv,
BobW
Posted by: BobW on October 16, 2005 06:03 AM
2
.
Ted Belman
said:
Joan O'Callahan writes
Canada should have no place whatsoever in any peace process.
Canada has shamelessly privileged the Palestinians over the Israelis at every turn, whether it is condemning Israel's security barrier, refusing to recognize Israeli sovereignty over east Jerusalem, winking at Hamas invovement in UNWRA, endorsing the "Right of Return" (sic) or rolling out the red carpet complete with millions of Canadian dollars in aid for Mahmoud Abbas, with no concomitant demand that the moneys NOT be used to fund terrorism, and not one formal invitation to Ariel Sharon to visit Ottawa. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what Canada would do in such a situation.
As for extending more humanitarian aid to the Palestinians to build an infrastructure - blah, blah......has anybody forgotten the fate of the Gaza greenhouses purchased for the Palestinians for just such a purpose? They need to understand that if they wilfully destory things like the greenhouses, they will have to live with the consequences of their hateful and destructive behaviours. Instead, CIC and Paul Martin are saying, "There, there. Canada will buy you a new one to replace the ones you broke."
Endorsing Canadian participation in any peace process is a sellout of Israel.
A couple of weeks ago, Professor Eyal Naveh of Tel Aviv University spoke at U of T. He heads up (on the Israeli side) a joint Israeli-Palestinian textbook project. Sounds nice, huh? He might as well try to clean out the Augean Stables, so herculean is his task. First, they couldn't find any common ground: so they decided that on either side of the page they would print the Israeli narrative and the Palestinian narrative. The two narratives would be distinguished by a flag: the Israeli flag over the Israeli narrative, the Palestinian flag over the Palestinian narrative. Except that the Palestinians objected. They are forbidden to bring the Israeli flag into their schools. So the flags had to go. Next was a problem of language. The Palestinians refer to EVERY Israeli place (even those inside Israel proper) as "settlements" (eg. the "settlement" of Tel Aviv). The effect of this of course is to delegitimize the very existence of Israel. But the biggest problem is that the Palestinians cling to their victimhood; they wallow in it! They will not relinquish it. And why should they? It has served them very well on the international stage4: all those churches threatening divestment; naive and cowardly politicians like our own throwing more and more "aid" (read arms) money at them. The Israeli attitude is to shrug and say: "They started a war; they lost; we won; get over it and move forward." But they can't do that. They are mired in the past and refuse to move forward.
It does not bode well for a peace process.
But then, does anybody see a peace process on the horizon?
Posted by: Ted Belman on October 16, 2005 01:06 PM
3
.
georg von mecklenburg
said:
Canada acts like it always has as a Province of the United States. In fact is is an image of the USA. The attitudes reflected in Canada are exactly like those reflected in the USA; only Canadians are a little more open about their feelings.
Canada must feel pressure within its borders concerning the presence of somany " Nationalistic groups.
Posted by: georg von mecklenburg on October 17, 2005 10:05 AM
4
.
Ptah
said:
I'm sorry Georg, but I'm an American who knows a lot of Canadians: For your statement, they'd gut you with a tin-can lid and string you up by your entrails.
Posted by: Ptah on October 17, 2005 08:38 PM
Do Away With UNRWA
Canada, The Middle East Peace Process, UNRWA and "Right of Return"
David Bedein
On November 1st, a little more than two weeks from now, the UN will debate the role that UNRWA will continue to play. Canada, as chair of the RWG, will again be empowered to act on the basis of that UN debate.While UNRWA self-identifies as a humanitarian ('relief and human development") agency, on the record it is clear that it is deeply involved in political matters—most specifically direct support for "right of return"—and has been from its genesis.
UNRWA has drawn on a small portion of the phrasing within its mandate to justify practices and policies that are actively pro-"right of return":
Were UNRWA purely humanitarian in its function, it would be providing services to the refugees while allowing others concerned with the politics of the situation to resolve the matter of return as versus resettlement. In fact, at least in recent years, UNRWA administrators tend to give lip service to this position, saying that the issue it not one for UNRWA to determine but a matter of negotiations. An examination of UNRWA practices and policies, however, exposes quite a different actively pro-"right" stance on the part of UNRWA. (READ THE REST)
Posted by Ted Belman at October 16, 2005 08:09 AM