Democratic Palestine : 31 (ص 14)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 31 (ص 14)
- المحتوى
-
stituents regarding peace. Isaac Modai,
a Likud minister, said that the agree-
ment between Likud and Labor to form
a national coalition government, which
was ratified on December 22nd, is bas-
ed on three negatives: No to negotia-
tions with the PLO, no to withdrawal
from the West Bank and Gaza, and no
to the establishment of a Palestinian
state anywhere between the Jordan
River and the Mediterranean Sea. This
can best be described as «negative
thinking.»
The reaction of the US State
Department was that the outcome of
the PNC was a «step forward» but did
not meet the American criteria.
Moreover, Arafat’s request for a visa to
address the UN session on the Palesti-
nian question in New York was denied.
This ill-advised and narrow-minded
decision by US Secretary of State
George Shultz brought on an _ un-
precedented deluge of international
condemnation which culminated in a
resounding UN General Assembly vote
of 151 to 2, (‘Israel’ and the US being
the only two votes against, while Bri-
tain abstained), condemning the US
decision, despite the ludicrous argu-
ment by Shultz that Arafat was a
security threat to the US. Newsweek
reported: «Among international
lawyers, the consensus was that the US
had breached its responsibility.»
Former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance
said, «It is quite clear that the US deci-
sion is wrong legally.» The 1947
Headquarters Agreement, which was
signed by the US and the UN and later
approved by the US Congress,
stipulates clearly in Article 4 Section 11:
«The Federal, State or local authorities
of the United States shall not impose
any impediments to transit to or from
the headquarters district of represen-
tatives of members or officials of the
United Nations, or of specialized
agencies... or representatives of non-
governmental organizations recognized
by the United Nations.»
Despite widespread criticism from
the US media, the public and the whole
world, with the exception of ‘Israel’, 61
US Senators signed a letter commen-
ding Shultz on his move. This is an in-
dication of the influence of the pro-
Israeli lobby (AIPAC) within the US
Senate, and of AIPAC’s ability to
pressure elected US officials to take
stands, even when such stands are
clearly against the prevailing sentiments
in the US and throughout the world.
14
Palestinian West Bankers celebrate the Declaration of Independence.
CS ae
7
The State Department’s decision
resulted in criticism from the US’s
closest allies. Francois Mitterrand,
when asked if he understood the US
decision, said «I prefer not to under-
stand it, for if I understand it, it would
lead me to pessimistic conclusions»
(International Herald Tribune,
December 2, 1988). The UN gave the
US 24 hours to reconsider and reverse
its decision. The US response was
negative again. Two days later the UN
passed another resolution to move the
session from the UN headquarters in
New York to Geneva; again the vote
was ‘Israel’ and the US against the
whole world (154 in favor and 2
against). The new date set for the ses-
sion was December 13-15th which
coincided with the first anniversary of
the intifada.
On his way to Geneva, Arafat made a
stop in Stockholm and held a much
publicized meeting with members of the
International Center for Peace in the
Middle East, an organization which has
branches in Tel Aviv and New York.
The head of the American Jewish
delegation was Rita Hauser who was
previously a consultant to George Bush - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 31
- تاريخ
- ديسمبر ١٩٨٨
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed