Al-Ahram Weekly | Region | A mission to Palestine

		29 August - 4 Sept. 2002 Issue No. 601 Region	Current issue Previous issue Site map
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875		Recommend this page

A mission to Palestine
Carolyn Parrish, Liberal Party MP and head of a delegation of Canadian parliamentarians who recently visited Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, spoke to Mursi Saad Eddin in Toronto on the increasingly harsh activities of the Israelis and the sub-human living conditions the Palestinians are suffering under

Click to view caption
An Israeli bulldozer destroys a Palestinan house near the Jewish settlement of Kfar Darom in Gaza on Saturday (photo: Reuters)
A report just published in Canada by nine Canadian parliamentarians back from a visit to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza caused quite a sensation. Eight members of the federal parliament, representing the three main political parties -- the Liberal, the Blue Quebecois and the NDP -- and one independent MP were there between 11 and 18 May 2002.
The trip, funded by Palestine House, a Palestinian Cultural Centre in Mississaugo, Ontario, took the Canadian officials to East and West Jerusalem, Ramallah, Nablus, Hebron, the Balata Refugee Camp, various sections of Hebron, Jenin, Bethlehem, Gaza, the Israeli Knesset, the Israeli Foreign Ministry and many small camps and settlements throughout the West Bank.
Let me begin by asking what the purpose was of your visit?
The purpose of the visit was to study the political situation, as well as to observe the living conditions of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. To this end, the group conducted many interviews with government officials, local politicians, clergy, representatives of domestic service agencies, foreign non-governmental organisations, teachers, medical personnel, business persons, youth groups, women's groups and ordinary Palestinians.
Before going into the report's details, what was your general impression of what you witnessed at close quarters?
The evidence pointed to one inescapable conclusion. Israelis are conducting increasingly harsh activities. Palestinians are suffering under sub- human living conditions with inadequate water, food and medical care, as well as personal humiliation and deprivation.
What were the results of your visit and your discussions with the different people you met?
We have actually recorded these impressions, which show clearly the brutality of the Israelis. There are now 400,000 settlers in 180 plus settlements in Palestinian territory and they are expanding. Daily unemployment levels have risen from 13 per cent to 70 per cent. Nearly 190,000 people have become unemployed in Gaza alone over the last 18 months. Almost 70 per cent of Palestinians live under the poverty line of two dollars a day. More than $1.2 billion in taxes have not been transferred from Israel to the Palestinian Authority. Water is not evenly distributed. Palestinians use 37.5 cubic metres per person per year while the corresponding figure for Israelis is 240 cubic metres. Over and above 10,000 administrative arrests have been made. At the time of our visit, there were still 3,000 people being held without charge or legal counsel.
Did you have a chance to see the destruction in Palestinian towns?
Oh yes. In Jenin, we found 180 buildings destroyed. We were told 500 houses were damaged, 80 later collapsed and 60 were burnt. The Israelis claim that only 52 Palestinians were dead, claiming that 16 were combatants. Here I ask what is meant by combatants. [Are they the people] who were defending themselves against a reported 270 tanks that were used to crush the one-third of an acre refugee camp? The same dire situation existed in Nablus and Hebron.
The report indicates that you met with representatives of a number of international NGOs. What were their impressions?
Let me start by saying that those NGOs were fair in weighing up the situation. They were accused by the Israelis of being pro-Palestinians. This is not true. They explained to us the situation as they witnessed it. They all told us that collective punishment was paramount and human rights were ignored. We met with Canadian NGOs Oxfam Quebec representative, who told us about the infrastructure destruction in Ramallah -- including homes, ministries, roads to the university, phone lines, electricity, -- in addition to raiding and looting private property and water sabotage. The same took place in Jenin. Besides, and here again I'm quoting the Canadian representative, from 29 September 2000 to 5 April 2002, there were 190 attacks on ambulances, 166 attacks on emergency teams, six emergency workers killed and 136 injured. All NGOs agree that all the problems can be solved with an end to the occupation and they are of the opinion that the US is part of the problem because they put too much weight on the wrong side of the balance, meaning Israel.
Did you meet with any members of the Palestinian legislative council?
Yes we did. We had a meeting that lasted for one and a half hour and we listened to five speakers. They all explained that the aim of the last Israeli invasion was sheer destruction. They destroyed supplies, ministries and the parliament building. The destruction was vengeful. They destroyed healthcare and education facilities, computers and files. The Palestinian Authority has lost all the statistics they had accumulated over seven years. The elected parliament has been prevented from meeting for a year and a half.
One of the speakers said that they would have loved our group to attend a session because the Palestinians studied the Canadian system when setting up their parliament. The first parliamentary association that was formed was the Canada-Palestine Friendship group.
One speaker stressed the fact that there have been 11 years of negotiations with the Israelis. Many people in the West are surprised by the breakdown of talks and the resort to violence. The truth is there are two versions of the story that the world should see. There are two visions for the process. Palestinians believe that peace means the end of occupation. Israel's vision is peace with occupation.
You met with the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem Michel Sabbah. What were your thoughts on what he had to say?
He expressed his appreciation for our visit, but he thought that what was needed was action. He brought out an important point, which is now becoming recurrent in the West. The flag of anti- semitism, he said, is often raised when there is criticism of Israel. We all become victims of anti- semitism, although we are not a part of it. In North America, we are afraid of falling into anti- semitism or we are afraid of being accused of it.
His opinion about the violence is that it is not a question of terrorism. It is a question of an occupied people who must resist by any means possible. He thinks that the UN has a long-standing position that should be adhered to. We do not need new decisions. We need to apply the ones we already have. But, unfortunately, there is no political will in the US to implement UN resolutions.
Speaking of the US, you have recently met with Allan Baker, the American Legal Advisor to Negotiators. Reading through your record of the meeting, it becomes clear that he has shamefacedly taken Israel's side. Am I right in my assumption?
You're quite right. He was also rude to the delegation and became really angry when asked any tough questions. When one of us asked about the Likud turning down the idea of a Palestinian state, he gave that comic answer, that Israel is a free and open democracy. He wished that the Palestinians and other Arab states had the same situation. When he was reminded that the world community had denounced the expansion of settlements, he said that he can legally justify settlements. His summing up was another example of his glaring prejudice. Occupation is not the root of all evil. Israel offered to give it up and still there was terrorism. Agreements were close and Palestinians resorted to terrorism. I ask you: what kind of legal adviser is this?
Did you meet with the Israelis?
Yes, we visited the Knesset. Prof Naomi Chazan of the Meretz Party (Left Wing) was of the opinion that they were living in difficult and extraordinary times. It is a period of violence and counter- violence in which the debate is emotionally driven on both sides. She sees not only anger and hatred, but a desire for revenge. The extremists have taken over on both sides. For example, the Likud declaration against a Palestinian state was a big mistake. They make Sharon look moderate. The Palestinian side is also propelled by extremists. The majority of both populations want to reach an agreement.
Finally, she said the major problem is that the two leaders have turned this into a personal vendetta. Sharon is trying to humiliate Arafat; Palestinians call Sharon a war criminal. The two are democratically elected leaders and they have to be pushed in the right direction.
On the other hand, there was Dr Yaval Steinitz from the Likud Party. He claimed that creating a Palestinian state would lead to the dismantling of Israel and the displacement of several million people -- another historical disaster like the Holocaust. He was dead against a Palestinian state.
How do you see the role of Palestinians and Arabs in explaining the real issues?
We are doing our part. We have sent copies of the report to all members of parliament, to churches and to universities. We have also created an e-mail site on which we have posted our findings. I received many e-mails congratulating me on the report. There was also some favourable press coverage.
Of course there was criticism, especially by Jewish organisations. I'll always remember the reaction of the head of the Canadian-Israeli Alliance. Since 1995, he has been inviting members of parliament to visit Israel. They were put up at the best hotels, dined at expensive restaurants, visited Jewish and Christian monuments, met with Israeli officials who came to them at the hotel, and then returned to Canada. They never saw what was going on and simply had a superficial image of things. Our report was like a bombshell. This gentleman I mentioned called me and said angrily; "I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on many visits of parliamentarians. And here you come and in one visit you undid what I have been doing since 1995."
This made me feel that our mission has accomplished its objective. But let me add that we must explain the Palestine issue. We must inform, hold seminars and workshops at churches and universities, invite journalists to see what we saw. The more we talk, the more we explain, the more we understand.
Your use of the word "we" shows you have special concern for the Palestinian cause. When did your interest begin?
Long before I became member of parliament when I had some Palestinian friends who explained the issue. Then I began to read and study until I was convinced of the justice of their case.
What is the story behind your letter to the Toronto Star about an editorial they published that you took umbrage at?
Well my letter explains what happened and it went like this:
Liberal MP says Star pro-Israel
Re: Bush must step in, editorial, 1 August
A soft lob by a pro-Israeli paper. You suggest the US should take a more active role to "ease tensions." How insipid. A huge, modern army spends $11 billion on its military every year to protect a country the size of Lake Ontario. It is pounding a starving opponent huddled in refugee camps. Why does The Star continue to portray this as a fair, even fight?
Palestinians are labelled "fanatics." What did you call those who used one bomb to kill one man? You go on to say: "They indicated they don't even care if they kill their own people." What a ludicrous statement. Those desperate people blow themselves up regularly. You suggest it's incumbent on the US to work harder to bring the two sides together. Perhaps the US should cut off the $6 billion per year it sends to Israel. That would get the Israelis' attention. The Star has sold out. I'm cancelling my subscription.
CAROLYN PARRISH
Member of Parliament, Mississauga Centre, Ottawa
I understand you are the Canadian representative to NATO. Was the Palestinian issue ever brought up?
I lately attended a NATO meeting in Bulgaria. I was asked to give a presentation about our trip to Palestine, which I did for 15 minutes. In the end, a resolution was passed. Every member voted for it except the American representative, who abstained. He was a nice man and came to me later and said "I'm sorry, but that's the best I can do."
Finally, I would like to add that both politically and information wise, we have been concentrating on the so-called great powers -- the USA, Russia and Britain. But international public opinion, which we should seek to win, covers more than those three countries.
Canada is, in my opinion, a country that can play an important role in international affairs, especially when it comes to the creation of a favourable public opinion. Canada is far from being the 54th state of America. Since [former Canadian Prime Minister] Pierre Trudeau's 18 years of government, Canada has assumed an independent stance over many issues, a stand which upset Americans.
Now when we talk about North America, we mean the USA and Canada. Canada has always played an important role in peace-keeping. Furthermore, it is the chairman of the UN Refugees Commission. What is important is, due to its close vicinity to the US, it can be an important information channel to the US public.
Over the Palestine issue, Canada has kept a fair and unprejudiced stand. Hence, it has a certain credibility which is lacking in America. In addition, the number of Arabs in Canada is more than that of Jews. However, this does not overlook the influence of the Jewish lobby.
What we should do is to try to create a favourable Canadian public opinion which can spill over to the US.

Send a letter to the Editor Recommend this page

ARCHIVES
Letter from the Editor
Editorial Board
Subscription
Advertise!

WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly
Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time
weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg

Al-Ahram Organisation