Et Tu Europa?
A recent document drawn up by the EU Heads of Mission in Jerusalem and Ramallah raises some worrying issues, not least the proposal for organised boycotts. Readers will doubtless notice the report’s reliance upon information gleaned from politically motivated NGOs such as UN OCHA and ACRI, which set the tone for the cavalier repetition of numerous untruths such as;
“Successive Israeli governments have pursued a policy of transferringJewish population into the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and international humanitarian law.” (my emphasis)
It is also blatantly apparent that despite the fact that the status of Jerusalem is supposed to be the subject of long-awaited negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, the EU Heads of mission seem intent upon creating their own ‘facts on the ground’, together with a flawed narrative which seeks to over-ride any negotiation process.
However, the report’s ‘action plan’ is possibly its most disturbing aspect in that it includes outright initiatives for boycott of Israeli businesses and institutions as well as specific calls for intervention in the affairs of the host state.
A. East Jerusalem as the future Palestinian capital
1) In conformity with the objectives of the StrategicMulti-sector Development Plan for East Jerusalem, promote a coordinated approach and a coherentPalestinian strategy towards East Jerusalem.
2) Promote the establishment of a PLO focal point/representative in East Jerusalem.
3) National Europe Day events held in East Jerusalem (when suitable at Palestinian institutions)
4) EU missions with offices or residences in East Jerusalem to regularly host Palestinian officials with senior EU visitors.
5)Avoid having Israeli security and/or protocolaccompanying high rankingofficials from Member Stateswhen visiting the Old City/EastJerusalem.
6) Prevent/discouragefinancial transactions from EU MS actors supporting settlement activity in East Jerusalem, by adopting appropriate EU legislation.
7) Compile non-binding guidelines for EU tour operators to prevent support for settlement business in East Jerusalem (e.g. hotels, bus operators, archaeological sites controlled by pro-settler organisations etc).
8) Ensure that the EU-Israel Association Agreement is not used to allow the export to the EU of products manufactured in settlements in East Jerusalem.
9) Raise public awareness about settlement products, for instance by providing guidance on origin labelling for settlement products to major EU retailers.
10) Inform EU citizens of financial risks involved in purchasing property in occupied East Jerusalem.
E. Strengthen the role of the European Union
1) Enhance local coordination between Quartet actors for input into policy making and decisions.
2) Ensure EU presence when there is a risk of demolitions or evictions of Palestinian families.
3) Ensure EU presence at Israeli courts cases on house demolitions or evictions of Palestinian families.
4) Ensure EU intervention when Palestinians are arrested or intimidated by Israeli authorities for peaceful cultural, social or political activities in East Jerusalem.
5) Operationalise the EU policy on bringing high level visitors to sensitive sites (e.g. separation barrier etc). - on logistics for high level visitors (e.g choice of hotel, change of transport East/West) - on contacts with the Jerusalem Mayor and on refraining from meeting Israeli officials in their East Jerusalem offices (e.g. in the Israeli Ministry of Justice etc) - on information sharing on violent settlers in East Jerusalem to assess whether to grant entry into the EU.
The ‘code of conduct’ for Consulate missions is laid out in the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, and that of Diplomatic missions in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Missions. Both conventions include the following clause – the former as Article 55 and the latter as Article 41.
Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State. They also have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of the State.(my emphasis)
Whilst it is the case that the consulates currently located in Jerusalem do not regard themselves as missions to Israel, but to Jerusalem, nevertheless it is Israeli law which presides in that city and such blatant intervention in Israeli affairs as proposed in the EU Mission document would appear to fly in the face of diplomatic convention. As for diplomatic or consular missions actively promoting a boycott against their host country, well apparently no one had even dreamed of that possibility when the Vienna Conventions were drawn up.
However, it seems that not only the EU may be suffering from a case of diplomatic bad manners, as we have recently seen some rather curious activity emanating from the British Consulate in Jerusalem. In addition to two of its employees being recently arrested in connection with their suspected involvement in a planned terrorist plot, the Consul General, Sir Vincent Fean, has seen fit to attend (along with other foreign luminaries) the trial of Abdullah Abu Rahma –an organizer of the violent weekly demonstrations against the anti-terrorist fence in Bil’in – despite the fact that Abu Rahma does not appear to be a citizen of his country and therefore according to conventions, falls outside his consular mission.
If Sir Vincent Fean’s name rings a bell with American readers, it is probably because of his role in the controversial release of Abdel Baset al Megrahi from prison in Scotland whilst Sir Vincent was British Ambassador in Libya. British readers may remember him for his involvement in the procuring of a contract for a UK firm to supply military communications systems to Libya or for his role as a trustee of the London Middle East Institute at SOAS – founded by the supporter of the Geneva Initiative, Sheikh Mohamed Bin Issn Al Jaber. The LMEI lists as one of its ‘Institutional Affiliates’ none other than the anti-Zionist fringe group ‘Jews for Justice for Palestinians’, members of which recently tried to break the naval blockade on Gaza with a ‘Jewish flotilla’ and as part of that affiliation, JfJfP organizes lectures in association with and hosted by the LMEI:
26 Oct The Goldstone Report: impact andimplications
A public meeting on the Goldstone Report.
Daniel Machover, Hickman Rose Solicitors,
Co-founder of Lawyers for Palestinian Human
Rights; Miri Weingarten, Physicians for Human
Rights, Israel; Phylis Starkey, MP; Ghada
Karmi, Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies,
University of Exeter. Organised by Jews for
Justice for Palestinians (JFJFP) in association with the LMEI.
The LMEI also publishes a periodical magazine which featured in its July/August 2010 edition an ‘exclusive’ written by an SOAS student.
“Also included in this issue is Anne de Jong's exclusive account of the Israeli attack in the Mediterranean on the Mavi Marmara, one of the flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza”
Sir Vincent’s interests are clearly not limited to helping Anglo-Israelis renew their passports or promoting readings of Shakespearean sonnets in Jerusalem, and more’s the pity, because the blatant politicization of the missions of the EU and some of its member countries is not only revealing their lack of commitment to a negotiated – as opposed to imposed- peace process, but is ultimately likely to hamper the achievement of a viable and sustainable agreement.
For years the EU has willfully ignored, whitewashed and downplayed Palestinian terror. Its reports hardly mention the word. Lip-service statements regarding Israeli security are negated by unrealistic and dangerous demands from officials such as Catherine Ashton to open borders with a pseudo-statelet run by a Muslim Brotherhood offshoot terrorist regime. Whenever Israel is forced to defend itself against terror, it is instantly condemned by a whole host of European leaders whilst others apparently see nothing strange in expressing public support for violent ‘activists’ who aim to destroy the anti-terrorist fence which has saved many Israeli lives. The EU and several European governments finance a number of radical organizations dedicated to undermining Israel and during the second Intifada, whilst Israelis were dying almost daily in horrendous suicide bombings which specifically targeted civilians, the EU propped up the authority responsible for those war crimes with 10 million Euros of aid per month.
And now, in addition to all that, we also have official EU incitement to boycotts against Israel.
Et tu, Europa?
Hadar Sela is a Contributing Writer for The Propagandist
