THE WESTERN WALKOUT AT THE AHMADINEJAD SPEECH AT DURBAN II/TESTIMONY OF HYPOCRISY AND LACK OF RESPECT FOR FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS

FOREWORD:

Dear Editor and Readers,

Undoubtedly you have learnt about the Western boycott of Durban II, as the departure of the 23 Western diplomats during the speech of the Iranian president Mr Ahmadinejad [1]

See

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_8000000/newsid_8008500/8008572.stm

See for the speech of Mr Ahmadinejad:

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_8010000/newsid_8010700/8010747.stm


With regard to this Western attitude, which is hypocriticaI according to my opinion, I have written underlying comment.

Shortly I state, that the most Western countries have boycotted Durban II from the start, under the pretext of ''anti-semitism'', but as real motive out of fear for critcism on the Israeli occupation and her political military conduct in the Palestinian occupied territories.

This boycot is not only a lack of respect for the right on freedom of expression, mostly strongly defended in the West, but also shows a moral evilness, because of her implicite consent with the Israeli occupation and her stubborn refusal to condemn the Israeli military actions, even the Gaza attacks and the Gaza-blockade

Further, this Western boycott shows a fundamental lack of respect for the universal human right on freedom of racism and discrimination

You can find my comment under P/S

Kind regards

Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands

ARTICLE

THE SHAME OF DURBAN II
THE WESTERN WALKOUT AT THE AHMADINEJAD SPEECH/TESTIMONY OF HYPOCRISY AND LACK OF RESPECT FOR FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS

SUMMARY:

Shortly I state, that the Western countries have boycotted Durban II from the start, under the pretext of ''anti-semitism'', but as real motive out of fear for the to be expected [and uttered] critcism on zionism, the Israeli occupation and her political military conduct in the Palestinian occupied territories.

This boycot is not only a lack of respect for the right on freedom of expression, mostly so strongly defended in the West, but also a sign of moral evilness, because of her implicite support for the Israeli occupation and her stubborn refusal to take political or economical sanctions to condemn the Israeli military actions, even the Gaza attacks and the Gaza-blockade [2]

Further, this Western boycott shows a fundamental lack of respect for the universal human right on freedom of racism and discrimination [3]

END OF SUMMARY


''In this Convention, the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life.''

Article 1, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

 http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/d1cerd.htm



Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance are problems that occur on a daily basis in every part of the world, hindering progress in the lives of millions of people

Durban Review Conference, 2009

 http://www.un.org/durbanreview2009/pdf/InfoNote_04_BasicFacts_En.pdf

Dear Editor and Readers,

I have learnt with great indignation of the departure of the Western diplomats [stemming from the 23 EU countries] during the speech of the Iranian president Mr Ahmadinejad, in which he has uttered fundamental criticism on as well the founding of the State of Israel, her character, the nature of the present Israeli government as well on her occupation-policy.
Also he has uttered criticism regarding the Western political-military conduct in the world, especially with reference to the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq and the ensuing occupations [4]

However, the socalled Western ''apprehension'' had been focused on the criticism on Israel

Also the UN Sectretary General, Mr Ban Ki Moon, as well the human rights organisations Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch were singing in the chorus of the Ahmadinejad critics, although a little more nuanced, condemning also the Western boycott of the Durban Conference [5]

A WESTERN BOYCOT OF THE DURBAN II CONFERENCE
NOT BECAUSE OF ALLEGED ''ANTI-SEMITISM'', BUT BECAUSE OF THE CRITICS ON THE STATE OF ISRAEL

However, this Western attitude against the Ahmadinejad speech didn't come as a surprise
It is a known fact, that before the beginning of Durban II, pro Israeli countries like the USA, Australia, Italy, The Netherlands and Germany had withdrawn, because of an alleged fear for ''anti-semitic'' statements

However, soon became clear, that those socalled ''objections'' were not referring at real or alleged anti-semitism, but at any possible criticism regarding the State of Israel

It may be clear, that there lays a world of difference between anti-semitism, which is directed against Jewish people as a group and criticism on Israel, which implies the political-military conduct of a STATE.

To associate the criticism on Israel with anti-semitism, is by the way anti-semitic, since that implies, that all Jewish people are hold responsible for the politics of a State.

B WESTERN LACK OF FUNDAMENTAL RESPECT FOR THE RIGHT TO BE FREE FROM DISCRIMINATION

By boycotting this Anti Racism Conference, the Western countries are showing a shocking lack of respect regarding one of the most fundamental human rights, the absolute prohibition on discrimination and racism

Seen in the light of the historical background of most Western countries [slavery, colonialism], as especially with regard to the renewal of racism and discrimination since 11-9-2001 [against muslims in particular and against non-Western residents in common], this boycott is a slap in the face of the victims of racism.

C THE ISRAELI POLITICS AND THE SPEECH OF MR AHMADINEJAD

Viewing the contents of the Ahmadinejad speech in a clear light, it will be obvious, that it is not ''anti-semitic'' at all, but only ventilates criticism regarding the policy of the State of Israel and the historical foundation, in 1948
Not only this is legitimate as freedom of expression, moreover this criticism can be based on hard facts.


See the full Ahmadinejad speech:

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_8010000/newsid_8010700/8010747.stm


THE ISRAEL-CRITIC IN THE AHMIDINEJAD SPEECH

Quote 1 / About the racist character of the Israeli government


''Worse than this is that some Western governments and America are committed to support genocidal racists while others condemn the bombardment of innocent human beings, the occupation of their land and the disasters that took place in Gaza.''

Quote 2 / About the racist character of the State of Israel

''But we should try to put an end to the misuse of international means by the Zionists and their supporters. And by respecting nations' demands, we should motivate the united governments to eliminate this clear racism and step on the path of reforming international relations 0and mechanisms with courage.''


Quote 3 / About the Western influence regarding the foundation of the State of Israel

''After the Second World War, by exploiting the holocaust and under the pretext of protecting the Jews they [the Western countries/Astrid Essed] made a nation homeless with military expeditions and invasion.
They transferred various groups of people from America, Europe and other countries to this land [Palestine, then British Mandatory Territory/Astrid Essed].
They established a completely racist government in the occupied Palestinian territories. And in fact, under the pretext of making up for damages resulting from racism in Europe, they established the most aggressive, racist country in another territory, i.e. Palestine.

COMMENT AND ANALYSIS OF THE AHMADINEJAD ''ISRAEL CRITICS''


1 Regarding Quote 1/ The racist aspect of the present Israeli government

Ahmedinejad Quote

''''Worse than this is that some Western governments and America are committed to support genocidal racists while others condemn the bombardment of innocent human beings, the occupation of their land and the disasters that took place in Gaza.''

Comment 1

About the racist aspect of the present Israeli government

The Ahmedinejad remark on the racist and inhuman character of the present Israeli government is based on hard facts, since one of the coalition-partners is the extreme right wing 'party ''Yisrael Beitenu-party'' [Israel, Our Home]
This party is founded by Mr A Lieberman, a Russian immigrant, who came to Israel in 1978, and is the present Israeli minister of Foreign Affairs.

The racist and inhuman component of this party is based on her strong plea for ''transfer'' [etnical cleansings of the Palestinians] and the Lieberman remark regarding the throwing of a nuclear bomb on Gaza [6] [7]
Also he is sowing hatred and provoking violence against the Palestinian minority in Israel, by calling them [the socalled ''Israeli Arabs'', a reverse of the historical reality, to which I refer to in point 3 about the historical developments], the 5th column [8]

It is evident, that a party with those points of view, which are contrary to human rights and elementary rules of civilisation, is contributing to a strong racist character of the present Israeli government

2 Regarding Quote 2/ The racist aspect of the State of Israel

Ahmedinejad Quote

''''But we should try to put an end to the misuse of international means by the Zionists and their supporters. And by respecting nations' demands, we should motivate the united governments to eliminate this clear racism and step on the path of reforming international relations 0and mechanisms with courage.''

Comment 2

The racist aspect of the State of Israel

President Ahmedinejad is also right about the structural racist character of the State of Israel, since every Jewish man or woman, from any country in the world, who have never set a foot on Israel, has the ''right on return'' to the State of Israel, while Israel untill now is refusing to acknowledge the right on return of the Palestinians, who were ethnically cleansed out of their own land in the war of 1948

Not only that is discriminatory and inhuman, but also in contrary with International Law, since this right has been confirmed in UN General Assembly Resolution 194, dd 1948.

Besides that, in Israel itself [yet apart from the occupied Palestinian territories] there is a structural discrimination of Palestinians in Israel [the socalled ''Israeli Arabs'', a reverse of the historical reality, to which I refer to in point 3 about the historical developments], especially with regard to education.
Also there is a systematic discrimination of Bedouins [9]

3 Regarding Quote 3/ The Western ivolvement regarding the foundation of the State of Israel

Ahmedinejad Quote

''They [The Western countries] established [with the foundation of the State of Israel] a completely racist government in the occupied Palestinian territories. And in fact, under the pretext of making up for damages resulting from racism in Europe, they established the most aggressive, racist country in another territory, i.e. Palestine. ''

Comment 3

Old wounds
Historical backgrounds
The Western support for the foundation of the State of Israel/Destruction of the Palestinian right on selfdestination

In his speech, Mr Ahmadinejad has referred to the Western political involvement with the foundation of the State of Israel, by her consent with the UN Resolution 181, dd 1947, regarding the partition of Palestine

Without going to deep about the historical backgrounds of the foundation of the State of Israel, there must be emphasized here, that the zionism [10] has ''succeeded'' eventually by the acceptance of the UN General Assembly Resolution 181, dd 1947, dividing Palestine in a Jewish and Arab-Palestinian part [11]

This acceptance was greatly due to the pro-voting of as well as the USA, as the other Western countries [and financially and politically dependable allies], by which this ''partition'' took place without any consent of the original Palestinian population, which is a flagrant violation of the Palestinian right to selfdetermination and as such an example of neo-colonialism

Massslaughers and ethnical cleansings:

Following the foundation of the State of Israel, the then newly appointed Israeli government and the Israeli troops and militia have made themselves guilty of mass-slaughters, the destruction of more than 400 Arab villages and the so-called ethnical cleansings of the Palestinian population, by which more than 750.000 people were driven out of their own country
Presently, those ethnical cleansings are called ''transfer'' by the Israeli politics

As being mentioned, the present Isaeli minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Lieberman, is a strong adherent of ''transfer'' [12]

REFERENCE OF MR AHMADINEJAD REGARDING THE WESTERN ESTABLISHMENT OF A RACIST GOVERNMENT IN PALESTINE:

And just that is the reference, Mr Ahmadinejad is making by stating about the Western establishment of a ''completely racist government'' '' in Palestine

He is referring to the neo-colonialistic character of UN resolution 181, which was greatly supported by the West

D WESTERN GOTSPE

REGARDING THE WESTERN IMPLICITE CONSENT WITH THE ISRAELI OCCUPATION OF THE PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES
REGARDING THE WESTERN POLIITICAL AND MORAL CO-RESPONSIBILITY OF ISRAELI HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AND WAR-CRIMES

I REGARDING THE WESTERN IMPLICITE CONSENT WITH THE ISRAELI OCCUPATION OF THE PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES


1 Israeli occupation, settlementspolicy, the Israeli Wall and military operations:

The more astonishing the Western boycott and ''indignation'' about the Ahmadinejad speech is, since her implicite consent with the Israeli occupation, the illegal settlementspolicy as the illegal building of the Israeli Wall, partly through Palestinian occupied territory
And not to speak of the Israeli human rights violations and war-crimes, which are stemming from the occupation.

It is a commonly known fact, that there is a nearly 42th years Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories [The Westbank, Eastern Jerusalem and Gaza] [13], despite UN Security Council Resolution 242, dd 1967, by which Israel was summoned to withdraw from the conquered areas in the june war, among else the Palestinian.

a The humanitarian consequences of occupations

Inherent to any occupation wherever in the world, are oppression, humiliations and human rights violations
Also there is that universal right of any occupied population to resist against the occupator and to fight for freedom

In the Palestinian case there is legitimated resistance against the army of the Israeli occupator, as illegal [suicide] attacks on Israeli civilians or civilian-goals [14]

b The Israeli illegal settlementspolicy:

Also, the settlements, which are founded since the end of the sixties, are contrary with International Law [15]
But besides that, those settlements have led to huge Palestinian landexpropriations, without any financial compensation, which has made more than 100.000 Palestinians homeless [16]

c The illegal Israeli Wall

It is also a commonly known fact, that the Israeli Wall, is also illegal, according to the ICJ judgment dd 9-7-2004, since the cutting through Palestinian occupied territory [17]

2 ISRAELI HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AND WAR CRIMES:

a Assissination policy and shoot to kill policy:

Since the beginning of the Israeli occupation, there is a long record of human rights abuses.
I mention here among else the targeted assissination-policy on leaders and activists of Palestinian political resistance-organisations, which costed also many civilian lives, as the IDF [Israeli army] shooting to kill policy regarding innocent civilians-[mostly protesters], among else many children [18]

b WARCRIMES
THE SYSTEMATIC NATURE OF THE ISRAELI MILITARY OPERATIONS

Also must be mentioned the countless war-crimes, stemming from the Israeli military operations.
In many cases, those military operations didn't apply the internationally obligated protection for the civilian population, by either shooting undiscriminately on civilian goals, or using forbidden weapons like white phosphor or atillery in densely populated areas

I refer to the Israeli attacks on Gaza, from the end of december untill january 2009 [19] [20]

II REGARDING THE WESTERN POLIITICAL AND MORAL CO-RESPONSIBILITY OF ISRAELI HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AND WAR-CRIMES

The Western implicite support for the Israeli occupation and oppression

Despite the Israeli human rights violations and rthe obvious Israeli lack of respect for International Law, the Western countries are not prepared to undertake any political pressure on Israel, to follow International Law, by taking for example any sanctions [21] [22]

Even seen in the light of the Israeli military attacks on Gaza, which have costed in three weeks time, the lives of more than 1300 Palestinians, under who one-third part children, including the murderous Gaza-blockade, the EU apparently didn't valuated this humanitarian disaster as serious enough to condemn Israel. [23]

EPILOGUE:

Viewing the mentioned Israeli human rights violations and war-crimes, it is not only contrary human and civilisation-rules, that there hasn't been any Western sanction against Israel
Moreover it is Western hypocrisy, to boycott the Durban conference, being allegedly ''anti-Israel'', but let Israel get away with occupation, oppression and structural human rights violations.

Before taking that tone about the just and right criticism in the Ahmadinejad speech regarding the Israeli politics, it is the moral and political duty of the Western countries, to launch political pressure on Israel to end the occupation, dismantle all illegal settlements in occupied Palestinian territories, to tear down that illegal Wall and acknowledge the Palestinian right on return.

Only on those conditions, a rightful and just solution of the Middle East Conflict is possible.

When the Western countries continue to let Israel get away with injustice, they also have blood on their hands, supporting an injust regime of occupation.

Kind regards
Astrid Essed

Amsterdam
The Netherlands



[1]

See for the speech of Mr Ahmadinejad

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_8010000/newsid_8010700/8010747.stm


[2]

Regarding to economical sanctions, I am an adversary of those sanctions, which are destructing the lives of Israeli or Palestinian economical weak
But there are many possibilties to hurt the Israeli State without harm to the economical weak, like suspending or ending the Associating Treaty [regarding commercial advantages],, which the EU has closed with Israel
Also political and cultural sanctions are a possibility

[3]

See

 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/04/22/governments-should-endorse-anti-racism-declaration

As you can see, I don't share the Human Rights Watch point of view regarding the speech of Mr Ahmadinejad,which however the good work of the organisation, also shows a certain blindness for the humanitarian consequences of zionism, but I do applaud their plea for the Western endorsing of the Anti-Racism Conference

[4]

Ahmedinejad criticism regarding British-American attacks on and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq
Not only those attacks have been in contrary with International Law, in both wars British-American troops have made use of the international forbidden clusterbombs, which have caused the death of tenthousands of civilians
Not to mention about the extrajudicial executions of real or alleged Taliban or ''Al Qaeda'' leaders or activists, the installing of inhuman prisoncamps like Guantanamo Bay, Kandahar and Abu Graibh, the detention without trial of thousands of Iraqi, the secret CIA camps as the CIA waterboarding torture method





[5]

Criticism human rights organisation about Western Durban boycott


[6]


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yisrael_Beiteinu


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yisrael_Beiteinu#cite_note-13


 http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10302.shtml

[7]

Regarding the reference of throwing a nuclear bomb on Gaza, literary he said during the Israeli military attacks on Gaza, that Israel "must continue to fight Hamas just like the United States did with the Japanese in World War II''
Since it is known, that this fight has ended with the throwing of two nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it is obvious to me, that Mr Liebermann is referring to this

Yet apart from this quote, I base my presumption on other inhuman points of view of Mr Liebermann, as his plea for committing war-crimes

I quote

''if it were up to me I would notify the Palestinian Authority that tomorrow at ten in the morning we would bomb all their places of business in Ramalah ''

See

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman

Under ''Statements against Palestinian militancy''


[8]

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_column


[9]

 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/01/02/discrimination-against-palestinian-arab-children-israeli-education-system


 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/03/30/israel-end-systematic-bias-against-bedouin

See also
HRW Report '' Off the Map. Land and Housing Rights Violations in Israel's Unrecognized Bedouin Villages''



 http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt0308_1.pdf



[10]

The political-ideological movement, with as a goal the foundation of a Jewish State in Palestine, which has founded by the Austrian Jewish journalist Mr T Herzl

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Herzl

 http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story643.html

 http://www.indymediascotland.org/node/3396


[11]

Historical Palestine has been a Turkish colony untill the end of World War I and has become a British Mandatory Territory in 1922
However, already in 1917, the British government ''promised'' the zionists by means of the ''Balfour Declaration'', the establishment of a ''Jewish National Home'' in Palestine

The colonialistic character [which was common pratice in those colonial days] had been the best unmasked by the writer A Koestler, who quoted about the ''Balfour Declaration''

"one nation solemnly promised to a second nation the country of a third."

See for the Balfour Declaration:


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917


[12]

 http://ilanpappe.com/?page_id=7


 http://www.indymediascotland.org/node/3396


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yisrael_Beiteinu


[13]

Despite the Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, according to International Law, Gaza is still occupied territory, since Israel is controlling the air and borders of Gaza

First


''Also relevant is law on occupation found in the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which remains applicable in Gaza because of Israel's ongoing control of many aspects of life there despite the withdrawal of its troops.''

Excerpt from ''Q and A on hostilities between Israel and Hamas
Part
''What international humanitarian Law applies to the current conflict between Israel and Hamas'''

See

 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/12/31/q-hostilities-between-israel-and-hamas#_What_international_humanitarian

Second

''Under the laws of war, Israel remains a belligerent force and an occupier in Gaza, and its actions are accordingly regulated by two sets of rules: one for how it may fight and another for ensuring the welfare of the population. ''

See

 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/03/20/remote-control-death


[14]

According to International Humanitarian Law, any confictsparty has the international obligation to make a clear distinction between combatants [military and fighters] and non-combatants [civilians]
It is evident, that it applies the Israeli army, as well the Palestinian resistance-organisations

See

 http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/668BF8


[15]


According to article 49, 4th Geneva Convention, all Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories are contrary with International Law

 http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5

[16]


 http://www.btselem.org/English/Settlements/Index.asp


[17]

 http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pr=71&p1=3&p2=1&case=131&p3=6&search=%22The+illegality+of+the+Israeli+Wall%22

See also

 http://www.btselem.org/English/Separation_Barrier/index.asp


[18]

Since the end of the sixties of the former century, the Israeli authorities have practized the socalled ''assisination policy'' on Palestinian political leaders or activists
Those assisinations or extra-judicial killings are contrary with Interational Law, since they didn't take place in a common fighting clash between both conflictsparties, and any man has the right on a fair trial, regarding real or alleged crimes

Moreover, by the character of those extrajudicial killings in many cases, innocent civilian bystanders have been killed, since they took and take place on streets and marketplaces [like shooting on cars or just human beings],, or as air attacks, as well as on cars, crowded marketplaces or even residential buildings

By killing innocent civilias, war-crimes have been committed, since by the nature of the attacks, the risk of civilian victims coud have been estimated.

See an example of those extrajudicial killings:

 http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10099.shtml

See further:



 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_punishment


 http://www.btselem.org/Download/200101_Extrajudicial_Killings_Eng.doc

 http://www.alhaq.org/etemplate.php?id=19


 http://www.alhaq.org/etemplate.php?id=19


 http://jakarta.indymedia.org/newswire.php?story_id=2079


Regarding the IDF shoot to kill policy:

See HRW Report: ''Promoting Impunity''
The Israeli Military’s Failure to Investigate Wrongdoing

 http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt0605.pdf


[19]

Regarding the protection of civilians during a military attack:

According to International Humanitarian Law, all conflictsparties are obliged to make a strict distinction between combatants [military and fighters] and non-combatants [civilians]]

See

 http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/668BF8


When an attack is launched in an overlap-situation [the presence of fighters in a civilian area] all possible provisions must be made to protect the civilian population

See also the comment of the Israeli human rights organisation B'tselem [www.btselem.org]

''It should be emphasized that the presence of non-civilians among a civilian population does not deny the civilians the protections to which they are entitled, and the fact that one side breaches these rules does not release the other side from complying with them. ''


See link:

 http://www.btselem.org/English/Firearms/Index.asp


[20]

Regarding the use of white phosphor in a civilian area, with direct reference to the Israeli attacks on Gaza

 http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt0309web.pdf


 http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/weapons-interview-170109


Article about the Israeli attacks on Gaza:

 http://jakarta.indymedia.org/newswire.php?story_id=2079


[21]

The Israeli lack of Interational Law shows itself in the unwilingness to implement the UN resolutions regarding the Middle East, to begin with UN GA [General Assembly] Resolution 194 dd 1948, regarding the Palestinian right on return, which Israel has never acknowledged

Another disregard of International Law shows itself in the neglectance of UN Security Resolution 242, dd 1967, which summoned Israel to withdraw from the areas, which it has conquered in the june-war, among else the occupied Palestinian territories

A third important case were the two UN Sec Resolutions, dd 1979 and 1980, regarding the illegal character of the settlements in occupied Palestinian territories
They summoned Israel to dismantle all the build settlements and to refrain from building new ones

Till nowadays, the there is an expension of those settlements, in the Westbank and Eastern Jerusalem
The only time, Israel really respected a part of International Law was with the withdrawal of the settlements in Gaza in 2005.


[22]

Regarding sanctions:

Though an adversary of economical sanctions, which destruct the life of the economical weak, Palestinian or Israeli, I am an adherent of any diplomatic and cultural sanction against Israel, as economical sanctions, which don't disrupt or destruct the life of the common people

An example is the suspension or ending of the Association Accord, which the EU has closed with Israel and imply favourable commercial advantages
Besides this, there are other economical sanctions, which pressure Israel without hurting the weak

A frightening example of economical sanctions, that should have been a nightmare to coming generations, are the UN sanctions against Iraq, which have costed the lives of more than a half million children

See also:


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions#Effect_of_the_sanctions_on_the_Iraqi_people

 http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/021400-01.htm


[23]

 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/04/23/israelgaza-israeli-military-investigation-not-credible


 http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/iopt0309web.pdf


 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/01/10/q-israel-s-use-white-phosphorus-gaza


 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/02/28/israelgaza-donors-should-press-israel-end-blockade

 http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/12/31/q-hostilities-between-israel-and-hamas


Articles:

 http://jakarta.indymedia.org/newswire.php?story_id=2079


 http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display/81356/index.php



















''