Call for Lasting Peace between Israel and Palestine

[Bill Bartlett]

This is Proposal Draft 002-14: Call for Lasting Peace between Israel and PalestinePlease read the proposal, and confine any comments to the proposal only.  Designate your wishes by using "agree", “block”,  or "stand aside".  Any blocks will require a vote of the Council.  Taking a stance on a public issue requires a 60% vote of council, per Section 4.3 of the GPCO Bylaws.  The floor is open for one week of Agreement Seeking for passage, or a block to bring the issue to vote. There are currently nine (9) active voting chapters in the Green Party of Colorado.  A of 60% quorum requires at least one response from six (6) chapters.  Active Chapters:  Adams/JeffersonArapahoe CountyDenverDouglasGreater BoulderPikes PeakPoudre ValleySan MiguelSouthwest Thank you,Bill Bartlett, Co-chair and Interim Current Council Facilitator[hr]1.  Basic InfoDate proposed:  July 30, 2014Name of the sponsor(s):  Bill Bartlett,  billbartlett.gpco@gmail.com2.  Title:  Call for Lasting Peace between Israel and Palestine3.  Text of the actual Proposal: The Green Party of Colorado calls for a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine.  Leadership on both sides of the conflict must come together to forge a truce ending all hostilities.  We also urge the leaders of the world to withhold all aid but humanitarian aid from both countries until they have come to a mutual and lasting peace agreement.  Many of the party's Ten Key Values can provide useful guidance for lasting solutions:  nonviolence, respect for diversity, decentralization, personal and global responsibility, economic justice, and future focus and sustainability.  4. Background:  The conflict in this region is well documented.  The recent attack into Gaza by Israeli forces has resulted in casualties on both sides, many of which have been civilians.5. Justification/Goals:  We must lend a voice to the cries for peace.  There are many factors influencing the violence.  It is clear that we are in desperate need of peacekeepers to negotiate a peace for the many innocent lives being destroyed. 6. Pros and Cons:  Our voice may be influential, and may rally other Coloradans to add their own voices.  If we fail to take a stand against these actions, we are complicit in the violence as we stand silent. 7. Alternatives to the proposal:  We might draw up another proposal.  However, we may consider alternative actions to follow this proposal, if the Council finds the idea to have merit. 8. Supporting statements including references to other sources of readily accessible materials to aid in the members’ decision making process.  Many current articles examine the crisis.  Here are some of the originals, plus one added recently.  http://nsnbc.me/2014/07/10/war-natural-gas-israeli-invasion-gazas-offshore-gas-fields/http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/middle-east/12920-letter-from-gaza-by-a-norwegian-doctorhttp://www.cnn.com/2014/07/21/world/meast/mideast-crisis/https://www.facebook.com/groups/115664778529914/

[Bill Bartlett]

Please let me know if you would like to cosponsor this proposal.

[Susan Hall]

I would like to see the Green Party of Colorado's proposal on the violence in Palistine-Israel continue in the direction of what stands we choosing to take.  Thanks Bill for stating that we want to withhold or withdraw all finances and weapons from this area and only support humanitarian aid.  I so appreciate the recognition that a proposal should be ASAP to show we are not apathetic to the genocide toward of the Palestinian people by Israel with the US provisions and support.I would like to join the boycott divestment, agree with the Palestinian statement of ending the apartheid practice & occupation, the release of innocent prisoners, the right of return and the right to of Palestinians to travel and interact with their friends, families and commerce.  Also perhaps we could have an ongoing list of references for this issue.  I appreciate those that are listed and would like to add Prof. Norman Finckelstein, Prof. Mayer of Boulder, and Democracy Now.  Also I think it would be good to connect with the leader of of the Denver Protest & marches connected with this issue. 

[Susan Hall]

I also believe the US should be imposing sanctions on Israel as they reported this morning 8.1.14 on the news service France 24, that the former French ambassador, Villepin says sanctions against Israel, particularly arms embargoes. I say the US has provided such a huge supply of arms they would not care now about arms, but they should not be allowed any more trading or purchasing of items then the Israeli gov allows Palistine.

[Thom Langley]

Bill,Thanks. Nicely done. I have voted in agreement. I don't know exactly what co-sponsoring entails, but I would be happy to do so.With regards to Susan's well reasoned and insightful feedback, I would submit that these can perhaps be incremental follow on actions, as mentioned in the alternatives section of this proposal,  to this overall general statement of position. Each one, or group of related suggestions, can be submitted formally as a proposal for agreement seeking and at last, a vote.I am in the camp of expediency on a statement of general proportions, followed by any proposal(s) of specific actions after they have been debated on their merits.Peace Out;TLL

[Bill Bartlett]

Thanks everyone for your responses.  I didn't realize this poll would not show WHO voted WHAT, so please reply with your vote instead of using the poll.  (I've removed the poll.)Sorry, I was trying something new! So far, I note Agreement from Susan Hall, Thom Langley, myself and one other that the Poll didn't indicate.  🙁

[Susan Hall]

I am not in agreement because the wording of the proposal suggests that the violence is from both sides equally.  People have the right to fight against powerful entities for their freedom as did South Africa.  There had to be some sort of violence to counter the apartheid or the South Africans would remain as slaves today.  I think the wording should be stronger against both Israel's occupation & it's apartheid and then Palistine ending its violent rocket strategy.  What country would have said the US should neither have fought the Revolutionary War or the Civil War that ended slavery should not have taken place. I know we are a nonviolent Party, but there is the right of self defense, because slavery is an allowance of massacring with less public resistance or even acknowledgement.   I am doing other things today, so I'm not going to edit this. Sorry about the last then instead of tban.I think the wording needs a to communicate the aggressor is Israel-US as sponsor.

[Bob Kinsey]

I would support a statement on this current event but one which is more focused on US Foreign Policy/Military Foreign Aid to Israel.  I realize that the proposal is attempting to be even handed and not blame.    However, blame is in order.  The blank check to Israel in the form of 3.1 Billion Dollars a year of military aid that continued even after Netenyahu continued to support Settlement building in the West Bank and an economic blockade around Gaza has been in effect the  USA taking sides with Israel.    The current tragedy is another whirlwind brought by our sowing the wind (the AIPAC version of history). I would suggest an alternative proposal:  The Green Party of Colorado calls for an immediate cease fire by both Hamas and the Israeli Defense Force and immediate end to US military aid to Israel not just until hostilities cease but until Israel actually concludes a  peaceful conclusion of a one or two state solution that guarantees equal rights and justice for Arab Palestinians.      We recognize that the blockade maintained by Israel around Gaza since 2007 has been, in international law,  an act of war and that Gaza had a right to seek to defend itself as best it could.  We also recognize that Israel has refused to bargain in good faith in the so called "Peace Process", and that despite a few statements to the contrary, Israel's leaders never intended to give up the Occupied Territories for the establishment of a Palestinian two state solution.  And we recognize that it as been the US blind  support of Israel (according to the AIPAC script and thus  ignoring UN calls for Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories), that has enabled Israel to operate in such disingenuous fashion to slowly annex all of Palestine.  We note that the three Israeli young men who were killed recently were traversing between Israel and one of the extremist settlements within the West Bank.  What could more clearly reveal the realities underlying the current tragedy?     

[Steve Saint]

I think the statement is fine. I think Bob Kinsey's first sentence or so is even stronger. I fully support the GP commitment to nonviolence and I'm not sure what our official stance is on “self-defense.” Almost everybody believes in some notion of self-defense – in fact, most countries that engage in war believe they are only acting in self-defense – but I think the GP calls for NONVIOLENT self-defense. Could go on quite a bit about how most wars (including the Revolutionary and Civil) could have been avoided, but not appropriate for this forum! ; )Onward! We're participating in a second Gaza vigil in Colorado Springs Monday evening.

[Tim Hovezak]

Agree.  I agree with the proposal as written, taking into consideration the insightful comments by other respondents.Tim HovezakSW Colorado Greens

[Kevin Alumbaugh]

I agree with Bob's comments and I vote Agree on this proposal but I would also support an alternative proposal that included stronger language against Israel's continued building of settlements in the West Bank which blatantly violate negotiated peace treaties.  As far as Gaza is concerned there is only one principle issue and that is the inhumane siege and blockade that has created the largest concentration camp history has ever seen.  The missiles being fired from the Gaza strip are little more than a desperate and mostly noneffective response to Palestinian subjugation by Israel and a last ditch attempt to get the world (and US media) to pay attention to the inhumane conditions Israel has ruthlessly imposed on these people who's land and homes have been stolen from them.  And Israel uses this as an excuse to slaughter and EXTERMINATE women and children in a manner not that different from what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany.  I have to keep from gagging when I hear Obama, Kerry, and all of the Israel lap dogs in our government say Israel has "the right to defend itself."  This is obscene.  We need a statement DEMANDING that the U.S. government end aid to the Israeli apartheid in Gaza and the West Bank and support a UN statement condemning Israel and a UN Security Council resolution to isolate and IMPOSE AN ECONOMIC BLOCKADE OF ISRAEL until they stop building new settlements and end the siege of Gaza.  Have we already forgotten about the IDF murder of 10 unarmed people on the Mavi Marmara which was trying to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza in 2010? Inexcusable!Israel has absolutely no credibility on any level in this conflict and our "elected leaders" support Israel only in order to pander to AIPAC and solicit Jewish support for their reelection efforts and quite likely to also pander to the Christian fundamentalists who's only MO is to support Israel in their hope for an expedited second coming and subsequent rapture.  Absolutely despicable!I would support a much stronger statement condemning Israel's actions in this conflict and let's not forget the Green Platform which supports Palestinian right of return.Kevin AlumbaughGreater Boulder Green Party 

[Susan Hall]

Thank you so much Bob and Kevin.  I feel like if we, the CO Greens, adopt a proposal that does not clearly and explicitly state the violent, apartheid genocide that is taking place with the most guilt in the hands of Israel with the support of the US we will have fallen into a party position that shows little differentiation between the Democrat Partiers and the Greens concerning this important tragedy.  Our historian Bob and extremely well informed member Kevin have provided important facts to back up where the guilt lies.  I would like to agree with Bob's proposal and have it include the words apartheid ending and to change the wording of both sides coming to a cease fire.  Apartheid is not a morally right policy since Palistinians cannot use any of the public facilities or be allowed to move around in their own country without special papers.  As for the Palestinian cease fire, they will cease if they gain liberty and justice and we as a party do believe in justice and freedom rather than slowly without acknowledgement from many media corporations and most all of the wealthiest countries governments' as was seen with the Native Americans and Africans at the beginning of slavery as they and now the Palestinians being forced to starve and die of curable diseases, as well as having authorities looking for any reason to arrest, torture, and kill people.     

[Anonymous]

I agree with the non-violence stance.  I may be speaking out of my behind on this as I am not nearly as educated as some.  I would propose what if we just support the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement?  This is a peace agreement in place already.  Instead of trying to place blame in a place that is ludicrous as both sides have prejudice and demonstrated violence toward each other, what if we support the peaceful proposal already on the table.  (Since 1919) !  Taking sides, I feel is a violent act in itself.  There is no side if we are all in this together.

[Bob Kinsey]

From Wikipedia on Feisal-Weizmann:Weizmann first met Faisal in June 1918, during the British advance from the South against the Ottoman Empire in World War I. As leader of an impromptu "Zionist Commission", Weizmann traveled to southern Transjordan for the meeting. The intended purpose was to forge an agreement between Faisal and the Zionist movement to support an Arab Kingdom and Jewish settlement in Palestine, respectively. The wishes of the Palestinian Arabs were to be ignored, and, indeed, both men seem to have held the Palestinian Arabs in considerable disdain. Weizmann had called them "treacherous", "arrogant", "uneducated", and "greedy" and had complained to the British that the system in Palestine did "not take into account the fact that there is a fundamental qualitative difference between Jew and Arab".[2] After his meeting with Faisal, Weizmann reported that Faisal was "contemptuous of the Palestinian Arabs whom he doesn't even regard as Arabs".[3]In preparation for the meeting, British diplomat Mark Sykes had written to Faisal about the Jewish people, "I know that the Arabs despise, condemn, and hate the Jews" but he added "I speak the truth when I say that this race, despised and weak, is universal, is all-powerful and cannot be put down" and he suggested that Faisal view the Jews as a powerful ally.[4] In the event, Weizmann and Faisal established an informal agreement under which Faisal would support close Jewish settlement in Palestine while the Zionist movement would assist in the development of the vast Arab nation that Faisal hoped to establish.At their first meeting in June 1918 Weizmann had assured Faisal that "the Jews did not propose to set up a government of their own but wished to work under British protection, to colonize and develop Palestine without encroaching on any legitimate interests".[5] Weizmann and Faisal met again later in 1918, while both were in London preparing their statements for the upcoming peace conference in Paris.They signed the written agreement, which bears their names, on 3 January 1919. The next day, Weizmann arrived in Paris to head the Zionist delegation to the Peace Conference. It was a triumphal moment for Weizmann; it was an accord that climaxed years of negotiations and ceaseless shuttles between the Middle East and the capitals of Western Europe and that promised to usher in an era of peace and cooperation between the two principal ethnic groups of Palestine: Arabs and Jews.[6]Somehow, given the nature of the two negotiators, I don't think this agreement was very well received by either the Palestinian Arab Population or President Wilson who believed in the self determination of peoples.  It appears to be an agreement made by two men, one of whom  who represented the British/French Imperial control of the former Ottoman region via mandate and the other a Zionist from Europe having no authority to be dealing control of a territory he just wanted to inhabit regardless of the people living there.  Well there was at the time a relatively small minority of Jews some of whom had emigrated from Europe and the US but even by 1931 the population of Jews in the area was less than 175,000.  Compare that with the 750,000 Palestinians (from the small area of Palestine declared by terrorist  Ben Gurion as the new Sate of Israel,  homeless after the 1948 "war" of Independence. 

[Bob Kinsey]

At the 2010 ASM (Annual State Meeting) in Florence we passed two resolutions:Calls for an end to US military aid to Israel and approving only humanitarian and economic aid to both Israel and Palestine on an equitable basis.Calls for an immediate end of Israeli occupation of Palestine including an end of Settlement building and wall building within East Jerusalem and the West Bank and the blockade of the Gaza Strip.I suggest that we refer to these resolutions in the above proposal or create a new proposal.  The US should demand immediate access to Gaza to provide emergency needs for water, food and medicine to be paid for with the money appropriated for military aid to Israel since the problem was created by the Israeli military.

[Author]

Posts