Why is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict any business of the British? How is it relevant to British people, or to British workers whom Labour is supposed to represent? And is it really so easy to claim that you are supporting human rights by siding with only party in the conflict? Human rights violations have been carried out by both sides. I believe the Western world should stay out of it. Meddling in other people’s countries or taking sides in foreign conflicts rarely leads to good outcomes. More often than not it just creates more problems.
SPC
The western world should stay out of it, but others getting involved is fine?
1. The Western world largely created the state of Israel (given who was voting in the UN back in 1947).
2. The world is always involved in matters of national borders (collective security being a foundational principle of the UN), and there is always international interest in the matter of occupation of extra-territorial land – part of the rules based international order thing.
3. The land awarded for a Palestinian state remains unfinished business for the UN. And a peace process for concluding it is a long held international goal.
Morrissey
Thanks for those very good questions, treadingthemill. I’ll answer them one by one…
1.) Why is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict any business of the British?
Israel was created as a result of the most cynical and dishonest British imperial politics. I suggest you do some reading about the Balfour Declaration, one of the most destructive documents in history.
2.) How is it relevant to British people, or to British workers whom Labour is supposed to represent?
The labour movement, whether in Britain, the United States, New Zealand, or indeed anywhere in the world, has always been at the forefront of social activism. You may recall that New Zealand unions refused to unload Chilean imports while the U.S.-installed fascist regime was in power there in the 1970s and 80s.
3.) And is it really so easy to claim that you are supporting human rights by siding with only party in the conflict?
You must choose to side with the criminals or the victims. Israel is the most notorious serial violator of law in the world, and has flouted international law since 1967. The British Labour Party has finally shown some gumption, and is now in line with international law and international opinion.
4.) Human rights violations have been carried out by both sides.
Similarly, human rights violations were “carried out by both sides” in Occupied France from 1940 to 1944. I’m sure you’re not in two minds about which of those sides was more wrong.
5.) I believe the Western world should stay out of it. Meddling in other people’s countries or taking sides in foreign conflicts rarely leads to good outcomes. More often than not it just creates more problems.
I agree with you. The United States should immediately stop arming the Israeli regime, something which is, by the way, forbidden by United States law….
I don’t find any of your explanations convincing arguments. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not an easy black and white situation that can be boiled down to good guys vs bad guys. The comparison to France under the Nazis is obnoxious. Meddling is meddling, no matter who is doing it. Let them sort it out themselves. Unless you’re Israeli or Palestinian, or the near neighbors perhaps, it’s nobody else’s business. Imperialism comes in many forms. It seems to me that you are just advocating your own version.
Kimbo
Game 1 of the World Series today, Astros vs Dodgers. I assume you are still picking LA, tom hunter?
Morrissey
treadingthemill
SPC
Morrissey
treadingthemill
Kimbo