NOVANEWS
Secondly, in those areas of the occupied territories that they desire to expand their settlements they find any excuse at all to demolish people’s homes and expel them from their land for parks, for security zones, for ‘natural’ expansion of settlements.”
Illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian lands are still springing up all over the occupied territories standing firm against ineffectual lip service from the international community.
Press TV has interviewed Dr. Stephen Sizer, Vicar of Christ Church, Surrey, UK about the issue of settlements and the measures taken against them. The following is an approximate transcription of the interview.
Press TV: We are aware of a proposed 1,200 more settler units. This surely can’t be the way in which the peace process finally achieves something?
Sizer: Well, it depends how you spell peace. The Israeli’s spell it p-i-e-c-e. There is nothing to stop them building these homes; there is no disincentive, no penalties.
The US administration is continuing to fund their expansion in the occupied territories and therefore they’ve got no reason not to build these homes.
Their plan has always been to expand their territory to embrace as much of Palestine as possible and they are able to get away with it so we shouldn’t be surprised that they are building these latest expansions to their settlements.
Press TV: What does that mean on the ground though – we talk about 1,200 new developments, new units for families, individuals I’m not sure about the demographic permutations… But, who are settlers and why do we have these particular settlements?
Sizer: Settlements under international law are illegal – that’s very clear. Under the Fourth Geneva Convention, it’s illegal for an occupying power to transfer its population into the occupied territory.
Internationally it’s a illegal, but it’s a euphemism for colonization. The Israelis are seeking to colonize as much of the land that they presently control militarily, but don’t control sociologically if you like.
But they don’t want to annex the land with the Palestinians on it. They are caught in a dilemma. The old phrase in the 19th century was “a land with no people for a people with no land”. The problem was it was a myth because there were a lot of Palestinians on the land.
So, how do you turn the land into a land with no people? You’ve got to get rid of them and the way they do that is by expelling them, by denying them entry when they leave the country to study abroad or when they get married to someone from abroad they won’t allow the partner to come and live in the land. So it’s a revolving door – a one way out.
Secondly, in those areas of the occupied territories that they desire to expand their settlements they find any excuse at all to demolish people’s homes and expel them from their land for parks, for security zones, for ‘natural’ expansion of settlements…
There is a variety of excuses they use, which is basically land theft – take the land away from the indigenous people and give it to Europeans, to Americans, give it to Russian citizens who are Jewish who feel it’s their destiny to go and live in Israel, but they are largely parked in the settlements in order to expand and grow in the state of Israel.
Israel is the only country in the world that has never declared its borders. Why? Because it hasn’t got enough land yet. And the settlements? They’re not really settlements you see… settlements sounds temporary, but they’re not, it’s permanent.
They are colonizing. They steal the water, not only the land, but they steal the water from the local communities; they build these exclusive roads that join all the settlements up, which crisscross the Palestinian arable areas, their land their fields and so they’re (the Palestinians) deprived access to their livelihoods and that’s why we’re seeing more and more Palestinians forced off their land or leaving the country.
We now have a situation in East Jerusalem where there are more settlers than there are Palestinians.
Press TV: Can pressure from the outside community actually be brought to bear so there is a policy change? Because this is all political – the settlements, the incursions, it all comes from a similar place. Nobody seems to say anything, so the authorities can act with impunity.
Sizer: Yes. I think there is much that we can do and we should look back and be encouraged by previous campaigns in civil society to make a change in either commercial policies or political.
Press TV: Our first guest spoke about Ireland wanting to use its presidency with the EU to put pressure on settlement goods – Would something like this work?
Sizer: The problem with governmental decisions like that is that the Israelis are good at playing that kind of game and they will put pressure on the same politicians to soften a wording here; postpone a decision there; and find a common solution here. And all they’re doing is buying more time to build more settlements and expelling more Palestinians.
I was think of some campaigns like Fair Trade Coffee, Fair Trade tea – you wouldn’t dream of buying tea or coffee now if it didn’t have the Fair Trade symbol on it, if you do… stop it. We don’t buy fur coats for ladies anymore because we know it’s not right.
Press TV: Well, it’s frowned upon. There is a moral shame attached to it.
Sizer: That’s right. But it was only fifteen years ago you could into shops and buy any fur coat you like, but we changed people’s attitude to that. Blood diamonds, you know, people want to see the hallmark that shows that it hasn’t been stolen from developing country.
If we could change civil societies attitude toward apartheid in South Africa… It might have taken 20 or 30 years, but we achieved it, without a war, through civil society, individuals making changes to their eating habits to their buying habits as well as to government policy.
There’s boycotts, divestments and sanctions.
Boycotts is what you and I can do; we can stop buying settlement goods and it’s our moral choice how we spend our money – who should tell us how we should spend our money? The adverts try and seduce us, but it’s our choice.
So, boycotts is a free world choice. And our responsibility there is to inform people so they can tell the choices – Do you really want to buy these beauty products that have been stolen from Palestinians to make money for an Israeli settlement. You know, you have a moral choice. So, boycotts is up to us.
Divestment is where NGOs, charities, churches, mosques and organizations have funds, which they invest for pensions or for the future and they have a choice where they place that money. Again as the Church of England we do not invest our investments in companies that make weapons, that are involved in child labor. Those are moral choices.
Go back 20 years ago and we did – we had money where the money could be made. We’ve made policy changes.
So, divestment is a moral choice for corporate society; for organizations and therefore we can campaign against divestment from Caterpillar for example and other products that are exploiting the settlements.
The third one of boycotts divestments and ‘sanctions’ is more governmental. Yes we should push for sanctions against Israel, but I don’t hold my breath on that one because we are playing with politicians. But we can certainly make progress on boycotts and divestment.
Press TV: And people need to be aware of where are things coming from… where is your money going… your investment portfolio. It all adds to the same sorry state if you don’t make a stand.
Sizer: Exactly. And there are good websites that tell you what products are bought from the settlements. Go to al-Aqsa, friends of al Aqsa; the Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC); various organizations will have a list of products that they will advise you not to buy because they have been manufactured in settlements.
